The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutUnAlaska Geothermal Project Phase lll Final Report 1985UNALASK A GEOTHERM AL PROJECT PHASE Ill FINAL REPORT ~ FOR: THE ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL PROJECT PHASE Ill FINAL REPORT FOR: THE ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY BY: REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL, INC. JUNE 1985 THE UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION PROJECT PHASE III FINAL REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS TTRODUC TON eee are ac atcta eb a eerste etre et ag etd tte EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . 2... 2 1. ee ee ee ee THE PHASE III (1984) PROGRAM. ..............24.. A. OBJECTIVES eee ctte este eit te eee tetera ete tee ete ees B. Budget Provision, Estimated Costs ........... Operations Plan, Schedule of Project Activities PHASE TIT RESULTS eee tet ete ee telat eee tS A. Stage I, Mobilization .............20.0.4 1. Permit Acquisitions ..............6. 2. Equipment Installation. ............. B. Stage II, ST-1 Long-Term Production Testing ...... 1. Test Facilities and Instrumentation ....... 2. Flow Test Measurements .............. a. Downhole Pressure Survey Results ...... b. Downhole Temperature Survey Results C Reconciliation of Pressure- Temperature Data. ..........2.0.4. 3. Interpretation of Results ............ a. Reserve Estimation Using a Material Balance Calculation ............ b. Well Potential... 4. Reservoir Fluid Analysis ...........060. a. ee eee eee ete tethe tet bette b. OR ea te tate eat gg bial c. GAS OS tee tose ool oh oll lise eta te ttt ot fel 1) Gases Measured by Mass Spectrometer... 2) Carbon Dioxide in Flowline Gases .... 3) Non-C02 Gases in Flowline Samples... . 4) Hydrogen Sulfide ............ 5) Ammonia/Ammonium ..........4.-. 6) Conclusions ........2..240064-. d. Calcium Carbonate Scale Deposition. .... 1) Recovered Scale. .......-2...2- 2) Discussion ... 1... 2.2.2.2 ee eee 5. Environmental Impact Mitigation and Monitoring and Regulatory Compliance. ...... C. Stage III, Drilling, Evaluation of Sugarloaf Hole "A-1". 69 li Dring COU De ee Start 69 2. Drvthing Programe ce ae ee ot cc 69 oe DEVVUING: RESUUCS ree eet gee erecta 71 a. Summary of Drilling Operations ....... 71 b. Geologiciinterpretatvon tiie tens adte ce tcattte 72 Cc. Temperature Distribution. ......... 77 d. Temperature Data Interpretation ...... 80 4. Environmental Impact Mitigation and Monitoring and Regulatory Compliance ....... 82 D. Stage IV, Deepen and Test Well] ST-1 .......... 86 EG Stage V, Electrical Resistivity Survey ......... 87 a Survey Program Design ..........22026. 87 2. SUEVeY-RECOR GG att 89 3. Survey Results 2.9.00. 90 Ee Stage Vi, DemobilizatiOn t,t. et ee 94 i Equipment and Inventory ............. 94 2 SCOT RES CONC OM ey teen aii at arte tee est eatrett tennis arte 94 ie WelTTSUSDENSAON ete ttet tet stereo tte teeth etitutre tte 95 4, Actual Schedule of Project Operations ...... 96 5. Accounting of Project:Costs: . 2.020: 98 INTEGRATED RESOURCE EVACUATION terion ite tise turret citar ait 100 The Makushin Geothermal System Model ............ 100 PROJE GIT DEVEL OPMEN cote trereertetre re teet etre tele eats eee ee rons te 103 A. Estimated Electrical Generating Potential ...... 103 1. Power Conversion Processes ........... 103 2. Makushin Well Power Capacity .......... 104 B. Preliminary Economic Analyses ............ 107 APPENDIX Bl B2 B3 B4 C1 C2 E1 E2 FI F2 LIST OF APPENDICES PERMIT APPLICATIONS AND APPROVALS ST-1: DOWNWELL PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE DATA ASSESSMENT ST-1: FLASH FRACTION CALCULATIONS ST-1: MONITORING OF WATER QUALITY AND FLOW ST-1: REGULATORY COMPLIANCE CORRESPONDENCE A-1: DRILLING HISTORY A-1: REGULATORY COMPLIANCE CORRESPONDENCE MEMORANDUM REGARDING ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO SURFACE DISPOSAL OF GEOTHERMAL FLUIDS, UNALASKA REPORT ON E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SURVEY TWO-DIMENSIONAL MODELING ON SELECTED E-SCAN RESISTIVITY DATA INVENTORY OF EQUIPMENT OWNED BY ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY REGULATORY COMPLIANCE CORRESPONDENCE AFTER COMPLETION OF OPERATIONS 7A 7B 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 LIST OF TABLES ANTICIPATED PHASE III UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION PROJECT BUDGET ST-1 STATIC PRESSURE SURVEY (JULY 4, 1984) ST-1 