[The Well] Unrelenting turbity following hydrofracturing
Cliff Treyens
Typically, when I get a well owner inquiry, I refer the individual to content on our Wellowner.org. Web site or refer the well owner to our Contractor Lookup service. Neither approach works too well for the inquiry below.
Any thoughts on what might be the problem?
cliff treyens l public awareness director l
national ground water association l
About the middle of July our well gave us a severely limited amount of water. A company did two hydro fracs on the well, the last one being done in August. We have been running the water constantly since then for 8 weeks to get it clean. For the last three weeks we have hit a plateau, with the water quality not improving. It is a silvery grey and is not settling out when put in a clear glass. Last Monday (1 ½ weeks ago), we decided that maybe the bottom arteries are not getting cleaned out because of the head pressure in the well, so instead of running the water all day through a faucet and bathtub in the house, we decided to run the well almost dry through a hose in the basement quickly. The first day we did it, we got extremely grey water, which gradually got clearer. We are again at the point where we are getting this silvery grey water and nothing is settling out. Lab work on the water said that this is shale, PH looks almost perfect
Today, we called back the guy who did the hydro-fraccing and he said he would order floc for the well. He is coming Tuesday or Wednesday to do this. He said if this doesn’t work then we need to get a water treatment system.
This past summer, my husband had to floc our pool (on the recommendation of a pool center) and it totally messed up our filter for about three weeks (constantly clogged, had to backwash constantly – sometimes after 3 minutes)
My questions are:
1. Do you have any experience with flocking a well, and can you offer any pointers to the advantages/disadvantages, what to be careful of, etc.?
2. If the well is flocked…how should the water/ solids in the water/coagulated material be pumped out?
3. If this well is flocked, does it mess with the screen on the well pump?
4. After flocking, what happens to the new water from the arteries coming into the well? Should this water be clean? Does it have to be flocked again?
5. Should the well pump screen be pulled and cleaned?
6. Why didn’t we have this problem before the hydro-fraccing?
Any help you can give to us would be more than appreciated.
william blair
Kristine Uhlman
Assistant Area Agent
Cooperative Extension
University of Arizona
Water Resources Research Center
350 N. Campbell Avenue
Tucson, AZ 85721
(520) 621-9591 ext. 51 NOTE PHONE # CHANGE!!!
fax: (520) 792-8518
kuh...@ag.arizona.edu
www.cals.arizona.edu/azwater
You are subscribed as kuh...@ag.arizona.edu to The Well by National Ground Water Association
mill...@aol.com
would tend to shy away from the well flock. At my house I have
installed a simple 'whole house' particulate filter easily purchased at
a Home Depot or Lowes and installed after the pressure tank. The
filters cost about $10 to $15 each... I usually change mine out every
two to three months (I purposely try to over extend the recomended
replacement intervals; and yes, me trying to be cheap).
A others have stated hydro fracking in shale can exacerbate the influx
of fines from the fracture network. I would have had the hydrofracking
company pull my pump and as others have said install a temporary pump
to pump the well hard at different depths; i.e., "real well
re-development". Typically turbidity should drop off with time but if
one has to use the well it does pose an inconvenience. Thus, my
recommendations for the simple filter versus a complete treatment
system.
-----Original Message-----
From: Cliff Treyens <ctre...@ngwa.org>
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com <the...@ngwa.biglist.com>
Sent: Fri, Oct 2, 2009 2:09 pm
Subject: [The Well] Unrelenting turbity following hydrofracturing
Tuesday or Wednesday to do this.A
0 He said if this doesn’t work then we
My questions are:
You are subscribed as mill...@aol.com
to The Well by National Ground Water Association
EasyUnsubscribe
(by email)
--~----------------------------------------------------------------
The Well Mailing list by National Ground Water Association
EasyUnsubscribe: http://ngwa.biglist.com/unsub/22/1522201
or by email: thewel...@ngwa.biglist.com
--~--
john...@comcast.net
I caution suggesting to the homeowner that a legal wrong has occurred based solely upon the details presented by the homeowner. Over the past 40 years my experience has been that sometimes the homeowner can provide accurate details, sometimes details are left out, and sometimes the homeowner’s world is not remotely connected to the real world. I am not defending anyone. I’m just stating that based upon what has been presented, we do not know what has happened.
Before advising the homeowner on what courses of actions would be reasonable, we need to know all the details. For instance, how old is the water well? How was it constructed? What is the depth? What was the static water level? What were the working level and the pumping rate? What is/are the aquifer(s)? What are the available aquifers? In this particular area, is there a deeper aquifer that would provide sufficient yield of water? What is the yield the homeowner is looking for? What is the history of the water well and the yield? Had the homeowner experienced water shortages before? How was the water well hydro frac? Why 2 times? Was this really a hydro frac? What areas of the formations were isolated with packers? Is this a case of a low yield water well having its water bearing formations clogged with iron bacteria? What is the chemistry of the water? What is the history of the maintenance of the water well? And so on.
My point is that there is so much information missing that it is impossible to properly evaluate the situation. I appreciate that the homeowner is looking for a quick fix. But now is the time to stop and evaluate. It could very well be that this water well is beyond repair. Have a certified water well professional conduct an extensive analysis of the water well system and recommend a course of action.
John Pitz
N. L. Pitz, Inc.
Batavia, IL
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cliff Treyens" <ctre...@ngwa.org>
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com
Sent: Friday, October 2, 2009 1:09:59 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central
Subject: [The Well] Unrelenting turbity following hydrofracturing
Typically, when I get a well owner inquiry, I refer the individual to content on our Wellowner.org. Web site or refer the well owner to our Contractor Lookup service. Neither approach works too well for the inquiry below.
Any thoughts on what might be the problem?
cliff treyens l public awareness director l
national ground water association l
About the middle of July our well gave us a severely limited amount of water. A company did two hydro fracs on the well, the last one being done in August. We have been running the water constantly since then for 8 weeks to get it clean. For the last three weeks we have hit a plateau, with the water quality not improving. It is a silvery grey and is not settling out when put in a clear glass. Last Monday (1 ½ weeks ago), we decided that maybe the bottom arteries are not getting cleaned out because of the head pressure in the well, so instead of running the water all day through a faucet and bathtub in the house, we decided to run the well almost dry through a hose in the basement quickly. The first day we did it, we got extremely grey water, which gradually got clearer. We are again at the point where we are getting this silvery grey water and nothing is settling out. Lab work on the water said that this is shale, PH looks almost perfect
Today, we called back the guy who did the hydro-fraccing and he said he would order floc for the well. He is coming Tuesday or Wednesday to do this. He said if this doesn’t work then we need to get a water treatment system.
This past summer, my husband had to floc our pool (on the recommendation of a pool center) and it totally messed up our filter for about three weeks (constantly clogged, had to backwash constantly – sometimes after 3 minutes)
My questions are:
1. Do you have any experience with flocking a well, and can you offer any pointers to the advantages/disadvantages, what to be careful of, etc.?
2. If the well is flocked…how should the water/ solids in the water/coagulated material be pumped out?
3. If this well is flocked, does it mess with the screen on the well pump?
4. After flocking, what happens to the new water from the arteries coming into the well? Should this water be clean? Does it have to be flocked again?
5. Should the well pump screen be pulled and cleaned?
6. Why didn’t we have this problem before the hydro-fraccing?
Any help you can give to us would be more than appreciated.
kmad...@eoni.com
Kent Madison
3RValve.com
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device from U.S. Cellular
Fred Rothauge
Fred Rothauge
Quality Drilling Fluids
970 381-3788
EasyUnsubscribe <http://ngwa.biglist.com/unsub/thewell/1070647> (by email <mailto:thewel...@ngwa.biglist.com?subject=remove> )
You are subscribed as frot...@qdfluids.com to The Well by National Ground Water Association <http://www.ngwa.org/>
EasyUnsubscribe <http://ngwa.biglist.com/unsub/thewell/1885576> (by email <mailto:thewel...@ngwa.biglist.com?subject=remove> )
Mark W. Eisner
Mark W. Eisner, P.G.
Advanced Land and Water, Inc.
www.alwi.com
-----Original Message-----
From: blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com [mailto:blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com] On Behalf Of Fred Rothauge
Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2009 2:04 PM
To: 'the...@ngwa.biglist.com'
Subject: Re: [The Well] Unrelenting turbity following hydrofracturing
John is right, To much information is missing to suggest more than merely taking a stab in the dark to solve the unknown. I do though disagree with flocking the well. To floc will cause more harm than good as the fines need removed and flocculated solids are more difficult to move therefore creating a blockage in the formation around the well bore.
Fred Rothauge
Quality Drilling Fluids
----- Original Message -----
From: blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com <blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com>
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com <the...@ngwa.biglist.com>
Sent: Sun Oct 04 12:02:20 2009
Subject: Re: [The Well] Unrelenting turbity following hydrofracturing
I caution suggesting to the homeowner that a legal wrong has occurred based solely upon the details presented by the homeowner. Over the past 40 years my experience has been that sometimes the homeowner can provide accurate details, sometimes details are left out, and sometimes the homeowner’s world is not remotely connected to the real world. I am not defending anyone. I’m just stating that based upon what has been presented, we do not know what has happened.
Before advising the homeowner on what courses of actions would be reasonable, we need to know all the details. For instance, how old is the water well? How was it constructed? What is the depth? What was the static water level? What were the working level and the pumping rate? What is/are the aquifer(s)? What are the available aquifers? In this particular area, is there a deeper aquifer that would provide sufficient yield of water? What is the yield the homeowner is looking for? What is the history of the water well and the yield? Had the homeowner experienced water shortages before? How was the water well hydro frac? Why 2 times? Was this really a hydro frac? What areas of the formations were isolated with packers? Is this a case of a low yield water well having its water bearing formations clogged with iron bacteria? What is the chemistry of the water? What is the history of the maintenance of the water well? And so on.
