saleski project hydrogeology - laricina energy ltd. - home · the primary zone of hydrogeologic...

Suite 208 4207 – 98 Street Edmonton AB Canada T6E 5R7 Tel: 780.496.9048 Fax: 780.496.9049 Email: [email protected] www.mems.ca

Saleski Project Hydrogeology

Prepared for: Laricina Energy Ltd.

Prepared by: Millennium EMS Solutions Ltd.

#208, 4207 – 98 St Edmonton, Alberta

T6E 5R7

December 2007 File # 07-003

Laricina Energy Ltd. Saleski SAGD Pilot Project December 2007

Millennium EMS Solutions Ltd. 07-003 Page i

Table of Contents Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................1 2.0 GEOLOGY .....................................................................................................................1

2.1 Glacial Drift .................................................................................................................2 2.2 Viking (Pelican) Formation .........................................................................................3 2.3 Grand Rapids Formation ............................................................................................3 2.4 Clearwater Formation .................................................................................................4 2.5 McMurray Formation ..................................................................................................4 2.6 Devonian ....................................................................................................................5

3.0 GROUNDWATER ..........................................................................................................5 3.1 Glacial Drift .................................................................................................................5 3.2 Grand Rapids Formation ............................................................................................5

4.0 WASTEWATER DISPOSAL..........................................................................................6 5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ..............................................................................6

5.1 Potential Effects of the Surface Facilities on Groundwater Quality ............................6 5.1.1 Description of Potential Effects...........................................................................6 5.1.2 Effects Analysis ..................................................................................................7 5.1.3 Mitigation ............................................................................................................7

5.2 Potential Effects of the Production/Injection Wells on Groundwater Quality ..............8 5.2.1 Description of Potential Effects...........................................................................8 5.2.2 Effects Analysis ..................................................................................................8 5.2.3 Mitigation ............................................................................................................8

5.3 Effects of the Disposal Well(s) on Groundwater Quality.............................................8 5.3.1 Description of Potential Effects...........................................................................8 5.3.2 Effects Analysis ..................................................................................................9

5.4 Groundwater Monitoring Program ............................................................................10 5.4.1 Shallow Groundwater Quality ...........................................................................10 5.4.2 Water Supply ....................................................................................................10

6.0 REFERENCES.............................................................................................................11


Millennium EMS Solutions Ltd. Page ii 07-003

List of Tables Page Table 2.1. Stratigraphic Units at the Project Site.......................................................................1

List of Figures

Figure 1.1. Project Location Figure 2.1. Hydrogeological Cross Section Figure 2.2. Bedrock Topography Map Figure 2.3. Drift Thickness Map Figure 2.4 Viking (Pelican) Formation Structure Map Figure 2.5. Grand Rapids Formation Structure Map Figure 2.6 Upper Grand Rapids Net Water Isopach Map Figure 2.7 Lower Grand Rapids Net Water Isopach Map Figure 2.8. Clearwater Structure Map


Millennium EMS Solutions Ltd. Page 1 07-003

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The Saleski Pilot SAGD Project (Figure 1.1) is located approximately 80 km north-east of the community of Wabasca-Desmarais in Section 26, Townships 85, Ranges 19, West of the 4th Meridian.

The proposed Saleski SAGD Pilot Project will utilize in-situ SAGD technology to recover heavy oil at approximately 285 m3/d (1,800 barrels per day). Three well pairs will be drilled from a single surface pad (Production Pad) adjacent to the Pilot Plant where water treating, steam generation facilities, production handling facilities and disposal facilities will be located.

The primary zone of hydrogeologic interest at Saleski is the Devonian Grosmont Formation. The Grosmont is a regional marine carbonate lying below an average elevation of 270 metres.

The purpose of this report is to bring together the geological framework with the information that exists with respect to groundwater conditions that are of environmental significance to the project. This will provide a concept of hydrogeological conditions as they are currently known.

2.0 GEOLOGY

In general, the geological setting (Table 2.1) consists of glacial drift overlying Cretaceous-age sediments which lie unconformably on Devonian-age carbonate sediments (Figure 2.1). There are heavy oil deposits in the Grosmont Formation, which are the subject of the SAGD operations assessed in this report.

