pne r-63 Rulison

8/7/2019 pne r-63 Rulison

1/265

/ VO-71

PROJECT RULISONMANAGER'S REPORT

i!

APRIL 1973

UNITED S T A T E S ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSIONNEVADA OPERATIONS OFFICE

Las Vegas, Nevada

DISTRIBUTIONOF THIS DOCUMENT IS UNLIMITE


2/265

DISCLAIMER

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by anagency of the United States Government. Neither the United StatesGovernment nor any agency Thereof, nor any of their employees,makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legalliability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, orusefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or processdisclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privatelyowned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product,process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, orotherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement,recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or anyagency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed hereindo not necessarily state or reflect those of the United StatesGovernment or any agency thereof.


3/265

DISCLAIMER

Portions of this document may be illegible inelectronic image products. Images are producedfrom the best available original document.


4/265

NVO-71

PROJECT RULISONMANAGERS REPORT

APRIL 1973

NOT I C EThis report was prepared as an account of worksponsored by the United Stat es Government. Neitherthe United States nor the United State s Atomic EnergyCommission, nor any of their employees, no r any oftheir contractors, subcontra ctors, or their employees,makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes anylegal liability or responsibility fo r the accuracy, com-pleteness or usefulness of any informatio n, apparatus,product or process disclosed, or represents that its usewould not infringe privately owned rights.

UNITED S T A T E S ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSIONNEVADA OPERATIONS OFFICE

Las Vegas, Nevada

P R E P A R E D BYT H E N V O F F I C E O F I N F O R M A T I O N S E R V I C E S

T E C H NI C A L I N F O R M A T I O N B R A N C H

D ~ S T R I ~ U T I O NF THIS DOCUMENT 1s UN l . lM I nD- . _ -


5/265

PREFACE

The Rulison pr oj ec t , det ona ted September 10, 1969, w a s t he s econd nuc l ea rde ton a t i on designed t o de t ermine t h e economic and t ec hn i c a l f ea s i b i l i t yof us ing nuc l ea r exp los ives t o s t im u la t e an underg round, l ow-product i v it yn a t u r a l g a s r e s e r v o i r .The pro jec t w a s p a r t of the Atomic Energy Commission's (AEC) Plowshareprog ram fo r deve lop ing peace fu l app l i ca t i on of nuc l ea r exp los ives andw a s sponsored by th e Aus t ra l O i l Company, Incorporated (AUSTRAL) ofHouston, Texas; the AEC; and the U.S. Depar tmen t o f t he I n t e r i o r .Program management f o r A us tr al w a s provided by the CER GeonuclearCorporat ion (CER) of L a s Vegas, Nevada.The pro jec t s i t e i s loc ate d i n the low-product ive, gas-bear ing Mesaverdef o rm a ti o n i n t h e R u li so n f i e l d of w e s t ce nt ra l Colorado . The exper iment,us ing a 4 3 f 8-ki loton ( k t ) d e v i c e , w a s detonated a t a dept h of 8,426f e e t i n the-Piceance Creek Basin.Th i s r epo r t i s concerned wi th t h e admin i s t r a t i o n , ope r a t i ona l p l ann ing,s a f e ty , eng inee r ing , co ns t ruc t i on , and l o g i s t i c s pe rformed by t he AEC/NVi n s u pp o rt of t he t ec hn i c a l and s c i e n t i f i c exper imen t s conduc ted underPr o je ct Rul i so n through th e pos t shot re en t ry program and th e product iont e s t phase.Th i s r epo r t i nc ludes a summary of t e ch ni ca l and s c i e n t i f i c in format iona v a i l a b l e a t t h e t i m e of pu bl ic a t i on . More de ta i l ed inform at ion can befound i n th e documents l i s t e d i n "Repor ts A vai la b le i n P lowshare OpenF i l e , " NVO-86 (Rev. 2 ) .

i


6/265

Z0


7/265

ABBREVIATIONS

Listed below are abbreviat ions for agencies and government contractors thatp a r t i c i p a t e d i n P r o j e c t R ul is on .A i r Resources Laboratory--Las Vegas . . . . . . . . . . . . . ARL-LVAlbuquerque Operations Office (AEC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . ALOA u s t r a l O i l Company, Incorporated . . . . . . . . . . . . . .B at t e l l e Memoria l Ins t i tu te . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .CER Geonuclear Corporation of L a s Vegas, Nevada . . . . . . .Defens e Nuc le ar Agency (f or mer ly DASA) . . . . . . . . . . .Division of Applied Technology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Di vi si on of P ea c ef u l Nucl ear Exp los ive s (Now DAT/PNE) . . . .Eberl ine Instrument Corporat ion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .EG&G, Inc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Environmental P ro t ec t io n Agency (for mer ly USPHS) . . . . . .Environmental P ro t ec t io n Agency--National EnvironmentalResearch Center (formerly EPA/WERL) . . . . . . . . . . . .

AUSTRALBMICE RDNADAT

DPNEE I C

EG&GEPA

EPA/ NE CEnvironmenta1 P ro te c t on Agency--Nat io na l EnvironmentalResearch Center-Las Vegas ( fo rmerl y EPA/WERL-LV) . . . . . EPA/NERC-LVEnvironmental Research Corporation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ER CFenix & Scisson , Inc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F& SGenera l Adjustment Bureau, I nc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . GABHolmes & Narver, Inc., On-Continent T e s t Divis ion H&N-OCTDJohn A. B l u m e & Associates Research Division . . . . . . . . JAB. . . . . .Lawrence Livermore Laboratory (Universi ty of California,formerly LRL) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LLLLos Alamos S ci en t i f i c Labora tory (Univers i ty o fC a l i fo rn ia ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LASLNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration--AirResearch Laboratory (formerly ESSA/ARL) . . . . . . . . . . NOAA/ARL

iii


8/265

Na ti ona l Oceanic and Atmospheric Administ ration--AirRese arch La bora to ry-Las Vegas (f or mer ly ESSA/ARL-LV) . . . NOAA/ARL-LVNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration--EarthSc ie nc es L abo rat ory (fo rme rly USC&GS and ESSA/C&GS) . . . .Nevada Operations Office (AEC, formerly NVOO) . . . . . . . .O a k Ridge National Laboratory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Of fi ce of Info rma tio n Se rvi ce s (fo rmerl y OPA) . . . . . . . .O f f i c e of Pe ac ef ul Nu cl ea r Exp lo si ve s (Now PAD) . . . . . . .R ad io lo g ica l Op e ra t io n s Div i s io n . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Peace fu l Ap p l i ca t io n s Div i s io n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Peacefu l Nuclear Explosives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Reynolds E l e c t r i c a l & Engine ering Co., In c. . . . . . . . . .Sandia Lab orat or ie s ( formerly Sandia Corp .) . . . . . . . . .San Fra nci sco O pera tio ns Of fi ce (AEC) . . . . . . . . . . . .Teledyne I so t opes , Inc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .T e s t Ev al ua ti on P an el (Now CEP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .U.S. A t o m i c Energy Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .U.S. Bureau of Mines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .U.S. Bureau of Recl ama tio n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .U.S. Geolo gical Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .University of Nevada, L a s Vegas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Waterways Experiment Station (Corps of Engineers) . . . . . .Wackenhut Services, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

NOAA/ESL

NVO W L01s

OPNERODPADPNE

REECoSL

SA NI so to p es

TEPUSAEC

USBMUSBRUSGSUNLV

WESWSI

i v


9/265

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE NO .HAPTERiREFACE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

iiiBBREVIATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1LANNING, AUTHORITIES, AND ORGANIZATION . . . ..1.1 BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3. 2 OBJECTIVES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 '. 3 CHRONOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5.4 POSTSHCMl A C T I V I T I E S . . . . . . . . . . .677

1 .5 S I T E I N V E S T I G A T I O N AND EVALUATION . . . .1 .5 .1 C r i t e r i a . . . . . . . . . . . .1.5 .2 Loca t ion o f t h e S i t e . . . . . .8810 10101111

1 . 6 ORGANIZATION RESPONSIBILITY . . . . . . .1.6 .1 AEC . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.6 .2 A u s t r a l . . . . . . . . . . . .1 .6 .3 CER . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.6.5 L A S L . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1 .6 .6 Pr oj e c t Management Concept . . .1.6.4 Depar tmen t o f t h e In t e r i o r . . .

1 2 1 2 14 14

1 . 7 BOARDS AND PANELS . . . . . . . . . . . .1 . 7 . 1 T e s t Eva lua t ion Pa nel (TEP) . . .1.7 .2 Nuclear Safety Study Group . . .1 .7 .3 Panel of Consul tan t s . . . . . .1 . 7 . 4 P r o j e c t R u l i s o n Adv iso ryGroup . . . . . . . . . . . .1.7 .5 Ad H o c Rul i son R e v i e wP ane l . . . . . . . . . . . .1.7 .6 P ro j ec t R u l i son Adv isoryP ane l . . . . . . . . . . . .

161617 18CIENTIFIC ACCOUNT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.

2.1 SCIENTIFIC MEASUREMENTS . . . . . . . . .2.1.1 Background . . . . . . . . . . .2 .l. Rock Composition . . . . . . . .2.1.3 Equat ion of S t a t e Measurementsa nd C a l c u l a t i o n s . . . . . . .

18181818

V


10/265

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

PAGE NO.HAPTER1818 2020

2.2 NUCLEAR EXPLOSIVES OPERATIONS . . . . . .2.2.1 The Nuclear Explosive . . . . .2.2.2 Ca ni st er Emplacement . . . . . .2.2.3 The F i r ing Sys tem . . . . . . .20203033

2.3 POSTSHOT OPERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . .2.3.1 P r o d u ct i o n T e s t i n g . . . . . . .2.3.2 P o s t s h o t G a s Analysis . . . . .2.3.3 Gas P r oduc t ion Ca lc u la t ions . .

111. 34FFECTS EVALUATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 4 .1 BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3434 34

3.2 GROUNDMOTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3.2 .1 P r e d i c t i o n s . . . . . . . . . .3.2.2 Conclusions . . . . . . . . . .4 1 . 3 STRUCTURAL RESPONSE . . . . . . . . . . .4 1 4 1 45

3.4 MINE AND WELL SURVEY . . . . . . . . . .3.4.1 Mine Survey . . . . . . . . . .3.4 .2 Well Survey . . . . . . . . . .4545 48

3.5 GEOLOGY AND HYDROLOGY . . . . . . . . . .3.5 .1 Geology . . . . . . . . . . . .3.5.2 Hydrology . . . . . . . . . . . 50.6 BIOENVIRONMENTAZ, E'WECTS . . . . . . . .

50.7 AFTERSHOa STUDIES . . . . . . . . . . .53ROJECT EXECUTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .V .53. 1 G E N E W . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .53.2 THE OPERATIONS AND SAFETY PLAN . . . . .53.3 AREA CONTROL . . . . . . . . . . . . . .54.4 A I R OPERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . .55.5 OPERATIONS COORDINATION CENTER . . . . .

V. 56NGINEERING AND LOGISTICS SUPPORT ACTIVITY . . .56. 1 DIVISION OF RESPONSIBILITY . . . . . . .56.2 GOVERNMENT SUPPORT CRITERIA . . . . . . .

v i


11/265


PAGE NO .HAPTER5.3 R - E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5.3.1 D r i l l i n g t h e R-E . . . . . . . .