FLOWING PRESSURE SURVEYS (JULY - AUGUST, 1984) ST-1 STATIC TEMPERATURE SURVEY (JULY 3, 1984) ST-1 FLOWING TEMPERATURE SURVEYS (JULY, 1984) CALCULATED ST-1 RESERVOIR FLUID COMPOSITION CHEMICAL DATA - ST-1 1984 - RESIDUAL LIQUIDS CHEMICAL DATA - ST-1 1984 - LINEAR LEAST SQUARES FITS TO DATA AND SELECTED INDICES GAS CONCENTRATION DETERMINED BY MASS SPECTROMETRY CARBON DIOXIDE IN STEAM CONDENSATE COLLECTED IN GLASS BULBS CARBON DIOXIDE AND NON-CARBON DIOXIDE PROPORTIONS IN THE SUITE OF NONCONDENSABLE GASES ABSOLUTE CONCENTRATIONS OF INDIVIDUAL GAS SPECIES TOTAL FLOW BASIS HYDROGEN SULFIDE IN FLUIDS FROM ST-1 AMMONIUM IN FLUIDS FROM ST-1 COMPOSITION OF RECOVERED CARBONATE SCALE, MAKUSHIN ST-1 LITHOLOGY OF A-1 TEMPERATURE GRADIENT HOLE TEMPERATURE SURVEY RESULTS - A-1 TEMPERATURE GRADIENT HOLE UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION PROJECT EXPENDITURES (CUMULATIVE THROUGH MAY, 1985) 24 25 26 42 45 46 51 53 55 56 58 60 63 74-16 718 99 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 V7 LIST OF FIGURES ANTICIPATED PHASE III PROJECT OPERATIONS SCHEDULE (1984) MAKUSHIN WELL TEST EQUIPMENT SURFACE EQUIPMENT FOR ST-1 DOWNWELL MEASUREMENTS ST-1 FLOW TEST RESULTS JULY-AUGUST 1984 ST-1 STATIC TEMPERATURE AND PRESSURE DATA (JULY 3-4, 1984) ST-1 FLOWING TEMPERATURE AND PRESSURE DATA (JULY 6, 1984) ST-1 FLOWING TEMPERATURE AND PRESSURE DATA (JULY 19-20, 1984) ST-1 FLOWING TEMPERATURE AND PRESSURE DATA (JULY 20-21, 1984) ST-1 FLOWING PRESSURE DATA (AUG 7, 1984) PREDICTED FLOW RATE FOR A COMMERCIAL SIZE WELL AT MAKUSHIN CASING PROGRAM FOR A-1 TEMPERATURE GRADIENT HOLE LITHOLOGY AND TEMPERATURE PROFILE OF TEMPERATURE GRADIENT HOLE A-1 DETAILED TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTION IN TEMPERATURE GRADIENT HOLE E-1 SUMMARY OF RESISTIVITY SURVEY RESULTS ACTUAL PHASE III OPERATIONS SCHEDULE (1984) POTENTIAL POWER GENERATION OF A MAKUSHIN 13-3/8" WELL POTENTIAL POWER GENERATION OF A MAKUSHIN 16" WELL 27 28 29 30 31 40 710 719 81 92 97 105 106 THE UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION PROJECT PHASE III FINAL REPORT 1. INTRODUCTION Geothermal Energy, in the form of naturally occurring underground steam and hot water, is now being used throughout much of the world to commercially produce electricity. The Aleutian Archipelago, with its 46 active volcanoes, has for some time been recognized to have the same essential geologic characteristics that exist in those regions which are now producing geothermal power. One of these Aleutian volcanoes is Makushin Volcano, located on Unalaska Island at a distance of only 12 miles from the two communities of Dutch Harbor and Unalaska. Makushin Volcano is flanked by hot springs and fumaroles and it clearly represents a natural energy source that could be tapped and utilized by the Unalaska Island residents. Because the State of Alaska is attempting to utilize indigenous energy sources colocated with population centers, a decision was made in 1980 to fund a geothermal exploration project on Unalaska Island. In 1981, approximately $5,000,000 was appropriated for this purpose and the Alaska Power Authority (APA) was given project responsibility. In 1982, Republic Geothermal, Inc. (Republic), was awarded APA Contract CC-08-2334 to conduct the geothermal exploration on Unalaska Island, together with its Alaska partner, Dames & Moore of Anchorage. In 1982, Phase I activities were accomplished. A report of the Phase IA project activities, which included data review and operational planning, was delivered to the APA in April 1982. Phase IB activities, also completed in 1982, included geological, geochemical, and geophysical evaluations; topographic mapping; aerial photography; and the drilling of three temperature gradient holes. A final report of the Phase IB activities was delivered to the APA in April 1983. Based on encouraging indicia of a geothermal resource identified by this work, Phase II studies were formulated for completion in 1983. The Phase II work as originally proposed included the drilling and flow testing of a resource confirmation well to a depth of up to 4,000 feet, and the drilling of a 2,000 foot deep resource delineation hole. The resource confirmation well, Makushin ST-1, was drilled during the summer of 1983, and was successful in penetrating and producing a potentially commercial geothermal resource at a depth of less than 2,000 feet. However, the necessary time devoted to the drilling