Table 2.1. Stratigraphic Units at the Project Site.

Stratigraphic Unit Description Quaternary Glacial till, sand silt and clay

Colorado Group • Colorado Shale (Base of Fish Scales) • Viking Formation (Pelican Fm) • Joli Fou Formation

• shale • fine-grained sandstone, some cemented zones; water-

saturated • shale

Grand Rapids Formation Two fine-grained sandstones units; both are water-saturated

Clearwater Formation Shale with thin, silty sands

Wabiskaw Member Interbedded, argillaceous sands and shales; poor quality sands can be bitumen-stained



Table 2.1. Stratigraphic Units at the Project Site.

Stratigraphic Unit Description McMurray Formation Thin sands present only in lows on the Pre-Cretaceous

unconformity; thin bitumen-stained silty sands and interbedded mudstones where present

Devonian Age Formations • Winterburn Group

Nisku

• Woodbend Group

Upper Ireton

Grosmont

• massive dolomite, sub-cropping at the Pre-Cretaceous unconformity, thinning from west to east; fractured, vuggy and bitumen-bearing

• argillaceous dolomite with up to 25% porosity; bitumen-bearing

• four depositional units; oldest unit Grosmont A is a water-saturated limestone; Grosmont B is an argillaceous, dolomitic limestone with poor reservoir quality; Grosmont C and D are porous, bitumen-saturated dolomites.

The following sections present more detail on the geological setting near the project.

2.1 Glacial Drift

Bedrock in the vicinity of the project lies at approximately 560 m above sea level (asl) (Figure 2.2). Glacial drift thickness is approximately 30 m in the area of the pilot plant (Figure 2.3).

There is evidence of a north-south buried valley west of the project area in Range 20. This may be a tributary to the major buried channel referred to both as Wiau (Pawlowicz and Fenton, 1995) and the Muskwa (Pawlowicz and Fenton, 2005a, 2005 b) which lies 20 or more kilometres to the south. There are no buried channels beneath the project area. The bedrock topography indicates that the Saleski Lease is situated on the side of a regional bedrock high, contributing to thinner drift deposits within the vicinity of the Lease, relatively to adjacent areas.

There is no pre-existing information regarding shallow hydrogeological conditions in Township 85 Range 19 W4M. Information regarding the lithology of the glacial drift at the project site was obtained from a geophysical log of 10-30-84-22-W4M (Figure 2.1) that indicated the glacial drift is approximately 80 m thick and from water well drillers reports from Twp 83 to 85 Rge 21 to 23 W4M:.



• Sec 28 Twp 83 Rge 22 W4M - located southwest of the project • The driller reported clay to 30 m depth followed by 0.4 m of sand and then an

additional 17 m of clay. Of the 100.58 m of depth drilled, 90 m was reported as some form of “clay”.

• Sec 6 Twp 83 Rge 22 W4M – located southwest of the project • The driller recorded sand and gravel to 12 m followed by till to 25 m. Interbedded

till, sand and gravel extended to 76 m. This location may reflect the buried channel to the south of the project.

• Sec 2 Twp 83 Rge 23 W4M – located southwest of the project where two water well driller’s report; • One records sand from 2 to 3 m depth followed by clay and till to 82 m, • The other records till and clay to 82 m, sand from 82 to 84 m followed by till to

110 m.

Drilling will be undertaken in the winter 2007/2008 to determine the site specific lithology. Pawlowicz, J.G and M.M. Fenton (2005a) indicate that glacial drift in the area might be 80 m thick.

In summary:

• There are no buried channels in the vicinity of the project, • The glacial drift is expected to be 30 m thick under the project site, • The glacial drift is anticipated to consist dominantly of clay and clay till with only minor

sand lenses.

2.2 Viking (Pelican) Formation

The Viking Formation is a moderately permeable unit, and has been described by the AGS as an aquifer system. The Viking occurs at 480 m asl under the project site (Figure 2.4). At Saleski, the Viking Formation consists of two distinct wet coarsening-upwards sands with a total thickness ranging from 15 to 25 m. The sands are separated by 3-5 m of marine shale. The lower and thickest sand is gradational with the underlying Joli Fou shale. The upper sand is thinner and poorly developed over the pilot area but thickens and becomes better developed towards the west. The sands often contain cemented zones with low porosity.