5.3.2 Stemming t h e R-E . . . . . . . .5656 575757 60

5.4 CONSTRUCTION AND LOGISTICS SUPPORT . . .5.4.1 Phases I and I1 . . . . . . . . .5.4.2 Phase 111 . . . . . . . . . . .6 1 .5 COMMUNICATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . .6 1.6 LASL EFFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

V I . ACTIVITIES OF THE LASL RADIOLOGICALSAFETY ADVISOR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3 6 3 . 1 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

6. 2 PLANNING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6.2 .1 General . . . . . . . . . . . .6.2.2 Documentation of R a d i o a c t i v i t y

a

R el ea se d t o t h eEnvironment . . . . . . . . .6 3 6 3

64 6969707 1 7 1

6 .3 ONSITE OPERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . .6.3.1 P r e l i m i n a r y O p e r a t i on s . . . . .6.3.2 D r i l l b a c k O p e r a t i on s . . . . . .6.3.3 I n i t i a l F l a re . . . . . . . . .6.3.4 Tear Down . . . . . . . . . . .6.3.5 C a li b ra t io n F la r i n g ( I n i t i a lAttempt) . . . . . . . . . . . 72

75.4 S UMMA R Y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .85I 1. ONSITE RADIOLOGICAL SAFETY . . . . . . . . . . .85.1 BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .868686 87

7.2 EFFLUENT DOCUMENTATION . . . . . . . . .7.2 .1 De tona t ion Phase . . . . . . . .7.2.2 Reentry D r i l l i n g . . . . . . . .7. 2. 3 C d i i b r a t i o n F l a r i n g . . . . . . 909090

7.3 SITE ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEILLANCE . . . . .7.3.1 Detona t ion Phase . . . . . . . .7.3.2 R e e n t r y D r i l l i n g . . . . . . . .7.3.3 C a l i b r a t i o n F l a r i n g a n dP r o d u c t i o n T e s t i n g . . . . . . 90

7.4 CONTROL OF RADIOACTIVE SOURCES,MATERIALS, AND EQUIPMENT . . . . . . . 9 1 v i i


12/265


PAGE N O .CHAPTER91917.5 PERSONNEL DOSIMETRY . . . . . . . . . . .7.5 .1 Detonation Phase . . . . . . . .

7.5.2 R ee nt ry D r i l l i n g , C a l i b r a t i o nFlar in g , and Product ionTes t in g . . . . . . . . . . . 9 1

9 1 .6 INSTRUMENT MAINTENANCE . . . . . . . . .92 9292 9 3 9596

7.7 RESULTS.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7.7.1 Detonation Phase . . . . . . . .7.7.2 R e e n t r y D r i l l i n g . . . . . . . .7.7.3 C a l i b r a t i o n F l a r i n g . . . . . .7.7.4 Product ion Test ing . . . . . . .7.7.5 Personnel Dosimetry . . . . . .

7.8 SITE CLEANUP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9697FFSITE RADIOLOGICAL SAFETY . . . . . . . . . .III.97.1 BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .98.2 RADIOLOGICAL SAFETY C R I T E R I A . . . . . .9 8 . 3 PRESHOT CULTURAL SURVEY . . . . . . . . .9 8 .4 COMMUNITY RELATIONS . . . . . . . . . . .9999 99

8.5 MEDICAL AND VETERINARY A C T I V I T I E S . . . .8.5.1 Detonation Phase . . . . . . . .8.5.2 Postshot A ct iv i t i e s . . . . . .

9999 8.6 EVACUATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8.6.1 Detonation Phase . . . . . . . .8.6.2 Reentry D r i l l in g and Cal ib ra-t i o n F l a r i n g . . . . . . . . . 100

100100100101

8.7 AERIAL MONITORING . . . . . . . . . . . .8.7.1 Detonation Phase . . . . . . . .8.7.2 C a l i b r a t i o n F l a r i n g . . . . . .8.7.3 Product ion Test ing . . . . . . .

8.8 GROUND MONITORING . . . . . . . . . . . .8.8.1 Detonation Phase . . . . . . . .8.8.2 R e e n t r y D r i l l i n g . . . . . . . .8.8.3 C a l i b r a t i o n F l a r i n g . . . . . .8 . 8 . 4 Product ion Test ing . . . . . . .

1011011021031 03

v i i i


13/265


PAGE NO.HAPTER101010510510

8.9 ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING . . . . . . . . .8.9.1 Detonation Phase . . . . . . . .8.9.2 R e e n t r y D r i l l i n g . . . . . . . .8.9 .3 C a l i b r a t i o n F l a r i n g . . . . . .8.9.4 P r oduc t ion T e s t ing . . . . . . .

106.10 NATURAL GAS SAMPLING . . . . . . . . . .106.11 RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8.11.1 Detonation Phase andR e e n t r y D r i l l i n g . . . . . . .8.11.2 C a l i b r a t i o n F l a r i n g . . . . . .8.11.3 P r o d u ct i o n T e s t i n g . . . . . . . 101010710X . METEOROLOGICAL SUPPORT . . . . . . . . . . . . .10. 1 OBJECTIVES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .109.2 OPERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .111. INDUSTRIAL SAFETY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1110.1 MEDICAL SUPPORT . . . . . . . . . . . . .1110.2 S I T E SAFETY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1110.3 FIRE PROTECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1110.4 SANITATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .112I . COSTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .116 I 1. CLASSIFICATION AND SECURITY . . . . . . . . . .1161 2 . 1 CLASSIFICATION . . . . . . . . . . . . .116 11612.2

SECURITY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12.2.2 Shipment and Explosive12 .2 .1 Organiza t ion and Miss ion . . . .12.2 .3 S i t e Access Con t r o l . . . . . .

a nd Con t r o l s . . . . . . . . .t i o n O f f i c e r . . . . . . . . .12.2.6 I n t e l l i g e n c e . . . . . . . . . .Movement . . . . . . . . . . . .

1 2. 2. 4 P o s t s h o t S e c u r i t y In te res t12.2 .5 Clearances a n d I d e n t i f i c a -

11711811811811 9

i x


14/265

T AB LE O F CO NTE NT S ( C o n t i n u e d )

CHAPTERX I 1 1 . P U B L I C I N F O R M A T I O N A C T I V I T I E S . . . . . . . . .

13.1 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13.2 P U B L I C B R I E F I N G S . . . . . . . . . . . .13.3 S T A T E O F F I C I A L S . . . . . . . . . . . . .

X I V .

xv .

X V I .

13.4 P R O J E C T O P P O S I T I O N . . . . . . . . . . .13.5 J O I N T O F F I C E OF INFORMATION . . . . . . .13.6 P O S T S H O T A C T I V I T I E S . . . . . . . . . . .13.7 TECHNICAL INFORMATION PLAN . . . . . . .R U L I S O N L I T I G A T I O N S . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14.1 COSCC/C-1712 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14.2 CROWTHER/C-1702 . . . . . . . . . . . . .14.3 D E C I S I O N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14.4 APPEAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14.5 DUMONT/CIVIL ACTION 6563/C1722 . . . . .14.6 POSTSHOT TRIAL . . . . . . . . . . . . .PRIVATE PROPERTY DAMAGE COMPLAINTS . . . . . . .15.1 C L A I M S O F F I C E . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15.2 INVESTIGATION PROCEDURE . . . . . . . . .15.3 AEC INVESTIGATIONS AND REPAIRS . . . . .15.4 ASSISTANCE TO AUSTRAL . . . . . . . . . .15.5 CONTINUING ACTION . . . . . . . . . . . .CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . .16.1 GENERAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16.2 PLANNING AND PROCEDURES . . . . . . . . .

PAGE NO .120120120120120121121123124124124124125125126128128128128129130132132132

X


15/265


16/265


17/265


PAGE NO .FIGURECOMPARISON OF OBSERVED AND PREDICTED 5

PERCENT PSEUDO RELATIVE VELOCITY SPECTRAAT THE HARVEY GAP D A M , 3 2 . 4 KM FROM PROJECTRULISON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1840 43 1 9

20PROJECT RULISON DAMAGE CLAIMS VS DISTANCE . . .MINERAL INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT I N V I C I N I T YOF PROJECT RULISON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 PICEANCE CREEK BASIN-REGIONAL MAP ANDSTRUCTURAL INTERPRETATION . . . . . . . . . .1 46PICEANCE CREEK BASIN SCHEMATICCROSS SECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2 4749ULISON AREA STRATIGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . .3

24 WATER WELLS AND SPRINGS I N THE V I C I N I T YOF PROJECT RULISON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 1 5 8 596 5 6 8

THE R-E WELLHEAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .526272829

PROJECT RULISON CASING SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM . . . .THE STALLKAT PANEL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .NATURAL GAS BEING BURNED AT THE FLARE STACK . .THE R-EX WELLHEAD AND ATTACHEDCHRISTMAS TREE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88

89HE R-EX WELLHEAD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .0TABLES

PAGE NO.4277

TABLE1234

TYPE OF DAMAGE COMPLAINT . . . . . . . . . . . .PROJECT RULISON MONITORING SYSTEMS . . . . . . .REENTRY WELL GAS SAMPLES . . . . . . . . . . . .TRITIUM RELEASED I N WATER . . . . . . . . . . . 808 1

x i i i


18/265

TABLE567

8

9

10

11


PAGE NO .MINOR RELEASES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 2 MAJOR RELEASES THROUGH TKE FLARE STACK . . . . . 83AEC/NV WNDED EXECUTION COSTS FOR PROJECTRULISON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 2 AEC/NV FUNDED REENTRY COSTS FOR PROJECTRULISON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113TOTAL PROJECT RULISON EXECUTION AND

REENTRY COSTS FUNDED BY AEC/NV . . . . . . . . 1 1 4PROJECT RULISON REIMBURSABLE WORKBILLED TO AUSTFUL/CER . . . . . . . . . . . . 115PROJECT RULISON PROPERTY DAMAGE COMPLAINTSAND/OR CLAIMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131

xiv


19/265

CHAPTER IPLANNING, AUTHORITIES, AND ORGANIZATION

1.1 BACKGROUNDAustral became interested in the use of nuclear explosives tostimulate gas reservoirs early in 1965 and began evaluating proper-ties which might be amenable to this approach. They found that theMesaverde formation in the Rulison field of west central Coloradoappeared to be a suitable area for nuclear stimulation since, fromknown drilling and testing data, the underlying reservoir rocks con-tained an estimated eight trillion cubic feet of natural gas atdepths ranging from 6,200 to 8,700 feet beneath some 60,000 acres.The permeability of the reservoir rocks is so low that conventionalproduction stimulation methods seemed impractical and uneconomical.Austral acquired approximately 20,000 acres from various operatorsand options on an additional 20,000 acres. At Austral's request, CERconducted a surface site tour in the early winter of 1965 and con-firmed that the site had potential for a nuclear shot due to its re-moteness and formation depth in which a nuclear explosive couldsafely be detonated. Work was started immediately on preparing adetailed nuclear stimulation feasibility study and additionalleases were obtained and two test wells were drilled. Upon comple-tion of these wells in the spring of 1966, Austral/CER carried outan extensive well testing program to accurately determine the gasin place and more accurately define the producing characteristicsof the Mesaverde reservoir.The project site is in Garfield County about six miles southeast ofthe town of Grand Valley, Colorado. Elevation of the emplacementwell (R-E) is 8,154 feet above sea level. (See Figures 1 and 2 . )The Rulison exp erim ent al program was divided in to thre e phases . PhaseI included drilling the preshot exploratory hole (R-EX) and the R-E;performing preshot gas-production tests; and conducting geological,hydrological, and other studies for technical and safety confirmation.Phase I1 included surface construction, emplacement of the explosive,detonation, and measurements of immediate detonation effects. Thisphase was completed with the detonation of a 4 3 + 8-kt yield nuclearexplosive on September 10, 1969. The explosive was emplaced at adepth of 8,426 feet through a 10 3/4-inch steel casing that was thenfilled to the surface with stemming materials for containment purposes.A delay of seven months occurred before reentry. During this time,the radioactivity in the underground cavity created by the explosiondecayed to less than one thousandth of that present 12 hours afterthe detonation.

1


20/265

R. 95W. R . 9 4 W. R.93 .R.96 .

\D8iRGW RR

II JCT. IIOPUEBLOIIL--------- -----I

F I G U R E 2. I N D E X M A P OF T H E P RO JE C T R U L I S O N S I T E

T.6S.

T.7S.