and testing of Makushin ST-1, combined with the relatively short field season available in the Aleutians, prevented drilling of the resource delineation hole. A final report of the Phase II activities was delivered to the APA in June, 1984. The Phase III project activities were subsequently designed to obtain during the summer of 1984 substantially more technical data on this reservoir's temperature and pressure, its apparent longevity for sustained production, and its apparent lateral extent (size). The report that follows describes in detail all of the 1984 field activities, the data obtained therefrom, and interpretations made from those data. Also included are discussions regarding permit acquisition and related environmental activities. This Phase III report was compiled by numerous authors employed by Republic, Dames & Moore, and their several subcontractors. Considerable input was received from Alaska Division of Geologic and Geophysical Surveys (DGGS) employees, from University of Alaska staff, and from U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scientists. The project manager acknowledges these contributions and wishes to express his sincere thanks for the cooperation and spirit of communication that has greatly facilitated accomplishment of project objectives to date. 2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Project activities began with field work conducted during the summer of 1982 in the Makushin Volcano area of Unalaska Island. These investigations resulted in the identification of 23 thermal manifestation areas, some of which were previously unknown. Concurrently, a series of exploration surveys were conducted, including the drilling of three 1,500 feet deep holes in order to determine the most promising area for the drilling of a deeper exploration well. Well ST-1 was drilled to 1949 feet during the following summer, successfully discovering a 317°F (158°C) shallow steam zone overlying a liquid-dominated geothermal reservoir with a temperature of 382°F (194°C). Preliminary tests indicated that the reservoir was potentially commercial. Results from a long term, 34-day flow test of well ST-1 during the 1984 field season confirmed these results. Sustained flow of 63,000 lb/hr was achieved through a three-inch diameter wellbore with less than two psi of pressure drawdown from the initial reservoir pressure of 497 psi. This indicates a very large permeability-thickness value for the reservoir. The well productivity index obtained during this test was approximately 30,000 Ib/hr/psi. Wellbore flow modeling indicates that 13-3/8 to 16 inch diameter commercial-size wells should be capable of flowing steam and hot water at maximum rates of between 1.3 and 2.0 million lb/hr. A single production well can be expected to produce about 10 megawatts of electrical power. Reservoir size calculations indicate that the reserve found is sufficient to meet the electricity needs of the island for several hundred years. Commercialization of this geothermal resource has been recently investigated in several reconnaissance studies undertaken to determine which available technology can most economically meet the present and -3- future electrical energy needs of the communities of Dutch Harbor and Unalaska. The most recent study, completed by the Alaska Power Authority itself, concludes that geothermal power system plans, which use diesel generators for only peaking and backup, appear to be the most economi- cal. A detailed feasibility study has been recommended by the Authority. THE PHASE III (1984) PROGRAM A. OBJECTIVES In response to the previous 1983 drilling of well Makushin ST-1 that discovered a geothermal reservoir 12 miles west of Dutch Harbor, and to the 3-day flow test of this well which suggested that the initial temperature and pressure of this hot water reservoir were potentially adequate for electricity generation, the objectives for the 1984 program were as follows: 1) Continuously flow test well ST-1 for a period of time sufficient to clearly identify the temperature, pressure and stabilized fluid chemistry of the geothermal reservoir, including scaling and corrosion tendencies. A long term flow test of ST-1 was scheduled, including initial, mid-term, and final fluid sampling and temperature/pressure surveys. 