2.3 Grand Rapids Formation

The Grand Rapids Formation begins at an elevation of 445 m asl under the project site (Figure 2.5). The formation is approximately 80 to 100 m thick.



The Grand Rapids Formation in the study area generally consists of two coarsening-upward marine shoreface sands, informally named the upper and lower sands. A third, middle sand that is present to the west in the Germain area is virtually non-existent in the Saleski area The Upper Grand Rapids sand is 8 to 22 m thick and is wet throughout the entire project area (Figure 2.6). The middle sand, where present, reaches only 2.5 m in thickness and is water-bearing. The Lower Grand Rapids sand ranges from 25 to 40 m thick and is also wet throughout the entire Saleski project area (Figure 2.7). The shale at the base of the Upper Grand Rapids sand is regionally extensive throughout the study area and ranges from 2 to 6 m in thickness. This shale isolates the Upper from the Lower Grand Rapids sands.

2.4 Clearwater Formation

The Clearwater Formation, at 360 m asl (Figure 2.8), is made up of two sequences in the project area. The lowermost sequence consists of the Wabiskaw Member which is overlain by the Upper Clearwater sands and shales.

Clearwater Sands and Shales

The Clearwater consists of a 60 m thick sequence of marine shales with occasional thin, argillaceous to silty sands that are not hydrocarbon-bearing in the pilot area. The top of the Clearwater Formation has a short, transitional contact with the base of the Grand Rapids Formation.

Wabiskaw Member

The lowermost part of the Clearwater Formation is made up of the Wabiskaw Member, which directly overlies the McMurray Formation, where present. However, in most of the study area and specifically in the pilot area, the Wabiskaw Member directly overlies the Devonian.

In the study area the Wabiskaw Member represents a distal marine sequence about 30-35 m thick consisting of interbedded argillaceous sands and shales. The lowest unit is a 10 m thick shale that directly overlies the Devonian surface. This unit grades into a 10 m interbedded bitumen-bearing argillaceous sand that shows a weak coarsening upward character and is subsequently capped by marine shale. Although bitumen from the Wabiskaw sand is currently being produced by CNRL and EnCana to the south using primary techniques in horizontal wells it is not of commercial quality in the study area.

2.5 McMurray Formation

In the study area, the McMurray formation is very thin or not present. Where it is present it occupies the lows on the Pre-Cretaceous unconformity. Generally the formation appears as bitumen-stained silty sands and interbedded mudstones less than 5m thick. The McMurray is completely absent over the pilot area.



2.6 Devonian

Devonian sediments subcrop against the Cretaceous silts and shales. In the western portion of the Saleski Lease, the subcropping formation is the basal unit of the Winterburn Group, the Nisku Formation. This unit thins and is absent at the Pilot Site in Section 26-85-19W4M. At this point, the Upper Ireton Formation is the subcropping unit, which itself is completely eroded just east of the Saleski Lease area. The underlying Grosmont Formation is encountered below an elevation of 275 m asl under the project. The Grosmont is known to hold heavy oil deposits in the area and these are the subject of this project.

3.0 GROUNDWATER

Rock units that play a role in the environmental assessment from a hydrogeological point of view are the glacial drift and the Grand Rapids Formation. Other units consist of heavy shales or lie below the depth of project activities. The Devonian is a well-established zone for wastewater disposal both locally and regionally.

3.1 Glacial Drift

The plan for the winter season 2007/2008 is to undertake additional investigation of the lithology and thickness of the glacial drift in the immediate project area. Observation wells will be placed in the upper 20 m of the glacial drift in order to characterize water levels and chemistry.

3.2 Grand Rapids Formation

The Lower Grand Rapids sand is the likely source of water supply for steam generation.

The Grand Rapids Formation is well established as a reliable source of water in this region. A sample of water from the Grand Rapids Formation at 10-26-84-23-W4M revealed a total dissolved solids concentration of approximately 1,200 mg/L consisting of sodium bicarbonate. Golder (2007) indicated that TDS in other wells in the region averaged 1,900 mg/L.