T8S.

T.9S.

2


21/265

1 . 2

1.3

Phase I11 of t h e e x p er im e nt , i n i t i a t e d i n A p r i l 1 97 0, i n v o lv e dcon t ro l l ed d r i l l ba ck i n to t he chimney fo l lowed by f l ow t es t i ng o ft h e g a s t o d e te r mi ne t h e c a v i t y s i z e and t h e r a t e and volume a twhich th e na tu ra l gas could be produced .De t a i l e d desc r i p t i on s of t he exper iment a re c o n ta i ne d i n t h e P r o j e c tRul i son De f in i t i on P lan , da ted March 26, 1969, the Pro je c t Rul i sonPost-Shot Pl an s And Eva lu at io ns (NVO-61), da te d December 1969 and i nthe E ff ec t s Evaluat ion f o r Pro j ec t Rul i son (NVO-43), da ted June 1969.OBJECTIVESThe s p e c i f i c t e c h n i c a l o b j e c t i v e s of t h e p r o j e c t were: 1) to measurethe changes i n gas p roduc t i on caused by t he nuc l ea r e xp los ion ; 2) tom ea su re t h e e f f e c t i v e f l ow c a p a c i t y of t h e n u c l e a r f r a c t u r e zone w i t ht i m e and dec reas ing r ese rvo i r p res su re ; 3 ) t o de t e rmine t he gas qua l-i t y wi t h r e g a r d t o c o n ta m in a ti on by r a d i o a c t i v i t y a nd t e c hn i q ue s t h a tc a n b e u t i l i z e d i n r e d uc i n g t h i s c o nt a mi n at io n ; 4) t o i d e n t i f y t h ee f fe c t i v e he igh t and volume of t he chimney and t he e f f ec t i ve f r a c t u r ezone rad ius as determined by product ion te s t in g ; and 5) t o e v a l u a teseismic e f fe c t s produced by t h e de tona t i on , t hus p rov id ing i n fo rmat ionon app rop r i a t e y i e l d s fo r any fu tu r e deve lopmen t.CHRONOLOGYP ro j ec t R u l i son was proposed by Au st ra l and CER i n a l e t t e r addressedt o th e Chairman, A E C , d a t e d J u l y 2 9 , 1966. The companies provided AE Cwi th a f e a s i b i l i t y r epo r t wh ich proposed t he de tona t i on of two 50 -k tnuc l ea r exp los ives suspended i n a d r i l l h o l e a t dep ths of 7,500 t o8,500 f e e t . A pre l iminary review of t h e p r o p o sa l w a s made by A E C ' sSan Francisco Operat ions Off ic e ( S A N ) , i n c o n ju n ct i on w i t h t h eLawrence Livermore Laboratory (LLL) and the U.S. Bureau of Mines(USBM). The reviewed proposal w a s g i v e n t o t h e AEC's Divis ion ofPe ac ef ul Nucle ar Expl osi ves (DPNE), on December 5, 1966. A us tr al andCER made a fo rmal p res en t a t i on of t h e i r p roposa l be fo re t he Commissionon December 6 , 1966 , and on February 1 7 , 1967, r e s t a t e d t h e i r p l a n sbefore the Jo in t Commit tee on Atomic Energy.During the sp ri ng and summer of 1 967, Au st ra l and CER developed at e n t a t i v e O p e r a t i o n a l P l a n f o r P r o j e c t R u l i so n i n c o op e r at i on w i t hL L L , USBM, and t h e U.S. Geo lo g ic a l Sur vey ( U S G S ) . T h i s p l a n , r e l e a s e df o r pre l iminar y government review on November 27, 1967, differed fromt h e c o nc ep t c on ta in e d i n t h e f e a s i b i l i t y r e p o r t by: 1) s u b s t i t u t i n g as i ng le nominal 60-kt nuc lea r expl os iv e (subsequent ly reduced t o anominal 40-kt y i e ld by j o i n t agreement ) f o r t he o r i g in a l i d ea of two50-kt exp los ives and 2) i nc lu d ing t he exp lo ra to ry ho l e spe c i f i ca t i o ns .I n l a t e J u l y 1 9 6 7 , A u s t r a l c o n s t r u c t e d a 3 1/4-mile graded road fromMorr i san ia Mesa t o t he p roposed s i t e . The road w a s complet ed i n e a r l yOctober.On October 4 , 1967, Austral and the USGS executed the Rul i son Uni tAgreement which recognized the t i m e f rame nece ssary t o complete theexper iment .

3


22/265

The c o n t ra c t f o r d r i l l i n g t h e f i r s t e x p lo r at i on h o le f o r P r oj e c tRulison w a s signed on November 1, 1967, and the w e l l w a s spuddedon November 9, 1967.In Ap ri l 1968, th e Dir ec to r, DPNE, d es ig nat ed t h e Los AlamosSc ie n ti f i c Laboratory (LASL) as t h e AE C s c i e n t i f i c l a b o r a t o r yr e s p o n s i b l e f o r p r o v i di n g t h e n u c l e a r e x p l o s i v e f o r P r o j e c t R u l i s onand requested the AEC Nevada Operat ions Off ice (NV) t o c o o r d i n a ted ev elopmen t of th e t o t a l p ro jec t p l an . T o ass is t i n accompl ish ingi t s miss io n , NV d eve lo ped , i n co o rd in a t io n wi th CER, genera l p roce-d u r e s f o r o b t a i n i n g t h e material r e q u ir e d f o r d e t a i l e d p r o j e c td e f i n i t i o n .In May 1968, th e d r i l l i n g of the R-EX w a s comple ted and reservo i rt e s t s and eva lua t ions were s t a r t e d . D r i l l i n g of t h e R-E w a s begun byA u s t ra l i n l a t e September 1968. By January 1969, t h e w e l l had beend r i l l e d t o a t o t a l d ep th o f 8 ,7 0 1 f ee t an d co r in g , l o g g ing , ca s in g ,and cementing a c t i v i t i e s were completed. Prel iminary s i t e prepara-t i o n s a t the sur fac e ground zero (SGZ) and th e co n t ro l p o in t (CP)l o c a t i o n s were begun.C o n s i s t en t w i th th e P lowsha re o b je c t iv e of in c r eas in g in d u s t ry ' sp a r t i c i p at i o n i n p r o j e c t a c t i v i t i e s , Au st r a l an d CER took t h e leadr o l e i n p rep a r in g p lan s , sch ed u le s , estimates, an d fo r ecas t s o frequirements. The NV and th e o th er government pa r t ic ip an ts p ro-v ided req u i r emen t s , p l ann in g a ss i s t an c e , and c r i t i c a l l y r eviewedt h e p l a n s as t h e y were d eve lo p ed . I n th i s man ne r, t h e d e ta i l ed p ro -j e c t d e f i n i t i o n w a s completed i n December 1968.I n January 1969, th e Manager, NV, su b mi t ted th e p l an , t o g e th e r wi thh i s pro je ct an al ys is , t o DPNE recommending au th or iz at io n be givento en t e r c o n t r a c t n eg o t i a t io n s . Dur in g Feb ru a ry 19 69 , a c o n t r a c tw a s ne got ia ted and submit ted f o r management review by a l l p a r t i e sinvolved . Fo l lowing th e s ign i ng of the Rul ison con t ra c t on March 26 ,1969, a l l p r o j e c t p r e p a r a t i o n s , i n c l u d i n g e f f e c t s e v a l u a t i o ns andp u bl i c r e l a t i on s a c t i v i t i e s , were ta rge ted toward meet ing a May 1969deto nat i on da te . However, i n Ap r i l 1969 , i t became apparent thata d d i t i o n a l t i m e mig ht be r eq u i r ed t o co mple te th e s a f e t y s tu d ie s andon Apri l 14, 1969, a pu bl ic announcement w a s r e l e a s e d by NV t o t h i se f f e c t . I n ea r l y May, b ased on p o te n t i a l prob lems r e l a t ed t o th eHarvey Gap D a m an d o th e r sa f e ty - r e l a t ed matters, the Manager, NV , i ncon su l ta t ion wi th Aust ra l and o th er major pa r t ic ip an ts , recommendedt h a t d eto nati on be resche duled from May 2 2 , 1969, to ear ly September1969. A new det on ati on d at e of September 4, 1969, w a s announced onJu ly 16 , 1969 .I n l a t e August and e a r l y September 1969, t h re e s u i t s were f i l e d f o rp re l imin a ry in ju n c t io n s ag a in s t t h e Ru l i so n d e to n a t io n . Du r in g t h i sp e r io d , h ea r in g s were h e l d i n th e Fed e ra l D i s t r i c t Court of Coloradowi th su b sequ ent f in d in g s a l lo win g th e p ro j ec t t o p ro ceed .

4


23/265

The Rulison execut ion w a s delayed due to unfavorable weatherco nd it io ns from September 4 t o September 10, 1969, when then u c l e a r e x p l o si v e was detonated a t 3 p.m. Mountain Da yl ig ht T i m e(MDT). There w a s no release o f r a d i o a c t i v i t y t o t h e a tm os ph er eand th e re su l t an t g round mot ion w a s e s s e n t i a l l y as p r e d i c t e d .

1 . 4 POSTSHOT ACTIVITIESThe Rulison C l a i m s Off ice i n Grand Val ley w a s opened by the AE C onSeptember 11, 1969, and c lo se d on November 1 4, 1969. From t h a t t i m et o th e dea dl in e da te of September 10 , 1970, complain t s were handlede i t h e r by the General Adjustment Bureau (GAB) i n Grand Junc t ion o rd i r e c t l y by t h e AEC i n L a s Vegas. Chapter XV con t a in s i n fo rmat ionon pr iv at e pr oper ty damage complain t s .Fol lowing the detonat ion , t h e s i t e w a s deac t i v a t ed and p laced i n as t andby cond i t i o n awa i t i ng decay o f sho r t - l i ved r ad io i so t opes p r i o rt o chimney re ent r y . A document t i t l e d Pro je ct Rul i son Post -ShotPl a n s And Ev al ua ti on s (NVO-61) w a s i s sued by NV i n December 1969which d i s cus sed de t a i l ed p l ans f o r pos t sho t ope ra t i ons and eva lua -t i o n s .Five gas samples (about 150 s t a n da r d c u b i c f e e t e a c h ) were ob ta inedby LLL from the R-E on January 9, 1970. Subsequent an al yse s ind i-ca t ed t ha t t he s amples were no t r ep re sen t a t i v e o f t he chimney gas .S ubsequent t o t h e C our t ' s dec i s i on s t o pe rmi t t h e R u l ison detona-t i o n i n S ep tember 1969 , p l a in t i f f s sough t permanent i n junc t i ona g a i n s t t h e AEC t o p r o h ib i t f l a r i n g of gas. A t r i a l w a s held f romJanua ry 12 t o 16, 1970, i n Denver on th e matter. On March 16 ,1970, a d e c i s i o n w a s rec eiv ed which per mit t ed AEC and Au st ra l t ore en te r t he Rul i son chimney and under take the f l ar in g program s e tf o r t h i n NVO-61.P o s t s h o t r e e n t r y s i t e prepara t i ons began Apr i l 1, 1970, andreq ui re d about two weeks long er t o complete than est imated becauseof bad weathe r and t he ne ce s s i t y f o r eng inee r ing mod i f i ca t i ons .R ee n tr y i n t o t h e R-EX hole began on Apr i l 2 8 , 1970, and by May 26,1970, th e hole w a s m i l l e d t o a dep th o f 6 ,517 fe e t . A t t h a t p o in ton June 1, 1 97 0, d i r e c t i o n a l d r i l l i n g w a s s t a r t e d t o wa rd t h echimney, and on Ju ne 29, 1 970, t h e 5 1/2- inch cas ing l i n e r w a scemented i n p l a c e t o a dep th of 7,624 f e e t . D i r e c t i o n a l d r i l l i n gw a s completed to a t o t a l me asu re d d r i l l s t r i n g d e p th of 8 ,35 4f e e t ( 1 9 2 f e e t above de tona t i on po in t ) on Ju ly 28 , 1970.C a l i b r a t i o n f l a r i n g w a s scheduled t o s t a r t on August 18, 1970;how ever, t h e h o l e p lu gg ed a f t e r i n i t i a l f lo w tes ts were made onAugust 18 and 2 2 , 1970. To remedy th e co nd it io n, a d r i l l r i g w a sbrought i n and downhole operat ions were underway by September 11,1970, and the hol e w a s cle ane d out by September 29, 1970.