My point is that there is so much information missing that it is impossible to properly evaluate the situation. I appreciate that the homeowner is looking for a quick fix. But now is the time to stop and evaluate. It could very well be that this water well is beyond repair. Have a certified water well professional conduct an extensive analysis of the water well system and recommend a course of action.
John Pitz
N. L. Pitz, Inc.
Batavia, IL
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cliff Treyens" <ctre...@ngwa.org>
Sent: Friday, October 2, 2009 1:09:59 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central
Subject: [The Well] Unrelenting turbity following hydrofracturing
Typically, when I get a well owner inquiry, I refer the individual to content on our Wellowner.org. Web site or refer the well owner to our Contractor Lookup service. Neither approach works too well for the inquiry below.
Any thoughts on what might be the problem?
cliff treyens l public awareness director l
national ground water association l
About the middle of July our well gave us a severely limited amount of water. A company did two hydro fracs on the well, the last one being done in August. We have been running the water constantly since then for 8 weeks to get it clean. For the last three weeks we have hit a plateau, with the water quality not improving. It is a silvery grey and is not settling out when put in a clear glass. Last Monday (1 ½ weeks ago), we decided that maybe the bottom arteries are not getting cleaned out because of the head pressure in the well, so instead of running the water all day through a faucet and bathtub in the house, we decided to run the well almost dry through a hose in the basement quickly. The first day we did it, we got extremely grey water, which gradually got clearer. We are again at the point where we are getting this silvery grey water and nothing is settling out. Lab work on the water said that this is shale, PH looks almost perfect
Today, we called back the guy who did the hydro-fraccing and he said he would order floc for the well. He is coming Tuesday or Wednesday to do this. He said if this doesn’t work then we need to get a water treatment system.
This past summer, my husband had to floc our pool (on the recommendation of a pool center) and it totally messed up our filter for about three weeks (constantly clogged, had to backwash constantly – sometimes after 3 minutes)
My questions are:
1. Do you have any experience with flocking a well, and can you offer any pointers to the advantages/disadvantages, what to be careful of, etc.?
2. If the well is flocked…how should the water/ solids in the water/coagulated material be pumped out?
3. If this well is flocked, does it mess with the screen on the well pump?
4. After flocking, what happens to the new water from the arteries coming into the well? Should this water be clean? Does it have to be flocked again?
5. Should the well pump screen be pulled and cleaned?
6. Why didn’t we have this problem before the hydro-fraccing?
Any help you can give to us would be more than appreciated.
You are subscribed as john...@comcast.net to The Well by National Ground Water Association <http://www.ngwa.org/>
EasyUnsubscribe <http://ngwa.biglist.com/unsub/thewell/1070647> (by email <mailto:thewel...@ngwa.biglist.com?subject=remove> )
You are subscribed as frot...@qdfluids.com to The Well by National Ground Water Association <http://www.ngwa.org/>
EasyUnsubscribe <http://ngwa.biglist.com/unsub/thewell/1885576> (by email <mailto:thewel...@ngwa.biglist.com?subject=remove> )
--~----------------------------------------------------------------
The Well Mailing list by National Ground Water Association
EasyUnsubscribe: http://ngwa.biglist.com/unsub/22/1284796
Cliff Treyens
I just read John Pitz’ posting. I agree with what he says. It is our practice at NGWA not to recommend a specific course of action to well owners because we on staff don’t have the expertise and, even if we did, we may not have all the facts and we certainly don’t have an opportunity to examine the well first hand. Ultimately, we always point the well owner back to the professionals.
What I’m hearing, though, is that there could be a number of reasons for the turbidity and different approaches to addressing it based on the actual cause. I’m inclined to suggest that the well owner get back with the person who did the job and seek a thorough explanation of what he thinks is the cause, why, and what are the options for addressing the cause rather than just the symptoms through filtering.
I also would suggest that if the well owner is not satisfied with the answers she gets, she can always exercise her right to get a second or third opinion from other professionals who do hydrofracturing.
Thanks, everyone, for your help!
From: blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com
[mailto:blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com] On Behalf Of Cliff
Treyens
Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 2:10 PM
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com
Subject: [The Well] Unrelenting turbity following hydrofracturing
Typically, when I get a well owner inquiry, I refer the individual to content on our Wellowner.org. Web site or refer the well owner to our Contractor Lookup service. Neither approach works too well for the inquiry below.
You are subscribed as ctre...@ngwa.org to The Well by National Ground Water Association
Mike Krautkramer
This discussion is a fine example of a potential fundamental problem with the approach we now have with “the well”. There is not enough information in the initiating request to guide the discussion. I work in the Pacific Northwest (this is Mike Krautkramer – for the record). As such, I have quite a bit of confidence when discussing issues that are in my area. Even within the Pacific Northwest there are so many different settings that I would not venture a guess about a problem without knowing where a well is and what the construction circumstances are. We do not have the basic information and are rendering opinions regardless of that fact. I am likely to be assuming conditions similar to what I have seen throughout my career as are all of the others participating in the discussions. Yet, we may all be thinking about a subtly (or not so subtly) different setting and set of circumstances.
I think the first response to anyone requesting discussion should be to get the details as well defined as the person is willing to provide. When we are discussing things it would be best if we indicate who we are and where we do most of our work in order to provide a context to our discussion. Then we all have to be careful that we do not impose our subconscious assumptions on the discussion without trying to identify them as such. It is very easy for me to provide a good-faith comment to a person with a presumption he is in a setting similar to where I normally work and unknowingly advise a person in Pennsylvania to do something correct for the PNW but totally wrong for western Pennsylvania. I see this as a dangerous application of our collective knowledge if we do not develop some ground rules and make sure the expertise being brought to bear is appropriate to the problem being discussed.
Mike Krautkramer,
Hydrogeologist, Tacoma Washington
Cliff Treyens
Mike,
Your point is well taken, no pun intended. My purpose was not to get an accurate diagnosis of the problem because, I agree, there was not enough specific information on the front end. What I was trying to do was get some idea for an appropriate response to the well owner. I think the feedback that was provided enabled me to do this.
Below is the response I sent the well owner:
Dear Ms. _____,
I’ve looked into the symptoms you describe, there could be a number of reasons for the turbidity. There also are different approaches to addressing it based on the actual cause. If you haven’t already, I would get back with the person who did the job and seek a thorough explanation of what he thinks is the cause, why, and what are the options for addressing the cause rather than just the symptoms (i.e. filtering).
If you are not satisfied with the answers, consider whether you want a second or third opinion from other professionals who do hydrofracturing.
For someone to provide you an informed opinion would require more information that what you provide here.
Regards,
Cliff Treyens, National Ground Water Association
Machusick, Matthew D.
Matthew D. Machusick | SAIC
Env. Engineer/Geologist |
Cliff Treyens
Matthew,
Thanks for your feedback. It’s very helpful and very thoughtful. I appreciate that.
This thread started because of limited information on Wellowner.org regarding turbidity. Perhaps the most productive thing I could do is identify and fill in information gaps on Wellowner.org. I will make a separate post seeking such assistance.
Regards,
--Cliff
Mike Krautkramer
Cliff,
This was not meant as a recrimination of the process or this particular application. I do, however, want all of us to be watching out for situations where we may be misadvising someone or even adding an inappropriate 2 cents to a discussion. The primary lesson of my tenure as the McEllhiney Lecturer was that the groundwater industry and the NGWA membership in particular has an awesome “braintrust” and that tapping that asset will be great for the industry and for the public we serve. I do not want to do anything that would stifle that effort. I do want to make sure the effort is sufficiently cautious to maintain credibility and function.
Mike Krautkramer
kuh...@ag.arizona.edu
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
HGSA
President/Principal Engineering Geologist/Hydrogeologist
H.G. Schlicker & Associates, Inc.
607 Main Street, Suite 200
Oregon City, Oregon 97045
Office: 503-655-8113
Fax: 503-655-8173
Cell: 971-235-6538
HG...@teleport.com
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
This e-mail transmission may contain confidential information which is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby advised that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us.
Cliff Treyens
Kristine,
I think your question is a good one, and I’ve pondered it for years as I’ve received literally hundreds of well owner questions. In addition to the legal liability issue that Doug points out, there is the difficulty—as has already been pointed out—of trying to render an informed opinion based on sketchy information from a well owner. Even if we were to seek more precise information, the well owner will be the grid through which that information comes, which leaves a lot of room for error. We are at a distinct disadvantage at not being able to examine the well and associated information first hand.
I think NGWA has to be very careful not to supplant groundwater professionals who are in a better position locally to help well owners with a specific problem than we are—whether it’s the original contractor or those available to provide a second opinion. At the same time—and I know you agree because you’re doing it at the University of Arizona—we can serve a very important public awareness role to educate the well owner about key aspects of water well stewardship, including dealing with groundwater professionals. That’s why, for instance, Wellowner.org has information about the importance of having written contracts with water well contractors.
--Cliff
From: blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com [mailto:blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com] On Behalf Of kuh...@ag.arizona.edu
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 6:55 PM
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com
Mike Krautkramer
(Mike Krautkramer – Robinson, Noble & Saltbush, Tacoma, Washington) This is certainly an aspect that needs to be considered. I agree with Doug Gless that we would never offer advice to a client based on such flimsy understanding of the issue in the operation of our firm. I think there is, indeed, a risk of disseminating advice that will end up challenged in a courtroom. We have worked hard to have NGWA perceived as the expert on groundwater and water-well technology and our success with that works against us in the setting Mr. Gless has laid out. This needs to be a risk evaluated by the attorneys and taken by the Board of Directors (more appropriately, not taken by the Board of Directors). We are all anxious to use what we know to help someone out – as well-meaning as that may be, it is not necessarily good. I believe in the end we will have to keep this endeavor discussion only without formal response to the person requesting the help beyond a summary of the discussion (if that). Perhaps, the whole concept of a “help line” is inappropriate to the organization.
Thanks, Doug for bringing this aspect up so quickly. I was as mesmerized by the chance to offer advice as the rest. We needed to hear this sooner rather than later.