There are no measurements of hydraulic head in the Grand Rapids Formation in this area. It is likely that the hydraulic head in this unit is approximately 100 m below ground surface.

The plan for the 2007/2008 winter season is to drill and test water source wells in the Lower Grand Rapids sand. This information will be used to support the application to divert groundwater.

LEL will undertake investigations of other saline and non-saline sources in the Cretaceous and Devonian-age sediments. Potential for use of these sources has been identified by



Golder (2007). These investigations will commence in the winter program of 2007/2008 and continue in following seasons as appropriate.

4.0 WASTEWATER DISPOSAL

Golder (2007) has identified various Devonian and Cambrian-age units that may be candidates for wastewater disposal. The unit used in the region is the Grosmont Formation. Since this is the unit which is the subject of SAGD recovery there are issues regarding possible interaction of wastewater disposal and SAGD.

LEL plans to investigate the Pre-Cretaceous units beneath the site for their potential for wastewater disposal. This will commence with the 2007/2008 drilling season.

5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

5.1 Potential Effects of the Surface Facilities on Groundwater Quality

5.1.1 Description of Potential Effects

Details on the Saleski Pilot Project infrastructure and facilities are provided in the Saleski Pilot Project Application (“the Application”) Section 2 – Project Description. The following is a summary.

• The infrastructure will include the plant, the field facilities, the water source and disposal wells, pipelines and roads. The field facility will consist of well pads with horizontal well pairs (injector and producer). Pipelines will include steam and product-return lines from the plant to injection wells, a pipeline from the Grand Rapids source well(s) and, possibly, a pipeline to a disposal well.

• The site will be graded to direct surface water runoff to a storm water containment pond. Storm water that collects in the containment pond will be allowed to evaporate. Any excess storm water will be used in the SAGD or tested for key chemical parameters and released to the watershed if the chemical quality meets established Alberta Environment criteria.

• The facilities or locations where fluids are handled, transferred or stored include the heads of the production wells and the disposal well, the blowdown tank, glycol coolers, the tank farm and the oil/water separation equipment.

• The tank farm will contain bitumen, diluent and produced water tanks. A berm will be constructed at the perimeter of the tank farm to prevent releases into the environment in the event of a tank failure.

• Bitumen and produced water from the production wells will be separated in the Process Building. The produced water will be processed with standard oil field



equipment to remove residual oil and solids, and then transferred to the water and storage tank farm prior to deep well disposal.

• Sewage from the various buildings will be collected and trucked off site to disposal facilities.

• Domestic garbage will be taken from the plant site by a commercial disposal company.

• Oily rags and other waste will be placed in containers and emptied as needed by a commercial disposal company for off-site disposal at an approved landfill.

In consideration of the above mitigation measures and material handling methods, the surface facilities should have no effect on groundwater quality under normal operating conditions. Upset conditions, specifically spills or leaks of fluids, may allow small amounts of fluids to seep into the shallow groundwater. Possible groundwater contaminants include bitumen, produced water and small volumes of various process-related organic chemicals such as glycol, lubricants, etc.

5.1.2 Effects Analysis

As stated previously, the plant site is located where glacial drift of up to 30 m of clay and clay till is present. This will act to retard any movement of spilled liquids and allow ample time for clean up and remediation.

The mitigation measures to be implemented should be effective in preventing or minimizing any fluids from adversely affecting the shallow groundwater. In the event that a significant impact on groundwater quality is detected, a groundwater response plan will be implemented. This response plan typically includes determining the magnitude of the impact and undertaking remediation or a risk assessment. The response plan will be effective at avoiding a significant effect on groundwater quality, preventing impacted groundwater from reaching surface water bodies and restoring groundwater quality. As a result, any spills or leaks should have no adverse effect on the groundwater and surface water resources.

5.1.3 Mitigation

Mitigation measures for minimizing or preventing adverse impacts on shallow groundwater quality due to spills or leaks include industry-standard operating practices, preparedness for upset conditions and appropriate management of upset conditions.