5


24/265

1.5

Reentry opera t ions were completed on October 4 , 1970, andc a l i b r a t i o n f l a r i n g w a s r e in i t i a t ed o n Oc to b e r 4 . This phase off l a r i n g was completed on October 7, 1970. A t o t a l of 1 2 .9 m i l l i o ncu b i c f e e t (MMCF) w a s f l a r e d i n t h i s p er io d.The high f low-rate producti on t e s t i ng phase began on October 26,1970, and continued to November 3, 1970, when the w e l l w a s sh u ti n f o r a s h o r t t e r m bui ldup per iod . A t o t a l of 109 .5 MMCF w a sf l a r e d i n t h i s t e s t . The in te rm edia te p roduct ion f low t e s t beganDecember 1, 1970, and w a s completed on December 20, 1970. At o t a l of 99.9 MMCF of gas w a s f l a r ed . The th i rd , and f i n a l , f l o wt e s t began on Feb rua ry 2, 1971, and ended on A pr i l 23, 1971. Thet o t a l ga s f l ar e d i n t he t h i r d t e s t w a s 233 MMCF.The s i t e w a s placed on standby s t a t u s i n mid-May 1971 i n conformancewi th the Rul ison Standby Plan and consis ten t wi th c r i t e r i a and guid-ance provided by DPNE. S i t e a c t i v i t y h as bee n l i m i te d c h i e f l y t otaki ng per io di c measurements of pre ss ure buildup.The Rulison s i t e co nt inu ed on s t an d by s t a tu s u n t i l Ju ly 1 9 72 , a twhich t i m e a g en e ra l s i t e c leanup opera t ion was i n i t i a t e d . T h e s i t ew a s c leaned up t o c r i t e r i a fu rn ished by AEC/HQ1 and a s o u t li n e d i nt h e NV "Pro jec t Rul ison Radio log ica l Opera t ions Rol lup Plan" Ju ly1972.SITE INVESTIGATION AND EVALUATIONDuring 1967, L L L , CER, and Austral personnel developed c r i t e r i a f o rs i t e se l ec t io n , i n sp ec ted th e p ro po sed s i t e area , and preparedd r i l l i n g s p e c if i ca t i on s f o r t h e e x p l o r a t o ry w e l l . Findings o f th es i t e r eco nn a i ssan ce t r i p fol lo w.

"The s i t e i s served by a l6 - foo t wide a l l -weather road th a t connectswi th t he county-maintained paved road nea r t he Morrisa nia MesaCommunity Center. I n case o f e f f l u e n t re lease , the road network onMorr isan ia Mesa i s adequate and safe."Communication f a c i l i t i e s can b e b u i l t a t and near the s i t e . A r a d i osending antenna and power supply can be developed adjac ent to th eaccess road approximately one-half mile no rt h of SGZ. Radio repe at in g

towe rs can be l oc at ed on Doghead Mountain o r on th e east-west t r en d -in g no se n o r th eas t o f th e s i te . , E i t h e r of t h e s e l o c a t i o n s are i n l i n eof s i g h t t o Grand Valley and could be used f o r a full-scale commer-c i a l development i f the p ro jec t i s s u c c e s s f u l .

"Grand Va ll ey coul d serve as a c o n t r o l p o i n t i f t h e r a di o i s u sed fo rt ra nsm it t ing f i r i n g and communicat ion d a ta . T h is l o c a t i o n i s l o g i s -t i c a l l y a t t r a c t i v e since Grand Valley i s l o c a t e d on t h e r a i l r o a d a ndI n t e r s t a t e 70--U.S. 6-24.

lMemorandum, Ke ll y/ Mi ll er , da te d Ap ri l 1 7 , 1972. "Radiological SafetyGuidance f o r Experiments Involvin g Nuclear Stim ulat ion of Nat ural GasWells .I16


25/265


26/265

The SGZ f o r t he R ulis on experim ent w a s i n S e ct i on 2 5 , ?Township 7 South, Range 95 West. Als o, t h e SGZ w a s adequate ly 4served by a l6 - foot wide graveled road th at connects wi th th ecounty-maintained road system. Locat i ons of th e R-E and R-EXare shown on F igu re 3 . The nea re s t c i t y wi th commerc ia l a i r l i n e connec t i ons i s GrandJunc t ion , pop ula t ion about 22,000, approximate ly 40 m i l e s t ot h e s o u th w es t. The n e a r e s t c i t y w i t h s u b s t a n t i a l i n d u s t r y i sRi f l e , popula t ion about 2 ,200 , approximate ly 12 m i l e s t o t h eno rth ea st . The ne ar es t town, Grand Val le y, h as a popula t ionof around 245 and l i e s about 6 m i l e s nor thwes t of SGZ.The area i s served by the Denver and Rio Grande Western R a i l -road wi th s i d ings a t both Grand Val ley and Rifle. The area i sa l s o s e r ve d by a two-lane highway, U.S. 6-24. A l o c a l r o a dsystem wi th two 10-ton ca pa ci ty brid ge s, one near Grand Val le y,t h e o t h e r a t t he s e t t l emen t of R u l ison , fu rn i s h access a c r o s sthe Colorado River.The popu lat io n .of th e immediate Rulis on area i s conf ined p r i n -c i p a l l y t o t he v a l l ey s of t he Colorado River, P la t eau C reek ,a t r i b u t a r y t o t h e C ol or ad o R i v e r , a nd a d j a c e n t mesa l ands .About 220 persons l i v e between 3.5 and 5 m i l e s fr om SGZ, andabou t 1 ,500 ad d i t i on a l pe r sons l i v e between 5 and 10 m i l e sfrom SGZ. No permanent h ab i t a t i o n e x i s t s c l o se r t o SG Z t han3 . 5 miles.The economic base of the immediate area i s provided by theUnion Carbide pl an t a t R i f l e , t h e O i l S ha l e C orpo ra t i on p l an ti n P a r a c h ut e C re ek , t h e r a i l r o a d , t h e r a i s i n g o f l i v e s t o c k ,and t he cu l t i v a t i on o f o rcha rds and l i v es t ock feed .

1 . 6 ORGANIZATION RESPONSIBILITYThe major a s signmen t s o f r e s po ns ib i l i t i e s f o r P ro j ec t R u l i son arel i s t ed be low:1 .6 .1 E

DPNE w a s r e s p o ns i b le f o r t h e d i r e c t i o n of AEC Plowshareprogrammatic a c t i v i t i e s , ge ne ra l po l i cy development andguidance , ando r g a n i z a t i o n ss i b l e f o r t h einc lud ing t heservices.

c o o r d in a t i o n w i th o t h e r AEC and fede ra la t Headquar ters leve l . DPNE w a s a l so r espon-AEC pro j ec t - r e l a t e d funding r equ i remen t snuc l ea r exp los ive and as so c i a t ed de tona t i on

NV w a s res pons ib le f o r the management and con t r o l o f n ucle aropera t i ons i nc lud ing a c t i v i t i e s as soc i a t ed wi th p rov id ingf o r p u b li c h e a l t h a nd s a f e t y a nd f o r a d m in i s t e ri n g c e r t a i nAEC r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s d e l e g a te d t o t h e Manager, NV, by the

8


27/265

III

l . 9 7 6 '2 , 2 3 6 '

I

I

~

A U ST R A L OIL COMPANYINCO R P0R ATE DiOUSTON TEXAS

P R O J E C T R U L I S O NW E L L L O C A T I O N P L A TGARFIELD COUNTY, COLORADO

T - 7 - S , R - 9 5 - W OF THE 6TH. FM:SCALE: 1" - 5 0 0 '

D A T E : N OV E MB E R 1 4 , 1 9 6 7

FIGURE 3. LOCATION OF R - E AND R-EX

9


28/265

1.6.2

1 .6 .3

1.6.4

C on t rac t i ng Of f i ce r under t he p rov i s i o ns of t he R u l i soncont rac t . The Test Manager, NV, served both as t h eDirector of Nuclear Operat ions (DONO) and t h e C on t rac tAdminis t ra tor and w a s r e s p o ns i b l e f o r p r o j e c t c o n t r o ld u r in g o p e r a t i o n a l p e r i o d s .The P ro j ec t R u li son con t r ac t w a s r enego t i a t ed and AEC tooko ve r a d d i t i o n a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s s uc h as o f f s i t e r a d io lo gi -ca l s a f e t y .A u s t r a lAus t ra l , on i t s own or t h rough i t s ~ C E R rogram Manager, w a sr e spon s ib l e f o r p rov id ing and fund ing : 1) t h e p r o j e c t area;2) a l l c o n s t r u c t i o n , i n c l u di n g t h e R-EX, t h e R-E, and post-sho t r een t ry and re l a t ed p rog rams ; 3 ) g e n e r a l t e c h n i c a l a n dl o g i s t i c a l s u pp or t; 4) management of f i e l d a c t i v i t i e s(excluding c r i t i c a l nuc l ea r s a fe t y , t ech n i c a l , and opera -t i o n a l f u n c t i o n s ) ; and 5) i t s p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t h e e v a l u a ti o nof t h e e x p er i m en t a l r e s u l t s .CER-CE R w a s r e s p o ns i b l e f o r a l l s u b c o nt r a c ts t h a t were n o t t h ere spo ns i b i l i t y o f t he governmen t agenc i es , excep t t hose t h a tA u s t r a l e le c t e d t o l e t ( e. g. , t h e d r i l l i n g c o n t r a c t f o r p os t-s h o t a c t i v i t i e s ) . CER p ro vi de d t h e P r o j e c t D i r e c t o r , t h e S i t eManager, th e Chairman f o r the Tec hni ca l Committee, and ot h e rp r o j e c t p e r s o n n e l .Department of t h e In t e r i o rUSBM w a s r e spon s ib l e f o r t he governmen t agenc i es ' review,des ign , pa r t i c i pa t i o n , and eva lu a t i on of t h e gas - s t imu la t i onasp ec t s o f t he exper iment . USBM a l s o w a s r e s p o n s i b l e f o rcoo rd ina t i ng a c t i v i t i e s t h a t i nv o lv e d o t h e r o f f i c e s andbureaus wi th in t he Departmen t o f t he In t e r i o r and f o r s e rv ingas l i a i s o n r e p r e s e n t a t i v e f o r t h e Depa rtmen t i n matters per-t a i n in g t o R u li son . Under e x i s t i n g a r rangemen ts wi th NV, USBMeva lua t ed t he pre - and pos t sho t cond i t i ons of m ines , o i l w e l l s ,and gas w e l l s i n t h e v i c i n i t y o f t h e p r o j e c t f o r s af e ty -re l a t ed pu rposes .USGS ass i s te d and advised i n the d ef in i t io n of geolo gic andhydro log i c a spec t s r e l a t i v e t o t e c h n i c a l and s a f e t y con-s id e r a t i on s under ex i s t i ng i n t e ragency agreement s wi th NV.USGS a l so p rov ided superv i s i on o f d r i l l i n g , t e s t i n g , andp roduc t i on opera t i ons i n acco rd wi th F edera l R egu l a t i ons (30CFR 221), t h e Rulison Unit Agreement, and adv ise d on le as in garrangements and s i m i l a r matters f o r which i t h a d r e s p o n s i b i l i t y .