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From:
blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com
[mailto:blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com] On Behalf Of HGSA
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009
4:27 PM
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com
Subject: Re: [The Well]
Unrelenting turbity following hydrofracturing
Dear Fellow Professionals;
In my opinion all of your opinions, etc. could be interpreted in a court of law as providing consultation and recommendations if this information is passed on to the well owner. Providing this without a legally binding contract with the well owner spelling out the limits of both parties responsibilities and liability could put the NGWA at risk of being named in a lawsuit. I would recommend that if the Association wants to provide the well owner with any information or advice that it simply be "hire a consultant to help you work through this problem" and leave it at that. The NGWA is not a consultant, however many members are, refer the well owner to the membership list so that he may select a member to assist him. It sounds to me like the NGWA may be overstepping its duties here.
J. Douglas Gless, MSc,
RG, CEG, LHG
President/Principal Engineering Geologist/Hydrogeologist
H.G. Schlicker & Associates, Inc.
607 Main Street, Suite 200
Oregon City, Oregon 97045
Office: 503-655-8113
Fax: 503-655-8173
Cell: 971-235-6538
HG...@teleport.com
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
This e-mail transmission may contain confidential information which is intended
only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are not the
intended recipient, you are hereby advised that any disclosure, copying,
distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this
information is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in
error, please notify us.
----- Original Message -----
From: kuh...@ag.arizona.edu
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 3:55 PM
You are subscribed as hg...@teleport.com to The Well by National Ground Water Association
kuh...@ag.arizona.edu
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
kuh...@ag.arizona.edu
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
HGSA
President/Principal Engineering Geologist
607 Main Street, Suite 200
Oregon City, Oregon 97045
Office: 503-655-8113
Fax: 503-655-8173
Cell: 971-235-6538
HG...@teleport.com
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
This e-mail transmission may contain confidential information which is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby advised that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us.
----- Original Message -----From: kuh...@ag.arizona.edu
You are subscribed as hg...@teleport.com to The Well by National Ground Water Association
Joe Dobry
There are hundreds/thousands of forums on the internet for people to pose questions about things they need information/advice on, and I don’t hear of those forums being sued for the answers offered freely by others. Surely there must be some way to give a credible answer to an inquiry short of “Call your local consultant.” Something like “The above information is opinion only and should not be…… the rest to be written by an attorney?
“The recommendations made here shall not be construed as authorizing the infringement of any valid patent, and are made without the assumption of any liability by Halliburton Company or its agents, and are statements of opinion only.”
The above is what I am supposed to append to any letter/email that goes out to an external entity.
There are lots of “common” problems that can be approached with a “common” solution based on the hundreds of years of experience of the contributors to “The Well”—there should be some way to pass on those potential solutions without triggering a lawsuit?
Joe
“The recommendations made here shall not be construed as authorizing the infringement of any valid patent, and are made without the assumption of any liability by Halliburton Company or its agents, and are statements of opinion only.”
There you go.
This e-mail, including any attached files, may contain confidential and privileged information for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, use, distribution, or disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient (or authorized to receive information for the intended recipient), please contact the sender by reply e-mail and delete all copies of this message.
Cliff Treyens
Kristine,
Thanks again for your thoughtful comments. I think we all grieve every time an unscrupulous person takes advantage of a well owner. Nobody wants to see that happen. Toward that end, I very much welcome your suggestions--and the suggestions of all NGWA members--on how we can make Wellowner.org the best it can be.
By the way, I am familiar with the eXtension Web site project, and have talked with Elaine Andrews of the University of Wisconsin-Madison about it.
I can’t tell you how much I appreciate your heartfelt concern and passion for helping the well owner. NGWA shares that goal with you.
Warm regards,
HGSA
President/Principal Engineering Geologist
H.G. Schlicker & Associates, Inc.
607 Main Street, Suite 200
Oregon City, Oregon 97045
Office: 503-655-8113
Fax: 503-655-8173
Cell: 971-235-6538
HG...@teleport.com
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
This e-mail transmission may contain confidential information which is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby advised that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us.
You are subscribed as hg...@teleport.com to The Well by National Ground Water Association
Joe Dobry
I do agree with the potential for something to go wrong.
Joe
Gary Burchard
I agree with Kristine. We are a professional organization, and one of our missions is to educate the public about ground water issues. (Honestly, wouldn’t you rather have educated customers?) If we stop answering questions because of legal fears, then we must also stop activities such as workshops. At every workshop I’ve ever been to, advice is offered, and since we can’t control whether workshop attendees are “professionals who should know better” or “laypersons,” workshops should cease. To follow this fear to its logical end, the only information NGWA may disseminate will be juried research results.
If we need a disclaimer on the blog, then so be it. But let’s not put a chill on the free flow of ideas.
Gary C. Burchard
Hydrogeologist
Metropolitan Domestic Water Improvement District
P.O. Box 36870
Tucson, AZ 85740
Phone: (520) 575-8100
Fax: (520) 575-8454
You are subscribed as gbur...@metrowater.com to The Well by National Ground Water Association
HGSA
President/Principal Engineering Geologist
H.G. Schlicker & Associates, Inc.
607 Main Street, Suite 200
Oregon City, Oregon 97045
Office: 503-655-8113
Fax: 503-655-8173
Cell: 971-235-6538
HG...@teleport.com
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
This e-mail transmission may contain confidential information which is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby advised that any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us.
You are subscribed as hg...@teleport.com to The Well by National Ground Water Association
Cliff Treyens
Gary,
Thanks for your comments. We most definitely want to educate the public about ground water issues. So, amen to that! However, we want to have maximum impact, and with 13 million households on private wells, we could literally spend all our time investigating and providing customized answers to well owner questions only to reach a pretty small group of people. We don’t have the capacity to do that and, frankly, I think more people will be helped by teaching them about good well stewardship (i.e. proper well construction, maintenance, water testing, groundwater protection) through Wellowner.org and other means.
In addition to trying to make Wellowner.org the best it can be, another way we get the message out is through developing promotional partnerships with other organizations to promote our water well stewardship messages. Our partners include American Farm Bureau Federation, Automotive Oil Change Association, The Groundwater Foundation, Ground Water Protection Council, Irrigation Association, National Association of Conservation Districts, National Association of Local Boards of Health, National Environmental Health Association, National Environmental Services Center, National Onsite Wastewater Recycling Association, Tractor Supply Co., and USGS. We are leveraging our message to stretch our limited resources.
Probably the toughest challenge, however, has been to convince groundwater professionals to become active participants in raising public awareness about groundwater and water well stewardship. We have a potential public awareness sales force of 13,000+ NGWA members, but previous few are intentional about raising public awareness. We know this from membership surveys as well as anecdotal information. That is why I am doing a panel discussion at Expo on why groundwater professionals should be involved in raising public awareness—and Kristine graciously agreed a month ago to be on the panel.
So thanks again for your passion and commitment to educating the well owner!
--Cliff
john...@comcast.net
I participate in The Well because it is a convenient venue to bounce around thoughts, ideas, opinions, experiences, knowledge among professionals. Although there are numerous topics that don’t directly impact me, I enjoy the opportunity to learn and become aware of what is happening in other parts of the country. Based upon my 40 years of dealing with homeowners, the vast majority would, at best, be totally confused by the discussions and would, at worse, selectively edit and come up with some convoluted result. I would strongly object to allowing homeowners access to our discussions.
I have responded once to the current topic of the water well with the constant turbidity. My comment then was that there is not enough information to provide a valid solution. Nothing has changed that. I appreciate that much information has been presented and there is a feeling that this information could help the homeowner. My question is: “how is this information relevant since we don’t know anything about the situation.”
This is pure speculation.
What if the homeowner had contacted 2 other water well system professionals and those professionals informed the homeowner that their existing water well was beyond repair, should be abandoned, and new water well constructed into another aquifer that would provide for the homeowner’s needs. The homeowner rejected these informed evaluations for another contractor who would “fix” the homeowner’s water well for a lot less money.
What if the water from the existing water well has always been “cloudy” and the homeowner has been using bottled water for cooking and drinking. And the homeowner was advised that in attempting to get a greater yield from the water well the water quality could be worse.
What if this water well was constructed in a multiple formations of limestone and shale. The water well yield was low but had a very high static water level which provided significant storage in the water well. With the constant pumping down of the water the limestone formation’s crevices became fouled with iron bacteria. 2 water well system professionals informed the homeowner of how the water well could be cleaned and restored to near original conditions. Another contractor informs the homeowner that there is this new technology that will “fix” the problem for a 1/3 of the money.
My point is that as a water well system professional, I will not offer an opinion or course of action to a homeowner until I fully understand the water well system, the nature of the problem, and the expectations of the homeowner. Acting on partial information is a disservice to the homeowner and will usually lead to additional problems.
I am a licensed water well and pump installation contractor in Illinois. I operate in an area 40 miles west of Chicago. We have a family business that has been in business for 64 years. I have been on the state licensing board for 24 years. I am presently a director of NGWA. I need to stress this: These are my personal opinions.
I absolutely agree that an informed, knowledgeable homeowner is an asset for the water well system professional. My concern is that the homeowner gets information that is meaningful, understandable, and will assist the homeowner in resolving the problem.
John Pitz
N. L. Pitz, Inc.
Batavia, IL
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cliff Treyens" <ctre...@ngwa.org>
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com
suresh seetaram
I a well driller/contractor as well as an Engineer. Problems faced with clients having problems with their wells are very serious and they need the problem solved. If I may suggest that the Well Contractor provide a detail work program that he has done to the Client in having the well to the existing state and how he plans on getting it fixed. This should be discussed amongst overselves before the Contractor continues with his course of action. The local hydrologist should be involved also. The client could then be advised on the proposed course of action. This could be beneficial and a learning/complement added to our information. As with my little experience every well has its own particular characteristics.