5.2 Potential Effects of the Production/Injection Wells on Groundwater Quality


Annular Leakage

The planned drilling, completion and operational details for the production and injection wells have been provided in Section 2 of the Application. An injection well will be operated at pressures below the hydraulic fracturing pressure of the Grosmont Formation. There is little probability that fracturing could occur that would carry these fluids into overlying potable aquifers.

In addition, the intermediate casing strings (placed between the land surface and the bitumen-recovery zone) in the production and injection wells will not be subjected to abnormal pressures because tubing is used to conduct fluids into or out of these wells. Consequently, casing failures followed by annular leakage into the overlying potable aquifers should not occur.

In view of these design and operational factors, the operation of the production and injection wells should not have any effect on the chemical quality of the groundwater in the potable aquifers.


With respect to annular leakage, the operation of the production and injection wells should not have any effect on the chemical quality of the groundwater in potable aquifers. Therefore, an effects analysis is not warranted.

5.2.3 Mitigation

The mitigation measures noted above and in the Application (i.e., cemented surface casing and cemented production casing) should be effective at preventing casing failures and annular leakage from occurring. Instrumentation will be used to detect a casing failure and can be set for an automatic shutdown of the well.

5.3 Effects of the Disposal Well(s) on Groundwater Quality


As outlined in Section 2.7.3 of the application, all wastewater streams will be combined in a common tank and sent to the disposal wells.

It is already known that the Cretaceous sediments are not an acceptable disposal zone therefore exploration activities will examine units at greater depths. This means that the disposal zone is likely to be in the Devonian or Cambrian-age rock units. The zone has yet



to be identified however it is known that the Grosmont Formation is used for wastewater disposal in the region.

The AEUB approval of disposal wells will be a separate process that will take place only after any approval is issued under this current application.

Wastewater disposal wells are common in Alberta and the AEUB has a rigorous application process along with guidelines on operation. Typically the process is as follows:

• Drill through the drift deposits to bedrock.

o Land surface casing to the base of groundwater protection. • Drill a testhole and determine a prospective zone through logging and drill stem

testing. • Land and cement main string casing through the prospective zone and perforate the

casing within the zone • Conduct injectivity test(s) to confirm the capacity of the zone • Apply for AEUB approval • Run tubing with packer(s) into the main string casing isolating the disposal zone • Put rust-inhibiting liquid in annulus above the upper packer between the tubing and

the main string • Inject through the tubing into the disposal zone.

Operating requirements are likely to specify that:

• Injection pressure is not to exceed a specified amount to avoid fracturing the rock in the injection zone.

• Monitoring the annulus pressure to warn of packer or tubing failure


The probability of an adverse effect of injection is minimal. The reasons for this are as follows:

• Injection pressures are limited to below rock fracture pressure therefore the probability of escape of liquids through this mechanism is very low.

• If the packer or tubing should fail the injection pressures will be transferred into the casing annulus. Regular monitoring of the casing annulus pressure will observe this quickly, and if it occurs, the well will be shut in.



• Since the main string casing above the tubing packer is not subject to internal injection pressures and contains rust inhibiting liquid, the probability of it having a leak is minimal.

• An additional level of protection is the surface casing, which lies outside the main string casing, to the depth of groundwater protection. This provides additional protection against leaks into non-saline groundwater resources.

The probability is low that wastewater injection will have an impact on groundwater.

5.4 Groundwater Monitoring Program

The groundwater monitoring program for the Saleski Project will have two main purposes:

• to detect any impacts on the shallow groundwater quality resulting from spills or leaks from surface facilities at the plant site, and

• to evaluate the performance of the water supply well(s) in the Grand Rapids Formation

The details of monitoring programs for either of these two purposes will be the subject of:

• The EPEA Approval coming out of this application, or • The Water Act (in the case of the supply wells)

Therefore, the purpose of this section is to set forth the principles that will be used to develop those monitoring programs – rather than the actual detailed programs. The purpose of this section is to demonstrate that the requirements of either monitoring program are understood.

The following sections discuss the principles of the two monitoring programs.

5.4.1 Shallow Groundwater Quality

Shallow groundwater monitoring wells will be installed in locations down-gradient of the Saleski Plant. Monitoring parameters will be major ions, hydrocarbons, metals and selected organics.