10


29/265

Other of f i ce s and bureaus wi th i n the Depar tment, e .g . , th eS o l i c i t o r and Bureau of Land Management, were a v a i l a bl e f o ra s s i s t a n c e w i th i n t h e i r areas of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y .1.6.5 LASL-

LASL w a s r e spons ib l e f o r prov id ing t he nuc l ea r exp los ive ,t h e arming and f i r i n g syst em, and f o r t ec hn i ca l superv i s i onof th e emplacement and stemming of th e nuc le ar e xplo sive .The Operat ions Di r ec tor (OD) and s t a f f , fu rn i shed by LASL,armed and f i r e d t he nu cl ea r e xpl osi ve on th e command ofDONO, NV, and p rov ided t ech n i ca l a s s i s t an ce du r ing d r i l l b ack .

1. 6. 6 Pr o je c t Management ConceptAus t ra l , on i t s own behalf and through i t s Program Manager,CER, w a s r e spons ib l e f o r f i e l d i ng and managing t he p ro j ec t .F unc ti ons r e l a t ed t o t h e nuc l ea r exp los ive sys t em and t hec o n t r o l of n u c l e a r - r e l a t e d s a f e t y and s e c u r i t y a c t i v i t i e swere t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of t he AE C through N V and LASL.E s s e n t i a l l y , t h e f i e l d o r g an i z at i o n c o n si s t ed of a P r o j e c tDi rec to r , a s s i gned by CER, who w a s a s s i s t e d by o t h e r CERs t a f f members, incl udin g a chai rman for the TechnicalCommittee and a S i t e Manager. The Pro j ec t Di r ec tor w a sr e s p o n s i b l e t o CER f o r t h e o v e r a l l c o o r d i n at i o n of e n gi n ee r -i ng , cons t ruc t i on , suppor t , t e chn i c a l eva lua t i on , andmanagement of t h e pr o je c t. H e w a s i n cha rge of coo rd ina t i nga l l p r e s h o t p r o j e c t a c t i v i t i e s , except dur ing nuclea r opera-ti on s when th e AEC's DONO assumed c on tr ol . During the detona-t i o n p e r io d , t h e P r o j e c t D i r e c t o r w a s r e s p o n s i b l e f o rp rov id ing t he neces sa ry suppor t and as s i s t anc e r equ i red byDONO t o s a f e l y c on du ct n uc l ea r -r e la t ed a c t i v i t i e s .The Project Rulison Technical Committee w a s cha i red by aCER r e p r e s e n t a t i v e who r e p o r t e d t o the P r o j e c t D i r e c t o r . I na d d i t i o n t o CER, the Commit tee inc luded representa t ives f romthe Depar tment of th e In te r i or , th e AEC, LASL and Aus t ra l .The Tec hn ica l Committee w a s r e spons ib l e f o r r ev iewing andeva lua t i ng da t a ; fo rmula t i ng and rev i s i n g t echn i ca l p l ans ;and recommending a c t i v i t i e s , procedures, and techniqueswhich were r e q u i r e d t o meet t h e t e c h n i c a l o b j e c t i v e s . T h e i rp r in c ip a l i n t e r e s t w a s i n pr e - and p o s ts h o t r e s e r v o i reva lua t i on a c t i v i t i e s .The .S it e Manager, ass ign ed by CER, w a s r e s p o n s i b le t o t h eProgram Manager f o r s i t e .construction, support, communica-t i ons , and genera l s i t e planagement i n accor dance wi th apla n approved under the ' Rul ison Unit Agreement, except f o rt hose func t i ons r e l a t e d t o , nuc l ea r ope ra t i ons which weret h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f 'the DONO and t h e LASL Ope ra ti on sDirector . The S i t e Manager served as t h e c o n ta c t f o r t h e

11


30/265

DONO Engineer ing and Logis t i c Representa t ive on mattersr e l a t i ng t o mod i f i ca t i on and imp lementa ti on of governmentand l abo ra to ry f i e l d cons t ruc t i on and suppor t r equ i remen t s.The Manager, N V , e s t a b l i s h e d a Ru li so n Advisory Group con-s i s t i n g o f s en io r r ep res en t a t i v es f rom the Depar tmen t ofth e In te r i o r , LASL, LLL, and NV t o ad vise h im and th e indus-t r i a l p a r t i c i p a n t s upon t h e i r r e q u e s t on matters r e l a t i n g t othe development of the Pr o je c t Rul i son . Act ing a t t h ere qu es t of th e Manager, th e Advisory Group provided advi ceand recommenda ti ons pe r t a i n ing t o t ech n i c a l , ope ra t i ona l , o rsafe ty problems.D ur in g r e e n t r y and i n i t i a l f l a r i n g , t h e r a d i o l o g ic a l s a f e t yr e s p o n s i b i l i t y w a s d e le g a te d t o t h e OD by DONO. The OD w a sr e s p o ns i b l e t o DONO t o make c e r t a i n t h a t the r a d i o l o g i c a lsafe ty program w a s conducted within c r i t e r i a e s t a b l i s h e d .Eber l i ne In s t rumen t C orpo ra t i on ( E I C ) p r ov id e d r a d i o l o g i c a ls a f e t y s u p po r t t o DONO a nd t o t h e OD as r equ i red .The Environmental Pr ot ec t i on Agency/Nat ional EnvironmentalResearch Center (EPA/NERC) w a s r e s p o ns i b l e f o r p r o v i d in g ap u b l i c r a d i o l o g i c a l s a f e t y p rog ram as d i r e c t e d by D O N O . TheA i r Research Laboratory i n Las Vegas (ARL-LV) w a s respon-s i b l e f o r p r o vi d in g f o r e c a s t s o f m e t e o ro l og i ca l c o n d i t io n sand p red i c t i ons of ra d i a t io n movement and d i s per s io n , a l s ou nd er t h e d i r e c t i o n o f DONO.

1 .7 BOARDS AND PANELS1 .7 .1 Test Evaluat ion Panel (TEP)

The TEP, now c a ll e d t he Containment E val uat ion Pa ne l, anda l t e r n a t e s c o n s is t ed o f :R. H. T h a l g o t t , N V , T e s t ManagerW . W . A l la i r e , NV , Deputy Test ManagerChar les I . Browne, LASL, A ss oc ia te Div is io n Lea derRobert R. Brownlee, LASL, S t a f f MemberHarry L . Reynolds, LLL, A s s o c i a t e D i r e c t o rLar ry S . Germain, LLL, Assoc i a t e Div i s i on LeaderByron F. Murphy, Sa ndia La bo ra to ri es (SL), D ir ec to r ofCarter D . Broyles , SL , Department ManagerCol. J . J . Neuer, Defense Nuclear Agency (DNA), D i r e c t o r ,Col. J . T. Jones , DNA, D i r e c t o r , T e s t Opera t i ons ( s i nceCol. R. C . Holmes, DNA, Deputy Director, Test Operat ionsC l in ton S . Maupin, Reynolds E l e c t r i c a l & Engineer ing

Underground Experimentation

Test Opera t i ons ( t o Ju ly 1968)July 1968)

Co., In c. (REECo), Medic al Co ns ul ta nt

1 2


31/265

Melvin W. Car te r , EPAINERC-LV, D i r e c t o r , EPA/NERC-LVAlan Mog his si, EPA/NERC-LV, Ch ie f, Ra di ol og ic a l Res ear ch,John R . McBride, EPA/NERC-LV, Deputy D i r e c to r , EPA/NERC-LVP h i l l i p W. Allen, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Admin-Harold F. Muel ler , NOAA/ARL-LV, C hie f , R ad ioac t i v i t y ,

EPA/N-ERC-LV

i s t r a t i o n (NOAA) ARL-LV, C hie f , ARL-LVEstimates, & Research Branch, ARL-LV

The pr imary res po ns ib i l i t y of the TEP w a s t o review a l l d a t ape r t i nen t t o con ta inment a spe c t s o f each p lanned nuc l ea r t e s t ,t hen based on t hese da t a , a s s i gn t he t e s t t o o ne of t h e r i s kca t ego r i e s , C a t ego ry A, B , o r C. The meet ings held were asfo l l ows :a. Ju ly 16 , 1968--The conta inment asp ect s of th e in du s t r ia lP lowshare Pro jec t Rul i son , cosponsored by LASL/CER, w a sforma lly d iscu ssed by t he TEP a t t h i s mee t ing. C a t ego r iza -t i o n w a s defe r r ed u n t i l more i n fo rmat ion w a s received anda more complete review could be made.b. March 2 4 , 1969--At t h e fo rt y- se co nd TEP me et in g, a presen-t a t i o n w a s made by CE R on the emplacement hole R-E and the

exp lo ra to ry ho l e R-EX. The p resen t a t i on concerned i t s e l fp r i m a r i l y w i th t h e d r i l l h ol e c o n s t ru c t i on , i . e . , nar ra -t i v e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of c a l i p e r a nd similar l o g s , h o l eh i s t o r i e s , and m a t r i x ( d i s t a n c e s , b e a r i n g , s i z e , a nd d e pt h )of nearby hole s ou t t o a d i s t a nce of about 2,000 f e e t .There w a s co nc er n by some of the Panel members as t o t h ei n te g r i ty of the wel lhead equipment on the Rul iso n emplace-ment hole. The Panel reques ted that a ground shock analys i sbe performed of t h i s equipment , and upon complet ion of t h i sa n a l y s i s , s u b m i t i t t o t he P ane l members. The Pa nel w a sp o l l e d as t o t h e c a t e go r y c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f R u li s on an dagreed upon Category A-Conditional, subject to review ofth e wel lhead equipment.Between the forty-second and fo rt y- th ir d meet ings of th eTEP, th e Pane l eva lua ted th e s temming plan s and wel lheadconf igur a t io ns by correspondence.

c . May 26, 1969--At t h e for ty -t hi rd meeti ng of the TEP, ar e q u e s t was made t h a t t he co n f igu ra t i on of t he we l l head ,"Christmas tree," b e f u r t h e r r e vi ew ed t o see i f some ofi t s mass could be reduced.

d . August 1 4 , 1969--At th e for ty- fo urt h meet ing, a r e v i s e dAus t ra l d rawing dep i c t i ng t hec o n f i g u r a t i o n was reviewed bythus removing the c ond i t i ona l

changes i n t he we l lheadthe Panel and approved ,c o n s t r a i n t a t t a c h e d t o

13


32/265

1.7.2

the TEP ca te go ri za t i on "A." This meeting w a s t he f i n a lTEP meeting hel d t o eva lua te t he containment aspe ct s ofRulison.

Nuclear Safety Study Group

1 . 7 . 3

A Nuclear Saf ety Study w a s conduc ted i n Los Alamos, March 5,6 , and 13, 1 96 9, to ev a lu a te th o se o p e ra t io n s p l an ned fo rth e R u l i so n ev en t th a t were under th e cognizance of theManager, Albuquerque Op er at io ns Of fi ce ( L O ) . Members presentwere :

Thea .

b.

W. A . E a r l (Chairman), Weapon Safety, ALOT . E . Wade, Nuclear Safety, NVR. F. Su l l iv an , Tech nica l Se rv ices , SANR. W . Drake, GMX-DO, LASLD. R. L e w i s , Weapon Safety, SLA. W. Lundberg, Advanced Systems, LL Lfo l lowing meet ings were h e ld :March 5, 1969--The group reviewed t h e des ig n and assemblyof t h e Rul ison nuclear exp losive , and i t s t r a n s p o r t a t i o nto th e R u l i so n s i t e i n Colorado. The Study Report wasapproved by th e Ass is ta nt Manager f o r Operat ions, ALO.March 12-14, 1969--The same Nuclear Safety Study Group,w i t h T . E . Wade, N V , a c t i n g a s Chairman, m e t i n Los Alamost o e v a l ua t e th o se o p e ra t io n s p lan ned fo r t h e R u l i so n ev en tt h a t w e r e under t he cognizance of t h e Manager, N V .Opera t i ons eva lua te d by t h i s Study Group inc luded th egrou nd ze ro a c t i v i t i e s , t h e emplacemen t, and th e f i r i n gsystem f o r th e Rul ison nucl ear exp losiv e . The Study Repor tw a s approved by the Manager, NV, on Ap ri l 25, 1969.The Study Group made an i ns pe ct io n of th e Rulis on s i t e onA pr i l 24 and 25, 1969. No further recommendations concern-i n g n u c le a r s a f e t y were made t o t h e Manager, NV , andNuclear Sa fet y Study Group a ct io n w a s considered complete.