Suresh R. Seetaram
Water Well Engineer/Driller/Contractor
Guyana, South America
--- On Tue, 10/6/09, Gary Burchard <gbur...@metrowater.com> wrote:
> You are subscribed as srsee...@yahoo.com
> to The Well by National Ground Water
> Association
>
> EasyUnsubscribe
> (by email)
>
>
>
>
--~----------------------------------------------------------------
oyin...@yahoo.com
Now, if you want to talk about stewardship, I have a question: We here on the east coast look at places like Las Vegas using 350 gpdc and drying out a reservoir the size of our state, and we have to ask ourselves . . . .
Are you sure that's what you want us to talk about?
Bill Cocke
State of Delaware
Water Allocation Program
Cliff Treyens
Bill,
I hear your frustration. But, yes, I still believe that we should be preaching stewardship.
It reminds me of something everybody agrees upon but few people do: Preventive health care is better and less costly than treating the results of neglecting our health. The fact that few people take preventive health care seriously doesn’t mean it’s still not the wisest strategy considering the alternative.
--Cliff
From:
blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com
[mailto:blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com] On Behalf Of oyin...@yahoo.com
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 9:49 AM
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com
Subject: Re: [The Well] Free exchange of ideas
Thank you,
Cliff, for your appeal for public outreach. I stand in the Water
Resources booth at these events several times a year, and now I feel
validated. But no one ever asks me about water well stewardship.
"Why is my well dry?" "Why do I get rust stains?"
"Should I put in a bigger pump?" "Are we in danger of
saltwater intrusion?" It is just the nature of our business - wells,
like politics, are local. Beyond "You need a licensed well
driller.", there is really not much general information we can give.
If we want to educate the public, we're just going to have to get our hands
dirty.
Now, if you want to talk about stewardship, I have a question: We here on
the east coast look at places like Las Vegas using 350 gpdc and drying out a
reservoir the size of our state, and we have to ask ourselves . . . .
Are you sure that's what you want us to talk about?
Bill Cocke
State of Delaware
Water Allocation Program
From: Cliff Treyens <ctre...@ngwa.org>
To: "the...@ngwa.biglist.com"
<the...@ngwa.biglist.com>
Sent: Wed, October 7, 2009 9:08:46 AM
Subject: RE: [The Well] Free exchange of ideas
Gary,
Thanks for your comments. We most definitely want to educate the public about ground water issues. So, amen to that! However, we want to have maximum impact, and with 13 million households on private wells, we could literally spend all our time investigating and providing customized answers to well owner questions only to reach a pretty small group of people. We don’t have the capacity to do that and, frankly, I think more people will be helped by teaching them about good well stewardship (i.e. proper well construction, maintenance, water testing, groundwater protection) through Wellowner.org and other means.
In addition to trying to make Wellowner.org the best it can be, another way we get the message out is through developing promotional partnerships with other organizations to promote our water well stewardship messages. Our partners include American Farm Bureau Federation, Automotive Oil Change Association, The Groundwater Foundation, Ground Water Protection Council, Irrigation Association, National Association of Conservation Districts, National Association of Local Boards of Health, National Environmental Health Association, National Environmental Services Center, National Onsite Wastewater Recycling Association, Tractor Supply Co., and USGS. We are leveraging our message to stretch our limited resources.
Probably the toughest challenge, however, has been to convince groundwater professionals to become active participants in raising public awareness about groundwater and water well stewardship. We have a potential public awareness sales force of 13,000+ NGWA members, but previous few are intentional about raising public awareness. We know this from membership surveys as well as anecdotal information. That is why I am doing a panel discussion at Expo on why groundwater professionals should be involved in raising public awareness—and Kristine graciously agreed a month ago to be on the panel.
So thanks again for your passion and commitment to educating the well owner!
--Cliff
From:
blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com
[mailto:blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com] On Behalf Of Gary
Burchard
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 7:22 PM
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com
Subject: RE: [The Well] Free exchange of ideas
I agree with Kristine. We are a professional organization, and one of our missions is to educate the public about ground water issues. (Honestly, wouldn’t you rather have educated customers?) If we stop answering questions because of legal fears, then we must also stop activities such as workshops. At every workshop I’ve ever been to, advice is offered, and since we can’t control whether workshop attendees are “professionals who should know better†or “laypersons,†workshops should cease. To follow this fear to its logical end, the only information NGWA may disseminate will be juried research results.
If we need a disclaimer on the blog, then so be it. But let’s not put a chill on the free flow of ideas.
Gary C. Burchard
Hydrogeologist
Metropolitan Domestic Water Improvement District
P.O. Box 36870
Tucson, AZ 85740
Phone: (520) 575-8100
Fax: (520) 575-8454
From: blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com
[mailto:blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com] On Behalf Of kuh...@ag.arizona.edu
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 11:26 AM
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com
Subject: Re: [The Well] Unrelenting turbity following hydrofracturing
Cliff - I fear for the rural well owner. I just bumped into a case where a "professional" wanted to charge $70,000.- to a rural well owner managing an RV park to provide a source water protection plan. $30,000.- of the fee was to GPS the location. There are 'professionals' out there just looking for the ignorant well owner with a problem. National Cooperative Extension - eXtension - is building a web site like the NGWA for well owners and others with questions about drinking water. We give advice. We educate. I hope that is also the mission of NGWA - we are not all consultants working for a fee. In a court of law (and I have been on the witness stand many many times) advice provided over the internet is perceived as that - advice. We should provide the well owner with enough education to ask the right questions and to protect themselves when they do contract a professional consultant. Kristine
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
From: Cliff Treyens <ctre...@ngwa.org>
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 08:47:17 -0400
Subject: RE: [The Well] Unrelenting turbity following hydrofracturing
Kristine,
I think your question is a good one, and I’ve pondered it for years as I’ve received literally hundreds of well owner questions. In addition to the legal liability issue that Doug points out, there is the difficulty—as has already been pointed out—of trying to render an informed opinion based on sketchy information from a well owner. Even if we were to seek more precise information, the well owner will be the grid through which that information comes, which leaves a lot of room for error. We are at a distinct disadvantage at not being able to examine the well and associated information first hand.
I think NGWA has to be very careful not to supplant groundwater professionals who are in a better position locally to help well owners with a specific problem than we are—whether it’s the original contractor or those available to provide a second opinion. At the same time—and I know you agree because you’re doing it at the University of Arizona—we can serve a very important public awareness role to educate the well owner about key aspects of water well stewardship, including dealing with groundwater professionals. That’s why, for instance, Wellowner.org has information about the importance of having written contracts with water well contractors.
I’ve looked into the symptoms you describe, there could be a number of reasons for the turbidity. There also are different approaches to addressing it based on the actual cause. If you haven’t already, I would get back with the person who did the job and seek a thorough explanation of what he thinks is the cause, why, and what are the options for addressing the cause rather than just the symptoms (i.e. filtering).
If you are not satisfied with the answers, consider whether you want a second or third opinion from other professionals who do hydrofracturing.
For someone to provide you an informed opinion would require more information that what you provide here.
Regards,
Cliff Treyens, National Ground Water Association
From:
blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com
[mailto:blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com] On Behalf Of Mike
Krautkramer
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 12:34 PM
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com
Subject: RE: [The Well] Unrelenting turbity following hydrofracturing
This discussion is a fine example of a potential fundamental problem with the approach we now have with “the well†. There is not enough information in the initiating request to guide the discussion. I work in the Pacific Northwest (this is Mike Krautkramer – for the record). As such, I have quite a bit of confidence when discussing issues that are in my area. Even within the Pacific Northwest there are so many different settings that I would not venture a guess about a problem without knowing where a well is and what the construction circumstances are. We do not have the basic information and are rendering opinions regardless of that fact. I am likely to be assuming conditions similar to what I have seen throughout my career as are all of the others participating in the discussions. Yet, we may all be thinking about a subtly (or not so subtly) different setting and set of circumstances.
I think the first response to anyone requesting discussion should be to get the details as well defined as the person is willing to provide. When we are discussing things it would be best if we indicate who we are and where we do most of our work in order to provide a context to our discussion. Then we all have to be careful that we do not impose our subconscious assumptions on the discussion without trying to identify them as such. It is very easy for me to provide a good-faith comment to a person with a presumption he is in a setting similar to where I normally work and unknowingly advise a person in Pennsylvania to do something correct for the PNW but totally wrong for western Pennsylvania. I see this as a dangerous application of our collective knowledge if we do not develop some ground rules and make sure the expertise being brought to bear is appropriate to the problem being discussed.
Mike Krautkramer,
Hydrogeologist, Tacoma Washington
-----Original Message-----
From: blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com
[mailto:blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com] On Behalf Of Cliff
Treyens
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 5:36 AM
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com
Subject: RE: [The Well] Unrelenting turbity following hydrofracturing
I just read John Pitz’ posting. I agree with what he says. It is our practice at NGWA not to recommend a specific course of action to well owners because we on staff don’t have the expertise and, even if we did, we may not have all the facts and we certainly don’t have an opportunity to examine the well first hand. Ultimately, we always point the well owner back to the professionals.
What I’m hearing, though, is that there could be a number of reasons for the turbidity and different approaches to addressing it based on the actual cause. I’m inclined to suggest that the well owner get back with the person who did the job and seek a thorough explanation of what he thinks is the cause, why, and what are the options for addressing the cause rather than just the symptoms through filtering.
I also would suggest that if the well owner is not satisfied with the answers she gets, she can always exercise her right to get a second or third opinion from other professionals who do hydrofracturing.
Thanks, everyone, for your help!
From:
blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com
[mailto:blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com] On Behalf Of Cliff
Treyens
Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 2:10 PM
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com
Subject: [The Well] Unrelenting turbity following hydrofracturing
Typically, when I get a well owner inquiry, I refer the individual to content on our Wellowner.org. Web site or refer the well owner to our Contractor Lookup service. Neither approach works too well for the inquiry below.