5.4.2 Water Supply

As described in the Application, the Saleski Project intends to commence operations using non-saline water from the Grand Rapids Formation. The Project will apply for a license under the Water Act for diversion of groundwater from the Grand Rapids Formation and is familiar with the monitoring requirements within the regulations. The company is aware of requirements under the Oilfield Injection Policy.



The Project will undertake monitoring of the Grand Rapids source well (s), and any nearby water supply well(s), in accordance with the Water Act licences. Monitoring results will be reported to AENV as required.

6.0 REFERENCES

Golder Associates Ltd. (2007): Information Review – Groundwater Source and Wastewater Disposal Potential, Proposed Saleski SAGD Pilot Plant Facility, 18-26-085-19 W5M; report to Laricina Energy Ltd., November.

Pawlowicz, J.G and M.M. Fenton (1995): Bedrock Topography of Alberta. Alberta Geological Survey Map No. 226, August.

Pawlowicz, J.G and M.M. Fenton (2005a): Bedrock Topography of Peerless Lake Area Alberta (NTS 84B). Alberta Geological Survey Map No. 252.

Pawlowicz, J.G and M.M. Fenton (2005b): Drift Thickness of Peerless Lake Area Alberta (NTS 84B). Alberta Geological Survey Map No. 253.

Liv

ok

R

ive

r

Access Road

PlantSite

580

570

590

560

600

610

550

540

530

620

520

630

510500 490480

470

510

550

560

590

600

500

620

620

590

Laricina Energy Ltd. -Saleski Pilot Project

1.1Project Location

PS

DH

Dec 3/07

07-003bPROJECT:

DATE:

CHECKED:

DRAWN: FIGURE:

PROJECT:

TITLE:

�

0 2.5 51.25

Kilometres

T 84

T 85

T 86 R 20 R 19 W4MM

ap

Do

cu

me

nt:

(K

:\A

ctive

Pro

jects

20

07

\Pro

jects

07

-00

1 t

o 0

7-0

50

\07

-00

3b

(S

ale

ski)

\Fin

al D

ocs\G

eo

log

y\F

ig 1

.1 P

roje

ct

Lo

ca

tio

n.m

xd

) 1

2/4

/20

07

--

9:5

1:0

4 A

M

Legend

Saleski Lease Area

Well siteX

Contour (10m interval)

��

��

��10-30

10-22

10-26

987

1 6 5 4 3 2 1

36

25

24

13

12

363534333231

30 29 28 27 26 25

242322212019

18 17 16 15 14 13

121110

DN

DI

DG

Colorado Group

Wabasca/McMurray

Ele

va

tio

n (

ma

sl)

300

600

500

200

400

300

600

500

200

400

Ele

va

tio

n (

ma

sl)

10-30

10-22 10-26

Glacial Drift

Grand Rapids

Clearwater

Devonian

Plant SiteW E

Ma

p D

ocu

me

nt:

(K

:\A

ctive

Pro

jects

20

07

\Pro

jects

07

-00

1 t

o 0

7-0

50

\07

-00

3b

(S

ale

ski)

\Fig

2 C

ross S

ectio

n.m

xd

) 11

/28

/20

07

--

1:4

3:4

9 P

M

2.1

PS

DH

Dec 19/07

07-003B

Hydrogeological Cross SectionPROJECT:

DATE:

CHECKED:

DRAWN: FIGURE:

PROJECT:

TITLE:


XXX X

X

XXX

X

X XX

XX

XX

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

XX

XX X

X

XXXX

XX X

X

X

XXXX

X

X

Liv

ok

R

ive

r

Access Road

PlantSite

520

510

480

470

460

450

490

500

530

540

550

560

530

520

525565

555

545

535

525

515

505

595

485

475

465

455

445


2.2Bedrock Topography Map

PS

DH

Dec 20/07

07-003bPROJECT:

DATE:

CHECKED:

DRAWN: FIGURE:

PROJECT:

TITLE:

�

0 2 41

Kilometres

T 84

T 85

T 86 R 20 R 19 W4MM

ap

Do

cu

me

nt:

(K

:\A

ctive

Pro

jects

20

07

\Pro

jects

07

-00

1 t

o 0

7-0

50

\07

-00

3b

(S

ale

ski)