Panel o f Consu l ta n tsTh i s p an e l co n s i s t ed o f :

G. B. Maxey, U. of Nevada, HydrogeologistL . S. Jaco b sen , P r iv a te C o n su l t ant , S t r u c t u r a l Eng ineerN . M . Newmark, U. of I l l i n o i s , C i v i l EngineeringD . U. Deere, U. of I l l i n o i s , C i v i l Engineering & RockT . F. Thompson, Pr iva te Consultant , Engr . GeologistL . G. von Lossberg, Sheppard T . Powell & Asso c ia t e s ,

Mechanics

HydrologyS . D. Wilson, Shannon & Wilson, Inc ., S o i l Mechanics andFoundation Engr.

1 4


33/265

The following meetings were held by these consultants:a. February 27, 1969--On this date, a preliminary review ofProject Rulison was made. However, because the evalua-tion and plans were incomplete at that time, the Panelconcluded that additional studies were needed to formulate

a firm statement on the project.b. April 11, 1969--At this meeting, the Panel indicated thatrequired safety analyses had been properly performed. Italso noted that the planned operational precautions weresufficient to avoid hazard to the public. However, thePanel recommended that mines, to a distance including theDutch Creek Mine, be investigated and the material pro-perties of Harvey Gap Dam be analyzed to preclude apossible failure.c. May 1, 1969--A further review of the stability of HarveyGap Dam was made by the Panel with the following recommen-

dationsAlternate 1: Postpone the shot until such time as thereservoir is lowered by irrigation with-drawals to a level at least 15 feet belowcrest elevation. Provide for timely post-shot evacuation of people downstream ifcircumstances warrant.Alternate 2: Lower the elevation immediately by dis-charging and wasting water such that the

below the crest. Provide for timely post-shot evacuation of people downstream ifcircumstances warrant.

. reservoir level is lowered to 15 feet

Alternate 3: Lower the water elevation to 10 feet belowthe crest and provide stockpiles of sandand gravel with loading equipment at thedam so that cracks can be quickly repaired.Evacuate people during the event from thatarea downstream that could be flooded byuncontrollable discharge of the reservoirover a several hour period.d . .May 5 , 1969--By separate letter, consultant Stanley D.Wilson, after discussion with the Bureau of Reclamation

' and confirmation by telephone with other Panel members,concluded that the Rifle Gap and Vega D a ms posed nohazard from the event.Based on the above recoiendations by the Panel and otheroperational considerations, the Rulison detonation date wasrescheduled from May to early September. The following

15


34/265

meeting, therefore, was the final preshot evaluation madeby the Panel prior to detonation.e. July 25, 1969--The lowered water levels in dam reservoirsfor the revised (September) detonation date and additional

data concerning Battlement Mesa satisfied the Panel thatthe event could be executed safely.1.7.4 Project Rulison Advisory Group

This group consisted of:W. E. Ogle, Chairman, LASL, Scientific AdvisorH. L. Reynolds, LLL, Scientific AdvisorJ. W. Watkins, USBM, Director of Pet. ResearchF. W. Stead, Alternate, USGS, Research GeologistR. T. Johansen, Alternate, USBM, Project CoordinatorR. H. Thalgott, NV, Test ManagerM. D. Nordyke, LLL, Technical AdvisorBen Bowyer, NV, Executive Secretary

The following meetings were held:a. September 27, 1968--This group met on this date to reviewprogress relative to project planning.

June 4, 1969--Again the group met to recommend a newreadiness date of September 4, 1969.b.1.7.5 Ad Hoc Rulison Review Panel

This Panel was formed by the Manager, NV, to review dataconcerning predictions and evaluations of the bioenviron-mental and engineering aspects of Rulison reentry, gasreservoir testing, and flaring. The Panel consisted of thefollowing persons:Name and Title

B. W. Beebe, Vice President

Leo K. Bustad, Director

T. B. O'BrienProduction Manager

OrganizationMM&B, Inc.Natural Gas ConsultantsBoulder, ColoradoRadiobiology LaboratorySchool of VeterinaryUniversity of CaliforniaDavis, CaliforniaMedicine

Roden Oil CompanyMidland, Texas

16


35/265

Leonard A. Sagan, M,D,Associate Director

Vincent SchultzProfessor of Zoology

Department of Environ-Palo Alto Medical ClinicPalo Alto, Californiamental Medicine

Washington StatePullman, WashingtonUniversity

This Panel met on November 20 and 21, 1969, and again onDecember 2 2 , 1969. They concluded that Project Rulison couldbe accomplished within acceptable safety standards.1.7.6 Project Rulison Advisory Panel

Members of this panel included:R. H. Thalgott, N V , Test ManagerR. L. Aamodt, LASL, Scientific Adv. (Chairman)M. W. Carter, EPA/NERC-LV, Dir., EPA/NERC-LVP. W. Allen, NOAA/ARL, Chief, NOAA/ARL-LVC. S. Maupin, REECo, Med. (Rad) ConsultantR. D. Maxwell, Chief, Nuclear Explosive EnvironmentSafety, Division of Operational Safety, AEC/HQF. D. Cluff, N V , Rulison Safety Officer (Meteorology)

The Panel met in April' and August 1969 and reviewed projectplans. The Panel met in Grand Junction between September4 and 10 to interpret and advise the Test Manager ondetonation conditions.

17


36/265

CHAPTER I1SCIENTIFIC ACCOUNT

2.1 SCIENTIFIC MEASUREMENTS2.1.1

2.1.2

2.1.3

BackgroundMany org an iz at io ns have pub li sh ed measurements of P ro je ctRulison. LLL i s p rep a r in g a summary re po r t o f t h i s da t aand t h e i r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s .Rock CompositionThe R-E core from 8,400 t o 8 ,462 f e e t (below ground l eve l )w a s chemica l ly and minera log ica l ly ana lyzed by LLL. ThisMesaverde fo rmat ion con t a ins impure sandstone , s i l t s to ne ,and sha le . Some average va lu es of s pe c i a l in t e r e s t are:1) carbon d iox ide = 5 .2 weigh t percen t , 2) bound water =2 .2 weigh t percen t , 3) l i t h i u m = 3 2 p a r t s p e r m i l l i o n(pprn), 4 ) boron = 6 4 p p m , and 5) mercury = 50 pp b i l l i o n .Calc i te i s t h e major ca rbo nat e mi ne ra l and makes up about1 2 we igh t p e r cen t o f t h i s co re .Equation of S t a t e Measurements and Cal cul at ion sLL L measurements of th e st re ng th of th e R-E co re san d s ton e ,to g e th e r wi th a d d i t io n a l i n fo rma t io n from th e lo g s , wereu sed i n a compu ter ca l cu la t io n of th e e f f ec t s of th e R u l iso nexpl osiv e on th e gas-bearing fo rmat ion . The cav i t y rad ius(Rc) w a s c a l c u l a t e d t o b e 76 f e e t , s h e a r f r a c t u r e s e xt e nd edt o 276 f e e t ( 3.6 R ) , and the maximum exte nt of f r ac tu r i ngw a s 433 f e e t ( 5 .7 k c ) . Th ese ca l c u la t ed f ig u r es ag ree w e l lw i t h t h e R of 78 f e e t ca lc ul at ed from krypton-85, and th ef l u i d lossCencountered 275 f e e t above the working po in t .On Ap r i l 20 , 1971, th e apparen t leng t h of th e Rul ison f i r i n gc a b l e w a s e lec t ro n ica l ly measu red . I t w a s found t o b e opena t a poi n t 498 f e e t (6 .5 Rc) above the de tona t ion po in t . Th isi s only 65 fe e t beyond th e zone of f r ac tu r i ng de termined bycomputations.

2.2 NUCLEAR EXPLOSIVES OPERATIONS2.2.1 The Nucle ar Exp los ive

The n u c l ea r e x p l os i v e u t i l i z e d f o r P r o j e c t R ul i so n w a s pro-duced by LASL. I t w a s a f i s s i o n d e v i c e t h a t y i e l d e d 4 3 + 8k t . The n u c l e a r e x p l os i v e i t s e l f w a s co n ta in ed i n a dk-holepackage approximately 9 i n c h es i n d i am e te r , 1 7 f e e t l o n g ,and weighing approxi matel y 1,250 pounds. (See Fi gu re 4.)

18


37/265

F I G U R E 4. E M P L A C E M EN T O F D E V I C E19


38/265

2.2.2 Ca n is te r EmplacementThe exp los ive can i s t e r w a s emplaced usi ng an Amerigraphca bl e, Type 34JIXB, which co nt ai ne d t h e e lec t r i ca l cir-c u i t s t o t h e c a n i s t e r . The c a b le w a s run over a 36-inchsheave s ecu red t o t he headf rame a t a working height of20 fe e t . The downhole ca bl e w a s wrapped on a winch drumwhich w a s s p e c i f i c a l l y d es ig ne d a nd t e s t e d f o r t h i s ap-p l ic a t io n . The winch provided fu l l-power co nt ro l o f th ec a b l e a nd c a n i s t e r a t v a r i a b l e s p e e d s d u r i n g t h e lower-i ng opera t i o n . S u r face hand l i ng of t h e exp los ive anddummy canis te r s w a s accomplished with a mobi le crane .

2.2.3 The Fi r ing Sys temThe f i r i n g s ys te m f o r t h e n u c l e a r e x p l o s iv e c o n s i s t e d o f ac o n t r o l t r a i l e r a t the Rul ison CP, a 2.6-mile su rf ac e runof a s i ng l e mu l t i conduc to r cab l e runn ing downho le t o t h enuc l e a r exp los ive . E l e c t r on i c equ ipment l oca t e d i n t he con-t r o l t r a i l e r g e n er a t ed t h e n ec e s s a r y s i g n a l s i n t h e p r o p ersequence and t r ansm i t t ed them t o t he nuc l ea r exp los ive .The s i g na l cab l e w a s used both for t h e o p e r a t io n of t h enuc l e a r exp los ive and f o r mon ito r i ng t he exp los ive pe r fo rm-ance . Add i t i ona l cab l es f rom th e CP t o SGZ were used fo rsu rf a ce "environm ental" measurements. The downhole ca bl ew a s 0.719-inch Amerigraph double-armored ca bl e, con ta in in ga coa xia l cen te r conductor , 32 conductors of No. 22 w i r e ,and two lay er s (o ppos i t e l a ys ) of s t e e l armor . This cab l ew a s u se d t o t r a n s m i t s i g n a l s t o t h e n u c l e a r e x p l o s i v e . T hec a b l e w a s a l s o u se d t o lo we r t h e n u c l e a r e x p l o s i v e i n t othe emplacement hole.

2.3 POSTSHOT OPERATIONS2 .3 .1 P roduc t i on Tes t i ng

E 'o llowing t h e c a l i b ra t i on f l ow pe r iod , t h r ee p roduc t i on f l owt es t s w e r e made t o determine the po s t shot product ion charac-t e r i s t i c s of t he Mesaverde fo rmat ion i n t h e i n t e rv a l s timu-l a t e d by t h e n u c l e a r e x p l o s iv e . F igu re 5 shows t h e flow ra tesand volumes of g as produced f o r each of t he se t e s t per iods .Approximately 456 mi ll io n st an da rd cu bi c f e e t (MMSCF) of gas ,i n c l u d in g c e r t a i n d i l u e n t s w hic h were p r e s e n t , w a s producedfrom the nuc l ea r - s t imu la t ed w e l l i n 108 days of f low t e s t i n g .This volume i s t h e equ iva l en t o f app rox imate ly 10 yea r s o fproduct ion from a conven t i ona l l y s t imu la t ed w e l l i n t h e R ul i-s o n f i e l d . The 456 MMSCF of gas w a s s a t u r a t e d w i th w a t e rvapor a t separa to r cond i t i ons and w a s d i l u t e d w it h c ar bo ndioxid e and hydrogen . The behavior of the se d i lu en ts wi tht i m e i s d e s cr i b ed i n S e c t i on s a and b.