Any thoughts on what might be the problem?
cliff treyens l public awareness director l
national ground water association l
About the middle of July our well gave us a severely limited amount of water. A company did two hydro fracs on the well, the last one being done in August. We have been running the water constantly since then for 8 weeks to get it clean. For the last three weeks we have hit a plateau, with the water quality not improving. It is a silvery grey and is not settling out when put in a clear glass. Last Monday (1 ½ weeks ago), we decided that maybe the bottom arteries are not getting cleaned out because of the head pressure in the well, so instead of running the water all day through a faucet and bathtub in the house, we decided to run the well almost dry through a hose in the basement quickly. The first day we did it, we got extremely grey water, which gradually got clearer. We are again at the point where we are getting this silvery grey water and nothing is settling out. Lab work on the water said that this is shale, PH looks almost perfect
Today, we called back the guy who did the hydro-fraccing and he said he would order floc for the well. He is coming Tuesday or Wednesday to do this. He said if this doesn’t work then we need to get a water treatment system.
This past summer, my husband had to floc our pool (on the recommendation of a pool center) and it totally messed up our filter for about three weeks (constantly clogged, had to backwash constantly – sometimes after 3 minutes)
My questions are:
1. Do you have any experience with flocking a well, and can you offer any pointers to the advantages/disadvantages, what to be careful of, etc.?
2. If the well is flocked…how should the water/ solids in the water/coagulated material be pumped out?
3. If this well is flocked, does it mess with the screen on the well pump?
4. After flocking, what happens to the new water from the arteries coming into the well? Should this water be clean? Does it have to be flocked again?
5. Should the well pump screen be pulled and cleaned?
6. Why didn’t we have this problem before the hydro-fraccing?
Maggie Gresham
I have been in a family owned water well drilling contractor company since 1977. I agree with Doug’s remarks below. I will get customers who call who have had problems with another company. They will present it in a way blaming them for a drilling issue that they do not understand. When explaining their problem they usually don’t include a lot of the pertinent information. Depending on the circumstance we will advise them to follow up with the company and try to resolve the issue. There may be times when we will work with the customer to solve the issue. There are so many circumstances that can play into this. Is there ethical practices involved? Could the contractor research and resolve the problem on their own? This biglist sharing is a great asset for all.
I think the association takes a big step into a red area of liability. It is a good call to have the advise of legal.
I am not as well versed as a lot of you….. but thought I would like to throw my 2 cents in.
Maggie Gresham
Gresham Well Drilling Inc.
-----Original Message-----
From:
blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com
[mailto:blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com] On Behalf Of HGSA
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009
4:35 PM
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com
Subject: Re: [The Well] Free exchange of ideas
It is not the content of the information but how it is presented that will get us sued. If it is interpreted as technical advice (recommendations) to an individual and it turns out to be bad advice, we can probably be held liable. Let the Association's legal counsel tell how best to proceed.
Doug
J. Douglas Gless, MSc,
RG, CEG, LHG
President/Principal Engineering Geologist
H.G. Schlicker & Associates, Inc.
607 Main Street, Suite 200
Oregon City, Oregon 97045
Office: 503-655-8113
Fax: 503-655-8173
Cell: 971-235-6538
HG...@teleport.com
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
This e-mail transmission may contain confidential information which is intended
only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are not the
intended recipient, you are hereby advised that any disclosure, copying,
distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this
information is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in
error, please notify us.
----- Original Message -----
From: Gary Burchard
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 4:22 PM
Subject: RE: [The Well] Free exchange of ideas
I agree with Kristine. We are a professional organization, and one of our missions is to educate the public about ground water issues. (Honestly, wouldn’t you rather have educated customers?) If we stop answering questions because of legal fears, then we must also stop activities such as workshops. At every workshop I’ve ever been to, advice is offered, and since we can’t control whether workshop attendees are “professionals who should know better” or “laypersons,” workshops should cease. To follow this fear to its logical end, the only information NGWA may disseminate will be juried research results.
If we need a disclaimer on the blog, then so be it. But let’s not put a chill on the free flow of ideas.
Gary C. Burchard
Hydrogeologist
Metropolitan Domestic Water Improvement District
P.O. Box 36870
Tucson, AZ 85740
Phone: (520) 575-8100
Fax: (520) 575-8454
From: blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com [mailto:blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com] On Behalf Of kuh...@ag.arizona.edu
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 11:26 AM
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com
Subject: Re: [The Well] Unrelenting turbity following hydrofracturing
Cliff - I fear for the rural well owner. I just bumped into a case where a "professional" wanted to charge $70,000.- to a rural well owner managing an RV park to provide a source water protection plan. $30,000.- of the fee was to GPS the location. There are 'professionals' out there just looking for the ignorant well owner with a problem. National Cooperative Extension - eXtension - is building a web site like the NGWA for well owners and others with questions about drinking water. We give advice. We educate. I hope that is also the mission of NGWA - we are not all consultants working for a fee. In a court of law (and I have been on the witness stand many many times) advice provided over the internet is perceived as that - advice. We should provide the well owner with enough education to ask the right questions and to protect themselves when they do contract a professional consultant. Kristine
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
From: Cliff Treyens <ctre...@ngwa.org>
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 08:47:17 -0400
Subject: RE: [The Well] Unrelenting turbity following hydrofracturing
Kristine,
I think your question is a good one, and I’ve pondered it for years as I’ve received literally hundreds of well owner questions. In addition to the legal liability issue that Doug points out, there is the difficulty—as has already been pointed out—of trying to render an informed opinion based on sketchy information from a well owner. Even if we were to seek more precise information, the well owner will be the grid through which that information comes, which leaves a lot of room for error. We are at a distinct disadvantage at not being able to examine the well and associated information first hand.
I think NGWA has to be very careful not to supplant groundwater professionals who are in a better position locally to help well owners with a specific problem than we are—whether it’s the original contractor or those available to provide a second opinion. At the same time—and I know you agree because you’re doing it at the University of Arizona—we can serve a very important public awareness role to educate the well owner about key aspects of water well stewardship, including dealing with groundwater professionals. That’s why, for instance, Wellowner.org has information about the importance of having written contracts with water well contractors.
I’ve looked into the symptoms you describe, there could be a number of reasons for the turbidity. There also are different approaches to addressing it based on the actual cause. If you haven’t already, I would get back with the person who did the job and seek a thorough explanation of what he thinks is the cause, why, and what are the options for addressing the cause rather than just the symptoms (i.e. filtering).
If you are not satisfied with the answers, consider whether you want a second or third opinion from other professionals who do hydrofracturing.
For someone to provide you an informed opinion would require more information that what you provide here.
Regards,
Cliff Treyens, National Ground Water Association
From: blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com [mailto:blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com] On Behalf Of Mike Krautkramer
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 12:34 PM
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com
Subject: RE: [The Well] Unrelenting turbity following hydrofracturing
This discussion is a fine example of a potential fundamental problem with the approach we now have with “the well”. There is not enough information in the initiating request to guide the discussion. I work in the Pacific Northwest (this is Mike Krautkramer – for the record). As such, I have quite a bit of confidence when discussing issues that are in my area. Even within the Pacific Northwest there are so many different settings that I would not venture a guess about a problem without knowing where a well is and what the construction circumstances are. We do not have the basic information and are rendering opinions regardless of that fact. I am likely to be assuming conditions similar to what I have seen throughout my career as are all of the others participating in the discussions. Yet, we may all be thinking about a subtly (or not so subtly) different setting and set of circumstances.
I think the first response to anyone requesting discussion should be to get the details as well defined as the person is willing to provide. When we are discussing things it would be best if we indicate who we are and where we do most of our work in order to provide a context to our discussion. Then we all have to be careful that we do not impose our subconscious assumptions on the discussion without trying to identify them as such. It is very easy for me to provide a good-faith comment to a person with a presumption he is in a setting similar to where I normally work and unknowingly advise a person in Pennsylvania to do something correct for the PNW but totally wrong for western Pennsylvania. I see this as a dangerous application of our collective knowledge if we do not develop some ground rules and make sure the expertise being brought to bear is appropriate to the problem being discussed.
Mike Krautkramer,
Hydrogeologist, Tacoma Washington
-----Original Message-----
From: blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com [mailto:blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com] On Behalf Of Cliff Treyens
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 5:36 AM
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com
Subject: RE: [The Well] Unrelenting turbity following hydrofracturing
I just read John Pitz’ posting. I agree with what he says. It is our practice at NGWA not to recommend a specific course of action to well owners because we on staff don’t have the expertise and, even if we did, we may not have all the facts and we certainly don’t have an opportunity to examine the well first hand. Ultimately, we always point the well owner back to the professionals.
What I’m hearing, though, is that there could be a number of reasons for the turbidity and different approaches to addressing it based on the actual cause. I’m inclined to suggest that the well owner get back with the person who did the job and seek a thorough explanation of what he thinks is the cause, why, and what are the options for addressing the cause rather than just the symptoms through filtering.
I also would suggest that if the well owner is not satisfied with the answers she gets, she can always exercise her right to get a second or third opinion from other professionals who do hydrofracturing.
Thanks, everyone, for your help!
From: blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com [mailto:blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com] On Behalf Of Cliff Treyens
Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 2:10 PM
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com
Subject: [The Well] Unrelenting turbity following hydrofracturing
Typically, when I get a well owner inquiry, I refer the individual to content on our Wellowner.org. Web site or refer the well owner to our Contractor Lookup service. Neither approach works too well for the inquiry below.
Any thoughts on what might be the problem?
cliff treyens l public awareness director l
national ground water association l
About the middle of July our well gave us a severely limited amount of water. A company did two hydro fracs on the well, the last one being done in August. We have been running the water constantly since then for 8 weeks to get it clean. For the last three weeks we have hit a plateau, with the water quality not improving. It is a silvery grey and is not settling out when put in a clear glass. Last Monday (1 ½ weeks ago), we decided that maybe the bottom arteries are not getting cleaned out because of the head pressure in the well, so instead of running the water all day through a faucet and bathtub in the house, we decided to run the well almost dry through a hose in the basement quickly. The first day we did it, we got extremely grey water, which gradually got clearer. We are again at the point where we are getting this silvery grey water and nothing is settling out. Lab work on the water said that this is shale, PH looks almost perfect
Today, we called back the guy who did the hydro-fraccing and he said he would order floc for the well. He is coming Tuesday or Wednesday to do this. He said if this doesn’t work then we need to get a water treatment system.