2) Obtain sufficiently accurate pressure drawdown data during the continuous flow test to adequately estimate the reservoir's ability to supply long term (nominally 30 years) steam and hot water at commercial rates. Suitable continuous-reading precision equipment was selected, and a sequence of static and flowing downhole pressure measurements vs. flow rate changes were programmed. 3) Gather data to further delineate the lateral extent of the reservoir, in particular to estimate the location of its northeastern boundary to determine if potential development could take place from relatively easily accessible drill sites located closer to Dutch Harbor (at reduced cost). Two operations were scheduled; a “Resource Delineation" temperature gradient hole was sited for drilling at a location 1.2 miles north-northeast of ST-1, near “Sugarloaf", and a ground-surface resistivity survey was programmed to cover all of the potentially developable area within upper and lower Makushin Valley. Jel 4) Make a reasonable effort to seal off the producing zone in Makushin ST-1 and deepen the well an additional 500 feet (to 2,450 feet) in order to search for and test any additional, potentially higher temperature, reservoir encountered. A program to plug, deepen, and further test ST-1 was developed. B. BUDGET PROVISION, ESTIMATED COSTS The budget available for Phase III operations was simply the residual of the original authorization of $4,476,300 less the expenses of all prior years operations, or approximately $1,033,340. A detailed estimate of daily costs was separately obtained for well testing, drill rig operations, and the conducting of the resistivity survey, including mobilization and demobilization of a1] equipment and personnel, plus the daily operational support costs of running camp facilities, helicopter operations, communications equipment rental, on-site supervision, environmental monitoring, and management including provision for final reports. Our assessment of the cost estimate results identified an appropriate allocation of the available funds to meet the project objectives. The primary field operations financially provided for were 40 days of flow testing existing well Makushin ST-1, 20 days for drilling the Sugar loaf resource delineation hole (to approximately 1,200 feet), 36 days of resistivity mapping, and 15 days to plug, deepen and retest ST-1. Table 1 is the anticipated Phase III project budget, identifying the various cost allocations that were established prior to the start of these 1984 operations. C. OPERATIONS PLAN, SCHEDULE OF PROJECT ACTIVITIES The final preparatory step was to efficiently coordinate a sequence of prioritized objectives with the budget plan, resulting in the development of the 1984 field operations plan and schedule diagramed in Figure 1. A11 subcontractor schedules of personnel, -6- equipment and supply transport were arranged accordingly, with the total span of Makushin on-site operations anticipated to start on July 1 and continue through September 13. UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION PROJECT BUDGET TABLE 1 ANTICIPATED PHASE III Stage I Stage II Stage III Stage IV Stage V Stage VI Stage VII Mobilization ST-1 Long- Drill TGH Deepen & Resistivity Demobilization Interim & Term Testing Sugarloaf Test ST-1 Survey Final Report Total Republic Labor (Fringe & O/H) $ 26,300 $ 50,200 $ 27,100 $ 43,800 $ 12,900 $ 25,200 $65,000 $ 250,500 Republic Travel 1,600 14,500 4,500 9,500 2,900 1,700 34,700 Dames & Moore 9,000 13,500 4,500 9,000 9,000 5,800 50,800 Drilling 6,000 108,100 61,700 9,000 184,800 Well Testing 48,000 10,000 58,000 Helicopter 31,500 21,500 28,700 14,400 21,500 31,400 149,000 Resistivity Survey 129,800 129,800 Camp 15,000 7,200 9,000 9,000 10,800 20,000 711,000 Chemical Analysis 6,000 6,000 6,000 18,000 Prof. Liab. Insurance 6,300 6,300 Communications 1,900 1,400 1,900 1,400 1,900 1,000 9,500 Other 5,900 3,100 10,000 2,300 3,100 5,800 1,000 31,200 Subtotal 103,500 165,400 199,800 167,100 182,900 103,100 71,800 993,600 Corp. G&A (4%) 4,140 6,620 7,990 6,680 7,320 4,120 2,870 39,740 Total $107,640 $172,020 $207,790 $173,780 $190,220 $107,220 $74,670 $1,033,340 FIG) ::1 ANTICIPATED PHASE II] PROJECT OPERATIONS SCHEDULE (1984) UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION PROJECT PROJECT SITE OPERA TTON | (1984) QO 10 20 1] 60 70. 