20


39/265

*O8 I

T I M E P E R I O D , D AY S

FIGURE 5. PRO JE CT RULISON FLOW TESTS


40/265

Subsurface pressure and temperature measurements were madea t a depth of 8 ,2 0 0 f ee t , a p o in t 1 54 f e e t abo ve t h e b o tto mo f th e r een t ry w e l l o r 346 f e e t abo ve th e d e to n a t io n p o in t( see Figure 6 ) . The f i r s t measurement w a s made on October 24,1970, j u s t p r i o r t o t h e f i r s t pr od uc ti on t e s t , and a shu t - inpre ss ure of 3 ,150 pounds pe r squa re inc h gauge w a s recorded.These su bs urf ace measurements could no t be made duri ng t hec a l i b r a t i o n f lo w p e r io d , t h e f i r s t p ro du ct io n t e s t , o r t h ee a r l y p a r t o f t h e t h i r d p r o d uc t io n t e s t because o f th e h ighf lo w v e l o c i t y i n t h e tub ing s t r in g . To complete the subsur -f a c e p r e s s u r e d a t a , d a i l y p re s s u r e s were computed from sur-face p res sure measurements us i ng observed subsur f ace p ress urest o c a l i b r a t e t h e c o m p u t a t i o n s . A p l o t of th e computed andmeasured bottom-hole pr es su re s by days from t h e commencementof te s t in g on October 4 , 1970 , un t i l August 1, 1 9 7 1 , i s showni n Figure 7 .Analys is of th e bottom-hole pre ss ure s measured duri ng th esecond producti on f low t e s t i n d i c a t e d v e r y l i t t l e f low re-s t r i c t i o n th ro ug h t h e p e n e t r a t e d f r a c t u r e s , t h u s c on fi rm in gt h a t an ef fe c t iv e pa th be tween th e chimney and the r een t rywel lbore had been es ta b l i she d . This observa t ion w a s p a r t i c -u la r ly imp o r tan t b ecau se of t h e i n i t i a l conce rn t h a t th ei n t e r s e c t i o n o f f r a c t u r e s o n l y by t h e r e e n t r y w e l lb o r emight n o t b e s u f f i c i e n t f o r p ro d uc t io n t e s t i n g p ur po se s . As imple p ressure-vo lume- tempera ture ana lys is o f the se p res-s u r e s a l s o i n d i c a t e d a Rc of approximately 76 f e e t . Thi scompares fa vora bly wit h a r ad iu s o f 78 f e e t o b ta in ed fromkrypton-85 data.The maximum flowi ng sub su rfa ce tem pera tur e record ed i n t hef l o w s t r i n g a t 8 ,2 00 f e e t (346 f e e t abo ve th e d e to n a t io np o i n t ) w a s 438OF.a . Gas Analysis Data

Twelve gas samples were t ak en d u r in g th e f lo w t e s t s ,an d a comple te chemica l an a l ys is o f each w a s made t odetermine th e percen tage of th e var i ous methane se r ie sh ydro ca rbo n s p r e s en t . A l so, t h i s an a l ys i s d ete rminedthe conce n t ra t io n of t he two pr imary d i lu en ts , carbondiox ide and hydrogen. These da t a p lo t t ed a s mol percentco n cen t r a t io n vs cumulative gas produced are shown i nFigure 8.Through th e produc tio n of app roxima tely 374 MMSCF of g as ,the d ec l i ne i n concen t ra t ions o f hydrogen and carbond io x id e were e s s e n t i a l l y p a r a l l e l , accompanied by an in-crease of methane. However, th e pe rce nt ag e of car bond io x id e began t o in c r eas e v e ry g r ad u a l ly t o th e end o ft h e t h i r d p r o d u c t i o n t e s t . T h i s i n c r e a s e w a s accompanied

22


41/265

EXPLORATIONWELL

EMPLACEMENTWELL

77;' CAS I NG&T 6367 '

DEVIATED HOLEO R I G I N A L 5&"LINER MILLES)OFF AT 6520CEMENT PLUG

/ '

NEW 5 vi' L I N E RCEMENTED AT 7 6 0 0 '

TAPGET AREAIN0 R -EADIUST 8000l R C i d r vZ! ' '8000'

M I N I M U M PREDICT

F I G U R E 6. S C H E M A T I C D I A G R A M OF R E E N T R Y W E L L

23


42/265

MEASURED Q 8200'A CALCULATED

3600.3200

p\Iu'2

2800-

2400-

2000-

S 1600-

1200-800-400-

lu1L

Pu

0

.AAA . .".A 0 ..

0 . .. . . e .0 .

AA.

e e *....*. . . . .*e..I I I I I I I I

T I M E P E R I O D , D A Y SF I G U R E 7 . P R O J E C T R U L I S O N CAVITY P RE S S URE S


43/265

by a corresponding dec rea se i n t he methane component. Thei n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h i s be h av io r i s d i scus sed l a t e r under"Carbon Dioxide. "A l l of th e ga s samples mentioned above w e r e a l s o a n al yz e dfo r ce r t a i n r ad io ac t i ve components , i nc lud in g t he twogaseous i so topes , tritium and krypton-85. F igu re 9 showst h e c ha ng e i n t o t a l tritium and krypton-85 con cen t ra t ionswi th re spec t to cumulat ive gas product ion . The concent ra-t i on s o f t hes e two i so tope s dec l i ned i n an expec t ed mannerand were only about 2 p e rc e n t of t h e i r i n i t i a l c on ce nt ra -t i o n s a t t he conc lus ion of f l ow t e s t i n g .The i so to pe mercury-203 w a s a l s o o b s er v ed i n t h e R u l i so ngas . Chemical an aly s i s of th e format ion rock ne ar t hep o i n t o f d e t o n a t i on i n d i c a t e d t h a t s u f f i c i e n t m er cu ry w a sp r e s e n t n a t u r a l l y t o p r o d u c e the minut e conce n t ra t i on s o fmercury-203 seen i n t h e R u li so n gas.E a r ly c a l c u l a t i o n s were made t o d e t er m in e t h e i n i t i a l c on-ce nt r a t i on of krypton-85 , assuming th a t un i form mixing oft he gas and k rypton -85 t akes p l ace . These r e su l t s i nd i ca t eda Rc of 72 fe e t . The r e su l t s were b a se d on t h e t h e o r e t i c a lc r e a t i o n o f 800 cu r i e s of kryp ton-85 , t he i n i t i a l concen -t r a t i on of krypton-85 observed i n t h e g a s , 150 p i c o c u r i e s lcub i c cen t ime t e r s (pC i / cc> , and t he p resumed re se r vo i rpressure and temperature . Later c a l c u l a t i o n s b a se d on t h eobserved re lease of 1,064 cur ie s of krypton-85 and th eobserved re se r vo i r p res su re and t empera tu re i nd i c a t e d aRc of 78 fe e t . A s pre viou sly note d, th es e dimensions com-p a r e v e r y f a v o r a b ly w i t h t h e p r e s s u r e a n a l y s i s r e s u l t s andthe i n fo rmat ion deve loped by r een t r y d r i l l i ng .The y i e ld o f t he R u l i son exp los i ve w a s subsequent ly cal-c u l a t e d to be 43 8 k t based on the c r e a t i o n of approx-ima t e ly 1,113 c ur ie s of krypton-85 assuming 25.8 -. 3.9cu r i es of krypton-85 w e r e c r e a t e d p e r k t .Only 2 ,824 cu r i es of tritium w e r e produced from the w e l ldur ing t he f l ow t e s t s . This i s only about 28 percent oft h e t h e o r e t i c a l 1 0 ,0 00 c u r i e s p r e d i c te d t o r e s u l t fromthe nuc lea r explos ion . Most of t he gaseous tritium w a sremoved from the ca vi ty by t he end of t h e t e s t i n g , asshown i n F igure 9. An account ing of a l l o f t h e t r i t i u mcreated could not be made because of t h e l a r g e q u a n t i t yof t r i t i a t e d water s t i l l being recovered a t t he conc lus ionof testing and an unknown volume of water r e ma in in g i n t h ec a v i t y . A s i g n i f i c a n t p o r t i o n o f t h e tritium remains boundi n t h e s o l i d i f i e d m e l t zone. I t i s b e l i e ve d t h a t t h e b or onc a r b i d e s h i e l d s u r r o u n d i n g t h e n u c l e a r e x p l o s i v e w a s prob-a b l y e f f e c t i v e i n r e d u ci n g t h e t r i t i u m p ro du ce d by t h e

25


44/265

80

I ---

I

-

C U M U L A T I V E G A S P RO DU CE D - M M S C F W E T G A SF I G U R E 8. P R O J E C T R U L I S O N C H E M I C A L A N A L Y S I S D A T A

6

h

1 KRYPTON - 85\

3 -

2 -

I -

n"0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450C U M U L A T I V E G A S P R O D U C E D - M M S C F W E T G A S

F I G U R E 9. P R O J E CT R U L I S O N R A D I O C H E M I C A L A N A L Y S I S D A T A


45/265

explos ion t o below 10,000 c u r i e s , b u t t h e l a ck of at r i t i u m ba la nc e ha s made i t d i f f i c u l t t o e va lu at et h i s e f fe c t i ve n e ss .

b . Evolution and Production of Water and Carbon Dioxide(1)Water

The t o t a l volume of w a t e r i n i t i a l l y i n t h e chimneyi s be l i e ve d t o have be en as much as 30,000 b a r r e l s .There has been no way, however, t o acc ur ate ly assesst h i s i n i t i a l volume. T h is water w a s o r i g i n a l l y c o n -t a i n e d i n : 1) t he po r e spa c e o f th e r oc k, bo th sa ndand shale , which w a s va por i ze d , m e l t e d , o r he a te d bythe nuc le a r de tona t ion and 2 ) t he d r i l l i n g mud l o s twhen th e ree nt ry hole w a s connected wi th th e chimney.Approximate ly 15 ,000 bar re ls of water were recovereda t t h e s u r f a c e d u r i n g t h e f lo w t e s t s , and an addi-t i on a l c a lc ul a te d volume of approximate ly 6 ,000 ba r r e l sof water passed through the gas volume measurementsystem as vapor . A t t he c onc lus ion o f t he th i r d p ro -duc t ion t e s t , approximate ly 170 ba r r e l s of water ,l i qu id a nd va por , were s t i l l being produced from thew e l l wi th each MMSCF of methane g as and di l u e n t s(carbo n di ox id e and hydrogen) bein g produced. Thec onc e n t r a t ions o f tritium i n the p roduce d waterr em aine d e s s e n t i a l ly c ons ta n t th r oughou t the f lowt e s t i n g , i n d i c a t i n g no in f l ux of new water fromthe produc ing format ion .As t h e p r e ssu r e i n th e c himney de c l ine d , the a bsor p -t i v e c a pa c i ty of the ga s inc r e a se d , a l lowing the ga st o carry i n c r e a s i n g amounts of evolving water vaport o t h e s u r f ac e . A pa r t of t h i s va por condense d i n these pa ra ti on equipment and w a s measured. The gas whichl e f t t h e s e pa r at or was assumed t o be s a t u r a t e d w i t hwater vapor . The amount of water l e a v in g t h e s e p a r a t o requipment i n t he vapor phase w a s e s t im a te d us ing ap u bl i sh e d c o r r e l a t i o n of t h e a b s o r p t i v e c a p a c i t y o fna tu r a l ga s by Ka tz , e t a l . This ca lcula ted amountof water vapor w a s added t o t he amount recovered asl i q u i d t o d et erm in e t h e t o t a l water c o n te n t i n t h eproduc t ion stream. A t o t a l of 158 MMSCF of watervapor i s e s t i m at e d t o h av e e vo lv ed i n t h e c a v i t ydur ing the f low t e s t s . As much as 50 MMSCF w a scounted i n th e f low measurements.F igur e 10 shows t h e d a i l y t o t a l water produced perMMSCF of d ry gas . A s i g n i f i c a n t c han ge i n t h e ra teof wate r produc t ion occur red as the chimney pressureapproached 380-400 pounds per squ are inch abso lu t e