This past summer, my husband had to floc our pool (on the recommendation of a pool center) and it totally messed up our filter for about three weeks (constantly clogged, had to backwash constantly – sometimes after 3 minutes)
My questions are:
1. Do you have any experience with flocking a well, and can you offer any pointers to the advantages/disadvantages, what to be careful of, etc.?
2. If the well is flocked…how should the water/ solids in the water/coagulated material be pumped out?
3. If this well is flocked, does it mess with the screen on the well pump?
4. After flocking, what happens to the new water from the arteries coming into the well? Should this water be clean? Does it have to be flocked again?
5. Should the well pump screen be pulled and cleaned?
6. Why didn’t we have this problem before the hydro-fraccing?
Any help you can give to us would be more than appreciated.
You are subscribed as ctre...@ngwa.org to The Well by National Ground Water Association
You are subscribed as mkraut...@robinson-noble.com to The Well by National Ground Water Association
You are subscribed as ctre...@ngwa.org to The Well by National Ground Water Association
You are subscribed as matthew.d...@saic.com to The Well by National Ground Water Association
You are subscribed as kuh...@ag.arizona.edu to The Well by National Ground Water Association
You are subscribed as ctre...@ngwa.org to The Well by National Ground Water Association
You are subscribed as kuh...@ag.arizona.edu to The Well by National Ground Water Association
You are subscribed as gbur...@metrowater.com to The Well by National Ground Water Association
You are subscribed as hg...@teleport.com to The Well by National Ground Water Association
Alan Eades
I participate in The Well because it is a convenient venue to bounce around thoughts, ideas, opinions, experiences, knowledge among professionals. Although there are numerous topics that don’t directly impact me, I enjoy the opportunity to learn and become aware of what is happening in other parts of the country. Based upon my 40 years of dealing with homeowners, the vast majority would, at best, be totally confused by the discussions and would, at worse, selectively edit and come up with some convoluted result. I would strongly object to allowing homeowners access to our discussions.I have responded once to the current topic of the water well with the constant turbidity. My comment then was that there is not enough information to provide a valid solution. Nothing has changed that. I appreciate that much information has been presented and there is a feeling that this information could help the homeowner. My question is: “how is this information relevant since we don’t know anything about the situation.”This is pure speculation.What if the homeowner had contacted 2 other water well system professionals and those professionals informed the homeowner that their existing water well was beyond repair, should be abandoned, and new water well constructed into another aquifer that would provide for the homeowner’s needs. The homeowner rejected these informed evaluations for another contractor who would “fix” the homeowner’s water well for a lot less money.What if the water from the existing water well has always been “cloudy” and the homeowner has been using bottled water for cooking and drinking. And the homeowner was advised that in attempting to get a greater yield from the water well the water quality could be worse.What if this water well was constructed in a multiple formations of limestone and shale. The water well yield was low but had a very high static water level which provided significant storage in the water well. With the constant pumping down of the water the limestone formation’s crevices became fouled with iron bacteria. 2 water well system professionals informed the homeowner of how the water well could be cleaned and restored to near original conditions. Another contractor informs the homeowner that there is this new technology that will “fix” the problem for a 1/3 of the money.My point is that as a water well system professional, I will not offer an opinion or course of action to a homeowner until I fully understand the water well system, the nature of the problem, and the expectations of the homeowner. Acting on partial information is a disservice to the homeowner and will usually lead to additional problems.I am a licensed water well and pump installation contractor in Illinois. I operate in an area 40 miles west of Chicago. We have a family business that has been in business for 64 years. I have been on the state licensing board for 24 years. I am presently a director of NGWA. I need to stress this: These are my personal opinions.I absolutely agree that an informed, knowledgeable homeowner is an asset for the water well system professional. My concern is that the homeowner gets information that is meaningful, understandable, and will assist the homeowner in resolving the problem.John PitzN. L. Pitz, Inc.Batavia, IL
Cooley, Tony (EEC)
Two different things are getting mixed up in this discussion. One is the use of the forum noted by John Pitz below and was I think the original intention of The Well. The other would be to intensively respond to fully expounded problem, as would be done for a professional study. This latter is beyond the scope of what most users will want to use this for and also has a risk of liability for a negligent analysis that purports to be very site specific, but is unable to without far more info than will be available remotely.
When an issue is posed in the brief form we commonly see in this forum, with incomplete information, we see a broad range of ideas that may act as a clue directing a professional to explore an approach that had not occurred to that person previously. It would be worthwhile for those providing comments to include brief comments about their assumed geology and such in providing suggestions, but very limited. This forum is for brief comments that don’t involve a lot of time to produce and to read. All a user to this forum will get is leads and ideas that will then need to be explored and developed by the receiving professional to be useful. Such leads can be very valuable. However, we will me misdirecting our efforts if we try to do too much here. This is not the place for a professional study; go to journals and other sources for that. Recognize that the opinions provided here are only raw material that a professional must incorporate with many other resources to produce a final result.
I would limit access to this forum to professionals within NGWA. These unfiltered comments would often mislead or confuse non-professionals and too many questions submitted by non-professionals would clutter up our interface, wasting time in looking for ideas that might be worth pursuing.
Tony Cooley P.E., P.G.
Environmental Engineer II
EEC-DEP Division of Waste Management
Solid Waste Branch, Closure Section
502-564-8158 ext 4654 (direct)
On Oct 7, 2009, at 7:12 AM, john...@comcast.net wrote:
I participate in The Well because it is a convenient venue to bounce around thoughts, ideas, opinions, experiences, knowledge among professionals. …..
NGWA is not responsible for the authenticity or accuracy of information contained within this message. Published statements do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NGWA. Products and services that are mentioned or advertised within this site do not carry any kind of endorsement by NGWA.
cerrillo1
Hydrogeologist/Mediator/Facilitator/Arbitrator
P. O. Box 728
Evergreen, CO 80437-0728
Conflict is inevitable, litigation is not!
conflict is inevitable, litigation is not
cerr...@mindspring.com
O/F 303-674-6484
C 303-921-1612
Conflict is inevitable, litigation is not
----- Original Message -----From: Cooley, Tony (EEC)Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 11:33 AMSubject: RE: [The Well] Free exchange of ideas
You are subscribed as cerr...@mindspring.com to The Well by National Ground Water Association
Steve Lueck
Tucson Water
Water Resources Management/Hydrology
P.O. Box 27210
Tucson, AZ 85726-7210
(520) 837-2233
Albright, Randy
From: blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com [mailto:blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com] On Behalf Of Steve Lueck
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 4:28 PM
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com
Subject: Re: [The Well] How much sand...?
Gary Burchard
Steve --
My old version of the Bureau of Reclamation’s Ground Water Manual says the following:
“Acceptable sand content for various purposes is as follows:
1. Municipal, domestic, and industrial supply – 0.01ml or 20 p/m by weight
2. Sprinkler irrigation – 0.025 ml or 50 p/m by weight
3. Other irrigation – 0.075 ml or 150 p/m by weight”
They’re talking about Imhoff measurements.
Roscoe Moss’ Handbook of Ground Water Development has more detailed guidelines on P. 273. For our business they say wells may produce up to 5 ppm but ideally would be less than 0.7 ppm.
I believe NGWA’s new standards include this detail, but I’m lost track of when they’re supposed to be released.
Good luck!
Gary C. Burchard
Hydrogeologist
Metropolitan Domestic Water Improvement District
P.O. Box 36870
Tucson, AZ 85740
Phone: (520) 575-8100
Fax: (520) 575-8454
From: blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com [mailto:blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com] On Behalf Of Steve Lueck
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 4:28 PM
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com
Subject: Re: [The Well] How much sand...?
Greetings,
I would like to know what levels of sand production in terms of parts per million are considered High, medium or low? Any other information regarding wells considered sanders would be much appreciated. I will try to get another post out later with some data that may explain the basis for this question.
Thanks,
Steve Lueck
Steve Lueck
Tucson Water
Water Resources Management/Hydrology
P.O. Box 27210
Tucson, AZ 85726-7210
(520) 837-2233
cell: (520) 419-5921
You are subscribed as steve...@tucsonaz.gov to The Well by National Ground Water Association
NGWA is not responsible for the authenticity or accuracy of information contained within this message. Published statements do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NGWA. Products and services that are mentioned or advertised within this site do not carry any kind of endorsement by NGWA.
Kevin McCray
NGWA compiled this information from several states in late 2007. See attachment.
From: blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com [mailto:blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com] On Behalf Of Gary Burchard
Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 9:42 PM
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com
You are subscribed as kmc...@ngwa.org to The Well by National Ground Water Association
NGWA is not responsible for the authenticity or accuracy of information contained within this message. Published statements do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NGWA. Products and services that are mentioned or advertised within this site do not carry any kind of endorsement by NGWA.
Gary Burchard
Thanks, Kevin! That’s a great compilation. I’m curious, if you don’t mind, why the original question was restricted to household/domestic water wells and didn’t include municipal water supply wells also? Do you think you might have received different responses, or would they have been essentially the same?
Thanks again,
Gary Burchard
Hydrogeologist
Metro Water
You are subscribed as gbur...@metrowater.com to The Well by National Ground Water Association
Kevin McCray
This was originally compiled because the query to NGWA was about residential wells. I’m not qualified to speculate if we would have received a different response. Our recent experience in preparing a survey of state regulatory oversight of geothermal heating and cooling systems reminds me there are many aspects that could be asked about in terms of regulation of groundwater infrastructure –regardless of scale. I’d have to investigate, but I wonder if the relatively new EPA guidelines for inspecting public water supply systems using groundwater has an aspect related to sand levels? May not, but we’ll see if we can’t find out.
NGWA certainly will welcome ideas for collecting information such as this.