\Fin

al D

ocs\G

eo

log

y\F

ig 2

.2 B

ed

rock T

op

og

rap

hy.

mxd

) 1

2/3

/20

07

--

10

:33

:28

AM

Legend

Saleski Lease Area

Well siteX


20.0

20.0

20.0

30.0

30.0

40.0

40.0

50.0

50.0

60.0

60.0

70.0

70.0

80.0

3131

3636

6

31

16

3136

1

36

6161

76.8

29.9

23.570.0

25.6

51.2

65.9

23.845.7

62.549.3 37.5

27.0

32.539.646.966.8

28.8

72.2

45.279.4

35.0

22.6

Liv

ok

R

ive

r

Access Road

PlantSite


2.3Drift Thickness Map

PS

DH

Dec 20/07

07-003bPROJECT:

DATE:

CHECKED:

DRAWN: FIGURE:

PROJECT:

TITLE:

�

0 2 41

Kilometres

T 84

T 85

T 86 R 20 R 19 W4MM

ap

Do

cu

me

nt:

(K

:\A

ctive

Pro

jects

20

07

\Pro

jects

07

-00

1 t

o 0

7-0

50

\07

-00

3b

(S

ale

ski)

\Fin

al D

ocs\G

eo

log

y\F

ig 2

.3 D

rift

Th

ickn

ess.m

xd

) 1

2/3

/20

07

--

5:2

8:2

1 P

M

Legend

Saleski Lease Area

Well siteX


3131

3636

6

31

16

3136

1

36

6161

+472.4

+457.9

+467.4 +467.7

+465.9+463.3

+469.4+468.7

+466.5

+465.8

+480.6

+478.5

+463.9

+472.9

+478.6+475.7

+470.1+477.3 +480.0

+480.3

+479.8+480.2+472.3

+481.9 +481.1

+475.9+476.4

+477.9

+488.4

452.0456.0

460.0

460.0

46

0.0

464.0

464.0

46

4.0

468.0

468.0

468.0

472.0

472.0

476.0

480.0

480.0

484.0

488.0

Liv

ok

R

ive

r

Access Road

PlantSite


2.4Viking (Pelican) FormationStructure Map

PS

DH

Dec 20/07

07-003bPROJECT:

DATE:

CHECKED:

DRAWN: FIGURE:

PROJECT:

TITLE:

�

0 2 41

Kilometres

T 84

T 85

T 86 R 20 R 19 W4MM

ap

Do

cu

me

nt:

(K

:\A

ctive

Pro

jects

20

07

\Pro

jects

07

-00

1 t

o 0

7-0

50

\07

-00

3b

(S

ale

ski)

\Fin

al D

ocs\G

eo

log

y\F

ig 2

.8 D

evo

nia

n S

tru

ctu

re.m

xd

) 1

2/3

/20

07

--

4:4

8:1

6 P

M

Legend

Saleski Lease Area

Well siteX


420.0

424.0

424.0

424.0

428.0

428.0

432.0

432.0

436.0

436.0

440.0

444.0

444.0 448.0

+438.9

+421.0

+432.7 +434.1

+432.2+426.9

+434.4+431.4

+430.2

+427.3

+446.0

+449.9

+435.6

+433.8

+434.8

+444.1+440.0

+432.0+442.2 +444.7

+444.3

+442.7+443.5+442.4+434.5

+444.8 +443.7+434.2

+434.1+434.7 +449.7

3131

3636

6

31

16

3136

1

36

6161

Liv

ok

R

ive

r

Access Road

PlantSite


2.5Grand Rapids Formation Structure Map

PS

DH

Dec 20/07

07-003bPROJECT:

DATE:

CHECKED:

DRAWN: FIGURE:

PROJECT:

TITLE:

�

0 2 41

Kilometres

T 84

T 85

T 86 R 20 R 19 W4MM

ap

Do

cu

me

nt:

(K

:\A

ctive

Pro

jects

20

07

\Pro

jects

07

-00

1 t

o 0

7-0

50

\07

-00

3b

(S

ale

ski)