27


46/265

( t ime per iod, 166-176 days ) . This i s i n t e r p r e t e d ast h e t i m e when most of the water r ema in ing i n t h echimney reached i t s v ap o r p r e ssu re an d f l a sh ed in tosteam. Fol lowing th is , i t i s b e l i ev e d t h a t a d d i t i o n a lwater c on ti nu ed t o f l a s h i n t h e f r a c t u r e d z one asi t a l so r eached i t s v apo r p r e ssu re . A chimney tempera-t u r e of 440-445OF i s ind ica ted f rom t h i s Event . Thetempera ture w a s somewhat greater than 450 F a t t h es t a r t of t e s t i n g s i n c e h e a t w a s l o s t w i t h t h e flow-ing gas and water and due t o t he expansion of gas.A s w a t e r vapor evolved i n t he chimney, i t added t oth e volum etr ic withdrawal f rom th e chimney and, a tt h e same t i m e , t o t h e a p pa r e n t i n f l u x of g as i n t o t h echimney. I n ad d i t io n , t h e v ap o r i za t io n o f th e wateri n th e chimney c r ea ted ad d i t io n a l sp ace av a i l a b let o g as , water v ap or , and o th e r d i l u en t s , a l tho u ghthis volume i s r a t h e r small.

(2) Carbon DioxideA s t h e w e l l produced , the-hydrogen concen t ra t ioni n t h e g as dec l ined a lmost l in ea r l y wi th t he cumu-l a t i v e gas p roduct ion (see Figure 8 ) . The carbondiox ide concen t ra t ion , however, d id no t dec l in e i nt h i s f as h i o n. L o g i ca l l y , i f a l l of th e carbon d iox ideand hydrogen were formed a t t h e t i m e of the detona-t i o n a n d were uniformly mixed i n t he vapor phase,bo th th e carbon d iox i de and hydrogen concen t ra t i onshould have dec l i ned s im i l ar ly . The carbon d iox ideconcen t r a t ion no t on ly f a i le d t o dec l in e commensur-a t e l y w i t h t h e h yd ro ge n c o n c e n t r a t i on , b u t a c t u a l l yb eg an t o i n c r e a s e a f t e r a cumulative production ofabout 375 MMSCF of gas (ti me peri od, 148 day s). Mostof th e carbon d iox ide w a s i n i t i a l l y formed a t t h et i m e of d e t o na t i o n w i t h t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of a smallamount being gen erated by t he he at f rom the rockm e l t .Figure 11shows the measured sep ar at or gas gr av it y wit hr e s p e c t t o t i m e and a l s o r e f l e c t s t h e l a t e r ev o lu t io nof carbon diox id e. The rapi d removal of carbo n dio xid ed u r ing th e f i r s t and secon d flow t e s t s ( t i m e p e r i o d s ,23-31 days and 58-76 days) caused th e i n i t i a l de cl in ei n g r av i ty . Once th e cav i ty p r e ssu re w a s ap p rec iab lyreduced, however , th e excess carbon dioxide began t oe vo lv e f a s t e r t h a n i t w a s being removed and broughtabout a su b seq u en t in c r ea se i n g r av i ty . The co n t inu edd ec l in e i n h yd ro gen co ncen t r a t io n a l so co n t r ib u te d t othe g rav i ty change .

28


47/265

,

'I I .0C%PL.5,5 0.95Ir

0.90Q8

0.7:

TIME PERIOD, DAYSF I G U R E 10. P R O J EC T R U L I S O N D A I L Y W ATER P R O D U CT I O N

-0 70 tTHIRD PRODUCTION TESTI I I I I I I I160 I70 180 190 20030 140 I50T I M E PERIOD, DAYS

F I G U R E 11. P R O J E C T R U L IS O N SE P AR A TO R G A S G R A V IT Y29


48/265

c. Analys i s of Well PerformanceLL L made an anal ys i s of th e w e l l p er fo rm an ce by f i t t i n ga sim ple model of t he chimney, gas san ds, and expl osiv e-l y c r e a t e d f r a c t u r i n g t o t h e two e x p e r i m e n t a l ly me asur edvariables, flow ra te and chimney pressure. The gas flowc a l c u l a t i o n s f o r v a r i o us t r i a l models were made by af i n it e - d if f e r e n ce s o l u t i o n t o t h e no n li n ea r p a r t i a ld i f f e r en t i a l equa t i on f o r r a d i a l Darcy f low. The modelcons i s t ed o f a ce n t ra l zone r ep re sen t i ng t h e chimneysurrounded by a number of concen t r i c zones r ep resen t i ngthe fo rmat ion . The e f fe c t of exp los ive f r ac tu r i ng w a ss i m ul a te d by i n c r e a s i n g t h e p e r m e a b i l it y i n t h e z o ne sn e a r the c e n t r a l z o ne ; t h i s i n c r e as e d -p e r me a b il i tyreg ion w a s r e p r e s e n t e d by a 33-fold in cre ase over theundis turbed format ion perm eabi l i ty ex tendin g from th echimney w a l l o u t t o a ra d ia l d i s t an ce of 2 .75 chimneyr a d i i .These ca l cu l a t i ons w e r e r e pe a te d u n t i l t h e c a l c u l a t edand measured pressures w e r e i n good agreement. Theparamete r s t ha t w e r e va r i ed dur ing model ing t ha t gavet he b e s t f i t are g i ve n i n t h e c a p t i on t o F igu re 12 . The use of the se parameters t o ca lc u l a t e th e 20-yearcumulat ive product ion of Rul i son le ad s t o a r e s u l t of1.8 B cf . E s s e n t i a l l y , t h e same r e s u l t i s ob ta ined byCER. DeGolyer and McNaughton c a l c u l a t e a h i g h e r f i g u r e ,4.5 Bcf, pr im ar i ly because the y assumed a higher forma-t i o n p e r m e a b i li t y a nd a t ime-varying water b a r r i e r i nt h e f r a c t u r e d r e g i o n . A d d i t i on a l e x p er i m en t a l d a t awou ld he lp t o r e so lve t he i s sue . None the l ess , somepre d i c t i on con f idence r e su l t s f rom thes e independen tc a l c u l a t i o n s .

2 .3 .2 Pos t shot Gas Analys i sGas from the R-E w a s sampled and analyzed se ve ra l t i m e s byLLL a t th e re qu es t of LASL, CER, and NV. The f i r s t s am pl eswere t aken January 9 , 1969, b e fo re pos t sho t p roduc t i ont es t i n g . The mos t r ec en t w a s A pr il 21, 1971, when the w e l lw a s be in g blown down t o pe rmi t access t o t h e f i r i n g c ab lef o r an e l e c t r i c a l length measurement. A l l of t he se samplesconta ined l ess t han 20 pe rc en t chimney gas. The cla y col-l e c t e d on f i l t e r s du r ing t he blowdown w a s found t o con t a i no n ly n a t u r a l l y o c c u r r i n g r a d i o n u c l i d e s .Twenty-three samples of gas were ana lyzed du r ing t he ca l i b ra -t i o n f l a r i n g a nd p r o du c t io n t e s t i n g o f t h e R-E w e l l . The

30


49/265

30009kE;

8,0,Q2 2000

w4

1 I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I 1 I I I I I

-0 M E A S U R E D G A S P R E S S U R E S- A L C U L A T E D P R E S S U R E

\\B

4D i s t a n c e f r o m s hotp o i n t - c a v i t y r a d i i

FIGURE 12. Gas f low f r o m t h e R u l i s o n e x p e ri m e nt .t i m e o f th e sho t (September 1969) t o June 15 , 1971.i s 32 00 p s i a .t h e p e r m e a b il i ty X h e i g h t o f t h e u n d i s t u r b e d f o r m a t i o n [ ( k h ) o , w he re k i s t h ep e r m e a b i l i t y an d h i s t h e h e i g h t ] = 680 v d - f t , and t h e po s t s h o t v a r i a t i o n i n khas a f u n c t i o n o f d i s ta n c e f r o m t h e s h o t p o i n t i s shown i n t h e i n s e t g ra ph . Thec a v i t y r a d iu s i s 76 f t .

The d a t a c o v e r s t h e p e r i o d f r o m t h eT h e f o r m a t i o n p r e s s u r eThe parameters assumed were : $h ( po ro s i t y X h e i g h t ) = 3.0 f t ,


50/265

r e su l t s co v e r th e t e s t in g p e r io d f ro m Au g u s t 1, 1970, throughA p r i l 23, 197 1, when 426 MMCF of ga s were flared. The com-b i ne d e f f e c t s o f p r o d uc t io n and d i l u t i o n of t h e i n i t i a l chim-ney g ases r e su l t ed i n a r ed u c t io n i n t h e r ad io n u c l id e concen-t r a t i o n s pres en t i n th e p roduced gas by about a f ac to r o f 5 0.The most s i g n i f i c an t r ad io n u c l id e , t r i t i u m, d ec reased from1 76 t o 3.7 p i c o c u r i e s / mi l l i l i t e r ( pC i/ml ) o f p ro du ced g as ,wh il e krypton-85 changed from 150 t o 2.9 pCi/ml. Through-o u t t he t e s t i n g p e ri o d, t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f tritium among th egases w a s approximately 81 percen t i n methane gas , 11 p e rcen tin hydrogen, 6 percen t i n e thane , and 1 percen t i n p ropane. Thechemica l composi t ion of th e p roduced gas a ls o changed s ig n i f i -can t ly dur ing product ion . Carbon d i ox id e concen t ra t ion droppedfrom 48 percen t t o 22 percen t , and t ha t o f hydrogen from 1 5 . 7p e r c e n t t o 1 per cent . Concen trat ion s of th e components offormat ion gas increased th rough the t e s t per iod by about af a c t o r of 2 . The methane co nce nt rat io n went from 32.8 per ce ntt o 71.6 perc en t , th a t of e thane from 1 . 7 p e rcen t t o 3.6 p e r cen t ,and th a t of propane from 0.3 pe rce nt t o 1 p e rcen t .The anomalous behavi or of carbon dio xi de i s due t o late-timei n t r o d u c t i o n of t h i s mater ia l from a t l e a s t two sources. Oneof the se , cont aini ng carbon-14 and account ing fo r a 15 per-cen t in c r ease i n th e t o t a l ca rb on d io x id e av a i l ab l e , may b eev id en ce fo r th e release of gas d iss olve d i n chimney water.The second sour ce re le as ed carbon dioxi de which w a s f r e e ofcarbon-14 and accounted f o r an 8 p e rc e nt i n c r e as e i n t o t a lcarbon d iox id e i n t he chimney. This material could be t h e re-s u l t of con t inued decomposi t ion of carbonate minera l s . A s i m -i l a r e b u l l i t i o n e f f e c t , th oug h t o a co n s id e rab ly lesser e x t e n t ,i s seen i n th e beh av ior o f h yd ro gen. The sp e c i f i c ac t i v i ty ofhydrogen gas i s constan t th roughout the t e s t , and i s c o n s i s t e n twi th the maintenance of t r i t iu m exchange equ i l ib r ium betweenwater and hydrogen gas. No o t h er t r i t i a t e d sp ec ie s i n t r i t i u me

pne r-63 Rulison

Documents

Transcript of pne r-63 Rulison