Stephen.A...@snwa.com
This is not to divert the discussion but I just wanted to correct some wrong impression by people outside Las Vegas.
Bill writes:
Now, if you want to talk about stewardship, I have a question: We here on the east coast look at places like Las Vegas using 350 gpdc and drying out a reservoir the size of our state, and we have to ask ourselves . . . .
Bill's facts are wrong and is missing the point when it comes to stewardship. Yes, Las Vegas use more water than most communities per person, but the Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA) has reduced use (in the Greater Las Vegas area) in GPCD from 350 gallons to 250 gallons between 1990 and 2009. This is while we live in the driest urban area in the U.S. with 4 inches of rain and we host nearly 40 million tourists annually. Not to mention the fact the community has a pretty strong groundwater management program. In addition, I believe the water quality efforts by SNWA and its members and the environmental commitments demonstrate our track record and I believe this demonstrates stewardship.
The other thing to keep in mind is that Nevada (Las Vegas) only uses 2% of the Colorado river. If Nevada were to disappear overnight it would not influence the Colorado river system. In fact about 75% of the Colorado river is used for agriculture.
Another point is that the Las Vegas area's water use consists of about 43% reuse. This demonstrates the community's commitment to environmentally conscious water use.
Steve Acheampong, Ph.D.
Southern Nevada Water Authority
Water Resources Division
P. O. Box 99956
Las Vegas, NV 89193-9956.
For UPS, Fedex and all other shipments, our physical address is:
Southern Nevada Water Authority
100 City Parkway, Ste. 700
Las Vegas, NV 89106.
Phone No.: (702)-862-3753
Fax No.: (702)862-3751
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong" -- Mahatma Gandhi
This communication, including any attachments, may contain confidential and privileged information and is intended only for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. Any review, dissemination, or copying of this communication by anyone other than the intended recipient(s) is strictly prohibited.
oyin...@yahoo.com
Sent by: blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com 10/07/2009 06:48 AM
|
|
Thank you, Cliff, for your appeal for public outreach. I stand in the Water Resources booth at these events several times a year, and now I feel validated. But no one ever asks me about water well stewardship. "Why is my well dry?" "Why do I get rust stains?" "Should I put in a bigger pump?" "Are we in danger of saltwater intrusion?" It is just the nature of our business - wells, like politics, are local. Beyond "You need a licensed well driller.", there is really not much general information we can give. If we want to educate the public, we're just going to have to get our hands dirty.
Now, if you want to talk about stewardship, I have a question: We here on the east coast look at places like Las Vegas using 350 gpdc and drying out a reservoir the size of our state, and we have to ask ourselves . . . .
Are you sure that's what you want us to talk about?
Bill Cocke
State of Delaware
Water Allocation Program
From: Cliff Treyens <ctre...@ngwa.org>
To: "the...@ngwa.biglist.com" <the...@ngwa.biglist.com>
Sent: Wed, October 7, 2009 9:08:46 AM
Subject: RE: [The Well] Free exchange of ideas
Gary,
Thanks for your comments. We most definitely want to educate the public about ground water issues. So, amen to that! However, we want to have maximum impact, and with 13 million households on private wells, we could literally spend all our time investigating and providing customized answers to well owner questions only to reach a pretty small group of people. We don’t have the capacity to do that and, frankly, I think more people will be helped by teaching them about good well stewardship (i.e. proper well construction, maintenance, water testing, groundwater protection) through Wellowner.org and other means.
In addition to trying to make Wellowner.org the best it can be, another way we get the message out is through developing promotional partnerships with other organizations to promote our water well stewardship messages. Our partners include American Farm Bureau Federation, Automotive Oil Change Association, The Groundwater Foundation, Ground Water Protection Council, Irrigation Association, National Association of Conservation Districts, National Association of Local Boards of Health, National Environmental Health Association, National Environmental Services Center, National Onsite Wastewater Recycling Association, Tractor Supply Co., and USGS. We are leveraging our message to stretch our limited resources.
Probably the toughest challenge, however, has been to convince groundwater professionals to become active participants in raising public awareness about groundwater and water well stewardship. We have a potential public awareness sales force of 13,000+ NGWA members, but previous few are intentional about raising public awareness. We know this from membership surveys as well as anecdotal information. That is why I am doing a panel discussion at Expo on why groundwater professionals should be involved in raising public awareness—and Kristine graciously agreed a month ago to be on the panel.
So thanks again for your passion and commitment to educating the well owner!
--Cliff
From: blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com [mailto:blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com] On Behalf Of Gary Burchard
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 7:22 PM
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com
Subject: RE: [The Well] Free exchange of ideas
I agree with Kristine. We are a professional organization, and one of our missions is to educate the public about ground water issues. (Honestly, wouldn’t you rather have educated customers?) If we stop answering questions because of legal fears, then we must also stop activities such as workshops. At every workshop I’ve ever been to, advice is offered, and since we can’t control whether workshop attendees are “professionals who should know better†or “laypersons,†workshops should cease. To follow this fear to its logical end, the only information NGWA may disseminate will be juried research results.
If we need a disclaimer on the blog, then so be it. But let’s not put a chill on the free flow of ideas.
Gary C. Burchard
Hydrogeologist
Metropolitan Domestic Water Improvement District
From: blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com [mailto:blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com] On Behalf Of kuh...@ag.arizona.edu
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 11:26 AM
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com
Subject: Re: [The Well] Unrelenting turbity following hydrofracturing
Cliff - I fear for the rural well owner. I just bumped into a case where a "professional" wanted to charge $70,000.- to a rural well owner managing an RV park to provide a source water protection plan. $30,000.- of the fee was to GPS the location. There are 'professionals' out there just looking for the ignorant well owner with a problem. National Cooperative Extension - eXtension - is building a web site like the NGWA for well owners and others with questions about drinking water. We give advice. We educate. I hope that is also the mission of NGWA - we are not all consultants working for a fee. In a court of law (and I have been on the witness stand many many times) advice provided over the internet is perceived as that - advice. We should provide the well owner with enough education to ask the right questions and to protect themselves when they do contract a professional consultant. Kristine
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2009 08:47:17 -0400
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com<the...@ngwa.biglist.com>
Subject: RE: [The Well] Unrelenting turbity following hydrofracturing
Kristine,
I think your question is a good one, and I’ve pondered it for years as I’ve received literally hundreds of well owner questions. In addition to the legal liability issue that Doug points out, there is the difficulty—as has already been pointed out—of trying to render an informed opinion based on sketchy information from a well owner. Even if we were to seek more precise information, the well owner will be the grid through which that information comes, which leaves a lot of room for error. We are at a distinct disadvantage at not being able to examine the well and associated information first hand.
I think NGWA has to be very careful not to supplant groundwater professionals who are in a better position locally to help well owners with a specific problem than we are—whether it’s the original contractor or those available to provide a second opinion. At the same time—and I know you agree because you’re doing it at the University of Arizona—we can serve a very important public awareness role to educate the well owner about key aspects of water well stewardship, including dealing with groundwater professionals. That’s why, for instance, Wellowner.org has information about the importance of having written contracts with water well contractors.
--Cliff
From: blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com [mailto:blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com] On Behalf Of kuh...@ag.arizona.edu
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 6:55 PM
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com
Subject: Re: [The Well] Unrelenting turbity following hydrofracturing
Cliff - I agree with Matt - couldn't we send the well owner the entire chain of discussion so she could see the variety of responses and perhaps comprehend the complexity of the problem? I would hate to have to figure out how to get a second opinion if I were in a rural area with only a limited number of options. I suspect she was 'sold' well hydrofracking because the professional she happened to approach was a fracker. She may have better luck with her fracker if he saw our chain of responses. Kristine
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 14:04:33 -0400
To: <the...@ngwa.biglist.com>
Subject: RE: [The Well] Unrelenting turbity following hydrofracturing
Cliff,
I've enjoyed this thread, it is interesting to read everyone's thoughts/suggestions. A lot of wisdom and knowledge has been presented. Given the wealth of knowledge and everyone's willingness to share, it seems we should provide more information/education to the well owner. Specifically, it seems the well owner may benefit by a list of the questions to ask the drilling contractor and a brief summary of the information that may be needed to make a proper determination. My hope is that the well owner is given proper guidance to find the proper resource to address her issue. That may be another driller, a state agency, a local official, a local hydrogeologist, etc. As it stands, it seems that this lady has come to NGWA seeking guidance and we've told her to talk to another professional to get another opinion. Based on the comments that everyone has shared it seems we could provide additional guidance that may assist her.
Matthew D. Machusick | SAIC
Env. Engineer/Geologist |
- From: blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com [mailto:blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com] On Behalf Of Cliff Treyens
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 1:45 PM
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com
Subject: RE: [The Well] Unrelenting turbity following hydrofracturing
Your point is well taken, no pun intended. My purpose was not to get an accurate diagnosis of the problem because, I agree, there was not enough specific information on the front end. What I was trying to do was get some idea for an appropriate response to the well owner. I think the feedback that was provided enabled me to do this.
Below is the response I sent the well owner:
Dear Ms._____,
I’ve looked into the symptoms you describe, there could be a number of reasons for the turbidity. There also are different approaches to addressing it based on the actual cause. If you haven’t already, I would get back with the person who did the job and seek a thorough explanation of what he thinks is the cause, why, and what are the options for addressing the cause rather than just the symptoms (i.e. filtering).
If you are not satisfied with the answers, consider whether you want a second or third opinion from other professionals who do hydrofracturing.
For someone to provide you an informed opinion would require more information that what you provide here.