\Fin

al D

ocs\G

eo

log

y\F

ig 2

.4 G

ran

d R

ap

ids S

tru

ctu

re.m

xd

) 1

2/3

/20

07

--

5:2

2:5

2 P

M

Legend

Saleski Lease Area

Well siteX


15.6

13.1

14.1

14.0

21.0

13.1

21.6

12.4

22.5

12.6

18.518.0

16.114.5

16.0

10.58.610.514.7

8.3

8.0

18.3

13.0

17.5

8.0

12.0

16.0

16.0

20.0

Liv

ok

R

ive

r

Access Road

PlantSite


2.6Upper Grand Rapids Net WaterIsopach Map

PS

DH

Dec 20/07

07-003bPROJECT:

DATE:

CHECKED:

DRAWN: FIGURE:

PROJECT:

TITLE:

�

0 2 41

Kilometres

T 84

T 85

T 86 R 20 R 19 W4MM

ap

Do

cu

me

nt:

(K

:\A

ctive

Pro

jects

20

07

\Pro

jects

07

-00

1 t

o 0

7-0

50

\07

-00

3b

(S

ale

ski)

\Fin

al D

ocs\G

eo

log

y\F

ig 2

.5 L

ow

er

Gra

nd

Ra

pid

s N

et

Wa

ter

Iso

pa

ch

.mxd

) 1

2/3

/20

07

--

4:2

9:0

7 P

M

Legend

Saleski Lease Area

Well siteX


21.7

26.7

25.2

21.423.1

34.8

16.4

20.7

12.6

29.9

30.6

26.0

23.736.9

11.326.4

32.6

34.1

25.620.720.8

37.4

19.3

22.0

6.1

4.0

8.0

12.0

12.0

16.0

16.0

20.0

20.0

24.028.0

32.0

32.0

32.0

Liv

ok

R

ive

r

Access Road

PlantSite


2.7Lower Grand Rapids Net WaterIsopach Map

PS

DH

Dec 20/07

07-003bPROJECT:

DATE:

CHECKED:

DRAWN: FIGURE:

PROJECT:

TITLE:

�

0 2 41

Kilometres

T 84

T 85

T 86 R 20 R 19 W4MM

ap

Do

cu

me

nt:

(K

:\A

ctive

Pro

jects

20

07

\Pro

jects

07

-00

1 t

o 0

7-0

50

\07

-00

3b

(S

ale

ski)

\Fin

al D

ocs\G

eo

log

y\F

ig 2

.5 L

ow

er

Gra

nd

Ra

pid

s N

et

Wa

ter

Iso

pa

ch

.mxd

) 1

2/3

/20

07

--

4:2

9:0

7 P

M

Legend

Saleski Lease Area

Well siteX


340.0

344.0

348.0

348.0

352.0

352.0

356.0

356.0

356.0

356.0

360.0

364.0

364.0

+343.1

+341.4 +341.6

+341.3+337.9

+340.8+338.9

+343.5

+348.9

+357.4

+360.4

+356.1

+352.9

+353.8

+361.3+357.5

+355.2+360.6 +360.8

+363.7

+362.5+362.8+361.4+354.1

+364.9

+365.8 +361.9+354.2

+358.7+358.8

+362.1

+353.9

3131

3636

6

31

16

3136

1

36

6161

Liv

ok

R

ive

r

Access Road

PlantSite


2.8Clearwater Structure Map

PS

DH

Dec 20/07

07-003bPROJECT:

DATE:

CHECKED:

DRAWN: FIGURE:

PROJECT:

TITLE:

�

0 2 41

Kilometres

T 84

T 85

T 86 R 20 R 19 W4MM

ap

Do

cu

me

nt:

(K

:\A

ctive

Pro

jects

20

07

\Pro

jects

07

-00

1 t

o 0

7-0

50

\07

-00

3b

(S

ale

ski)

\Fin

al D

ocs\G

eo

log

y\F

ig 2

.6 M

idd

le G

ran

d R

ap

ids N

et

Wa

ter

Iso

pa

ch

.mxd

) 1

2/3

/20

07

--

4:3

3:0

0 P

M

Legend

Saleski Lease Area

Well siteX


saleski project hydrogeology - laricina energy ltd. - home · the primary zone of hydrogeologic...

Documents