Regards,
Cliff Treyens, National Ground Water Association
From: blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com [mailto:blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com] On Behalf Of Mike Krautkramer
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 12:34 PM
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com
Subject: RE: [The Well] Unrelenting turbity following hydrofracturing
This discussion is a fine example of a potential fundamental problem with the approach we now have with “the well†. There is not enough information in the initiating request to guide the discussion. I work in the Pacific Northwest (this is Mike Krautkramer – for the record). As such, I have quite a bit of confidence when discussing issues that are in my area. Even within the Pacific Northwest there are so many different settings that I would not venture a guess about a problem without knowing where a well is and what the construction circumstances are. We do not have the basic information and are rendering opinions regardless of that fact. I am likely to be assuming conditions similar to what I have seen throughout my career as are all of the others participating in the discussions. Yet, we may all be thinking about a subtly (or not so subtly) different setting and set of circumstances.
I think the first response to anyone requesting discussion should be to get the details as well defined as the person is willing to provide. When we are discussing things it would be best if we indicate who we are and where we do most of our work in order to provide a context to our discussion. Then we all have to be careful that we do not impose our subconscious assumptions on the discussion without trying to identify them as such. It is very easy for me to provide a good-faith comment to a person with a presumption he is in a setting similar to where I normally work and unknowingly advise a person in Pennsylvania to do something correct for the PNW but totally wrong for western Pennsylvania. I see this as a dangerous application of our collective knowledge if we do not develop some ground rules and make sure the expertise being brought to bear is appropriate to the problem being discussed.
Mike Krautkramer,
Hydrogeologist, Tacoma Washington
- -----Original Message-----
From: blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com [mailto:blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com] On Behalf Of Cliff Treyens
Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 5:36 AM
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com
Subject: RE: [The Well] Unrelenting turbity following hydrofracturing
I just read John Pitz’ posting. I agree with what he says. It is our practice at NGWA not to recommend a specific course of action to well owners because we on staff don’t have the expertise and, even if we did, we may not have all the facts and we certainly don’t have an opportunity to examine the well first hand. Ultimately, we always point the well owner back to the professionals.
What I’m hearing, though, is that there could be a number of reasons for the turbidity and different approaches to addressing it based on the actual cause. I’m inclined to suggest that the well owner get back with the person who did the job and seek a thorough explanation of what he thinks is the cause, why, and what are the options for addressing the cause rather than just the symptoms through filtering.
I also would suggest that if the well owner is not satisfied with the answers she gets, she can always exercise her right to get a second or third opinion from other professionals who do hydrofracturing.
Thanks, everyone, for your help!
From: blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com [mailto:blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com] On Behalf Of Cliff Treyens
Sent: Friday, October 02, 2009 2:10 PM
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com
Subject: [The Well] Unrelenting turbity following hydrofracturing
Typically, when I get a well owner inquiry, I refer the individual to content on our Wellowner.org. Web site or refer the well owner to our Contractor Lookup service. Neither approach works too well for the inquiry below.
Any thoughts on what might be the problem?
cliff treyens l public awareness director l
national ground water association l
About the middle of July our well gave us a severely limited amount of water. A company did two hydro fracs on the well, the last one being done in August. We have been running the water constantly since then for 8 weeks to get it clean. For the last three weeks we have hit a plateau, with the water quality not improving. It is a silvery grey and is not settling out when put in a clear glass. Last Monday (1 ½ weeks ago), we decided that maybe the bottom arteries are not getting cleaned out because of the head pressure in the well, so instead of running the water all day through a faucet and bathtub in the house, we decided to run the well almost dry through a hose in the basement quickly. The first day we did it, we got extremely grey water, which gradually got clearer. We are again at the point where we are getting this silvery grey water and nothing is settling out. Lab work on the water said that this is shale, PH looks almost perfect
Today, we called back the guy who did the hydro-fraccing and he said he would order floc for the well. He is coming Tuesday or Wednesday to do this. He said if this doesn’t work then we need to get a water treatment system.
This past summer, my husband had to floc our pool (on the recommendation of a pool center) and it totally messed up our filter for about three weeks (constantly clogged, had to backwash constantly – sometimes after 3 minutes)
My questions are:
1. Do you have any experience with flocking a well, and can you offer any pointers to the advantages/disadvantages, what to be careful of, etc.?
2. If the well is flocked…how should the water/ solids in the water/coagulated material be pumped out?
3. If this well is flocked, does it mess with the screen on the well pump?
4. After flocking, what happens to the new water from the arteries coming into the well? Should this water be clean? Does it have to be flocked again?
5. Should the well pump screen be pulled and cleaned?
6. Why didn’t we have this problem before the hydro-fraccing?
Any help you can give to us would be more than appreciated.
EasyUnsubscribe (by email)
You are subscribed as ctre...@ngwa.org to The Well by National Ground Water Association
EasyUnsubscribe (by email)
You are subscribed as matthew.d...@saic.com to The Well by National Ground Water Association
EasyUnsubscribe (by email)
You are subscribed as kuh...@ag.arizona.edu to The Well by National Ground Water Association
EasyUnsubscribe (by email)
You are subscribed as ctre...@ngwa.org to The Well by National Ground Water Association
EasyUnsubscribe (by email)
You are subscribed as kuh...@ag.arizona.edu to The Well by National Ground Water Association
You are subscribed as gbur...@metrowater.com to The Well by National Ground Water Association
EasyUnsubscribe (by email)
You are subscribed as ctre...@ngwa.org to The Well by National Ground Water Association
You are subscribed as oyin...@yahoo.com to The Well by National Ground Water Association
EasyUnsubscribe (by email)
You are subscribed as stephen.a...@snwa.com to The Well by National Ground Water Association
EasyUnsubscribe (by email)
oyin...@yahoo.com
I’m sorry , Stephen, my facts were shockingly out of date. I really meant to offer that comment in jest, in an attempt to draw a distinction between the technical discussion of well maintenance and the more-or-less philosophical discussion of stewardship. You see, I believe we should be stewards of the resource, not the wells themselves. Wells can be fixed or replaced, and all it costs is money, but the resource is irreplaceable.
Having made my sorry excuses for my thoughtless comments, it shouldn’t be overlooked that Las Vegas has made great strides in stewardship of its water resources. If you don’t mind, I’d like to cite your summary in discussions with some of our Delaware water users who have been going backwards over the last ten years.
Bill Cocke
Water Allocation Program
State of Delaware
From: "Stephen.A...@snwa.com" <Stephen.A...@snwa.com>
To: the...@ngwa.biglist.com
Cc: blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com; the...@ngwa.biglist.com
Sent: Mon, October 12, 2009 11:46:45 AM
Subject: Re: [The Well] Free exchange of ideas
This is not to divert the discussion but I just wanted to correct some wrong impression by people outside Las Vegas.
Bill writes:
Now, if you want to talk about stewardship, I have a question: We here on the east coast look at places like Las Vegas using 350 gpdc and drying out a reservoir the size of our state, and we have to ask ourselves . . . .
Bill's facts are wrong and is missing the point when it comes to stewardship. Yes, Las Vegas use more water than most communities per person, but the Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA) has reduced use (in the Greater Las Vegas area) in GPCD from 350 gallons to 250 gallons between 1990 and 2009. This is while we live in the driest urban area in the U.S. with 4 inches of rain and we host nearly 40 million tourists annually. Not to mention the fact the community has a pretty strong groundwater management
program. In addition, I believe the water quality efforts by SNWA and its members and the environmental commitments demonstrate our track record and I believe this demonstrates stewardship.
The other thing to keep in mind is that Nevada (Las Vegas) only uses 2% of the Colorado river. If Nevada were to disappear overnight it would not influence the Colorado river system. In fact about 75% of the Colorado river is used for agriculture.
Another point is that the Las Vegas area's water use consists of about 43% reuse. This demonstrates the community's commitment to environmentally conscious water use.
Steve Acheampong, Ph.D.
Southern Nevada Water Authority
Water Resources Division
P. O. Box 99956
Las Vegas, NV 89193-9956.
For UPS, Fedex and all other shipments, our physical address is:
Southern Nevada Water Authority
100 City Parkway, Ste.
700
Las Vegas, NV 89106.
Phone No.: (702)-862-3753
Fax No.: (702)862-3751
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong" -- Mahatma Gandhi
Stephen.A...@snwa.com
Thanks Bill for your mail. I just wanted to give you some facts on what is going on here. Living in the desert, we have taken the stewardship of water resources very seriously and have taken various measures in our conservation efforts.
You are welcome to share the comments with your colleagues. If you want some more information and references, however, you may contact our Senior Resource Analyst, Tom Maher at thomas...@snwa.com. You may also check out our 2009 Water Resources plan at http://www.snwa.com/html/wr_resource_plan.html, our general website http://www.snwa.com, and the Las Vegas Valley Groundwater Management Program site http://www.lasvegasgmp.com/html/index.html.
Have a great day.
Steve Acheampong, PhD
Southern Nevada Water Authority
Water Resources Division
P. O. Box 99956
Las Vegas, NV 89193-9956.
For UPS, Fedex and all other shipments, our physical address is:
Southern Nevada Water Authority
100 City Parkway, Ste. 700
Las Vegas, NV 89106.
Phone No.: (702)-862-3753
Fax No.: (702)862-3751
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The weak can never forgive. Forgiveness is the attribute of the strong" -- Mahatma Gandhi
This communication, including any attachments, may contain confidential and privileged information and is intended only for the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. Any review, dissemination, or copying of this communication by anyone other than the intended recipient(s) is strictly prohibited.
Sent by: blmailer-thewell=ngwa.big...@biglist.com 10/13/2009 05:42 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
I’m sorry , Stephen, my facts were shockingly out of date. I really meant to offer that comment in jest, in an attempt to draw a distinction between the technical discussion of well maintenance and the more-or-less philosophical discussion of stewardship. You see, I believe we should be stewards of the resource, not the wells themselves. Wells can be fixed or replaced, and all it costs is money, but the resource is irreplaceable.
Having made my sorry excuses for my thoughtless comments, it shouldn’t be overlooked that Las Vegas has made great strides in stewardship of its water resources. If you don’t mind, I’d like to cite your summary in discussions with some of our Delaware water users who have been going backwards over the last ten years.
You are subscribed as stephen.a...@snwa.com to The Well by National Ground Water Association
EasyUnsubscribe (by email)