80 LT 25, | | | | - | STAGE I > MOBILIZATION i bol ; me | { | es | ri STAGE II iL 40 DAY FLOW TEST OF ST-1 st cove | 6 A J INSTALL EQUIPMENT STAGE Ill DRILL SUGARLOAF HOLE fee | 50 60 5 5 DAY| STAGE IV DEEPEN ST-1|]FLOW TEST Pit td ss 6s STAGE V MOBILIZE CONDUCT RESISTIVITY SURVEY f + DEMOBILIZE 60 { 75 DEMOBILIZE STAGE VI EQUIPMENT, PERSONNEL STAGE VII, REPORTS == & FULL FIELD CAMP SERVICE Pict i NOMINALLY JULY 1 NOMINALLY SEPTEMBER 13 ANTICIPATED DATES RCL CLOSS 4. A. PHASE III RESULTS STAGE 1, MOBILIZATION 1. Permit Acquisitions The complex of institutional permitting requirements and approval processes applicable for geothermal exploration operations on Unalaska Island has been previously discussed in detail in the Phase IA, Phase IB, and the Phase II final reports. Permit acquisitions for Phase III operations were necessary for the operation of a long-term flow test (up to 40 days) of the Makushin ST-1 well; the drilling of the previously approved, but not yet drilled, temperature gradient hole Sugarloaf A-1; the 500 ft. deepening of well ST-1; the conducting of another ST-1 flow test (up to four days); and the operation of a temporary field base camp for the housing of personnel. A separate permit for the conducting of the resistivity survey was not required. Because of the newly instituted Alaska Coastal Zone Management Program and consistency certification review conducted by the State, all applications for permits subject to this program were submitted through the Alaska Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for distribution to the appropriate agencies. Copies of the submitted permit applications were also sent by the OMB to other responsible agencies for their review and consistency determination. Copies of permit applications, written correspondence, and reports for the necessary permit acquisitions are included as Appendix A, as follows: 1) Letter and permit application to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service requesting Special Use Permit, dated June 5, 1984. -10- 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) Letter, project description, and application package to the Alaska Office of Management and Budget requesting Coastal Zone Program Review along with permit applications to the Alaska Department of Natural Resources (Drilling Permits) and to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (Solid Waste Permits and a Short-Term Water Quality Variance), dated June 6, 1984. Office of Management and Budget letter notifying Republic of startup of 30-day agency review for Coastal Zone Certification, dated June 8, 1984. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service letter offering Special Use Permit, dated June 15, 1984. Letter to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to request waste discharge of geothermal fluids without an NPDES permit, dated June 22, 1984. Letter to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service with signed copy of Special Use Permit with minor modifications to "Purpose" section of permit, dated June 26, 1984. Request to the Alaska Department of Natural Resources for extension of Temporary Water Use Permit, dated June 26, 1984. Memorandum from the Alaska Department of Fish and Game to the Alaska Office of Management and Budget giving Fish and Game approval for proposed waste discharge of geothermal fluid, date June 27, 1984. -11- 9) 10) 11) 12) 13) 14) 15) 16) 17) Letter to Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation withdrawing applications for solid waste disposal permits, dated June 28, 1984. Letter to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation clarifying water quality variance request, dated June 29, 1984. Letter to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation clarifying waste quality variance request, dated July 2, 1984. Alaska Office of Management and Budget determination of completed Coastal Certification Review, dated July 5, 1984. Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation approval of Short-Term Water Quality variance, dated July 5, 1984. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service approval of Special Use Permit, dated July 9, 1984. Letter to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation requesting Food Service Permit for field camp operations, dated July 10, 1984. Alaska Department of Natural Resources approval of deepening of well ST-1 and drilling of TGH A-1, dated July 12, 1984. Letter to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation requesting to dispose of solid wastes from field camp without issuance of a solid waste permit, dated July 12, 1984. -12- 18) 19) 20) 21) 22) 23) Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation approval of Food Service Permit, dated July 17, 1984. Letter to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation requesting to dispose of solid wastes from drilling of A-1 without issuance of a solid waste permit, dated July 17, 1984. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency approval of waste discharge of geothermal fluids without issuance of an NPDES permit, dated July 31, 1984. Letter to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation requesting to dispose of solid wastes from drilling of ST-1 without issuance of a solid waste permit, dated August 2, 1984. Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation approval of informal permit for disposal of wastes from field camp, dated August 15, 1984. Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation notice that the permit request to dispose of wastes from drilling of ST-1 was undergoing a 60-day public notice and review, dated August 29, 1984. Permit acquisitions necessary to accommodate modifications of the Phase III project plan during the actual course of 1984 summer operations season are discussed in Section 4.B.5. (Stage II, ST-1 Long-Term Production Testing), and in Section 4.C.4. (Stage III, Drilling and Evaluation of Sugarloaf A-1). Environmental compliance, monitoring, and impact mitigation are also discussed in these sections, as well as in Section 4.F.2. (Stage VI, Demobilization). -13- 2. Equipment Installation After completing all necessary scheduling adjustments in Anchorage the previous day, the first Republic representative arrived on Unalaska Island June 28, 1984. Final arrangements were made for the use of local warehouse facilities and a temporary office in Dutch Harbor, and the organizing to receive and transport all necessary equipment by helicopter to the operations site in Upper Makushin Valley began. The ERA helicopter arrived in Dutch Harbor on June 30, together with the radio communications equipment, and the (pre-camp) operations of testing Makushin ST-1 were ready to commence on July 1 as scheduled. PSI camp facility personnel arrived on July 4 and completed reconstruction of the base camp on July 9 at the same site used the previous year. Start up of full camp operations was begun on July 18, two days ahead of schedule. Arctic Resources drilling personnel began arriving on July 12, drilling equipment and supplies stored during the winter in Dutch Harbor were then hauled to the Sugarloaf "A-1" drill site, with final installation completed so that actual drilling started on July 22, three days ahead of schedule. Finally, the resistivity survey equipment and personnel from Premier Geophysics arrived in Dutch Harbor on July 26, and after field installation, layout, and final checking of their equipment, full survey data acquisition began on August 2, one day later than scheduled. -14- B. STAGE II, ST-1 LONG TERM PRODUCTION TESTING The 1983 well test described in last year's report confirmed a highly productive reservoir producing 47,000 lb/hr through three-inch pipe with little or no detectable pressure drawdown. Inadequately sensitive Amerada-type pressure instrumentation prevented rigorous analysis. A productivity index of over 3,000 1b/hr/psi and a permeability thickness of over 50,000 md-ft were inferred. A long flow test in the summer of 1984 was intended to provide a better estimate of these reservoir parameters as well as demonstrate sustained flow capability. 1. Test Facilities and Instrumentation The surface equipment utilized during the 1984 testing was basically the same as that used in 1983. Figure 2 shows the surface equipment arrangements utilized during the long-term test of 1984. A relatively simple two-phase orifice meter and James tube were installed at the end of the flow line to measure the flow rate. Upstream and downstream orifice pressures were recorded simultaneously with a differential pressure flow meter. The James tube lip pressure was monitored continuously during the flow test utilizing both a test quality pressure gauge and a Barton pressure recording meter. In addition, the wellhead pressure and temperature were recorded continuously on Barton meters throughout the flow test. The orifice plate described above was utilized to calculate the enthalpy of the fluid using the Russel James empirical equation. Downhole pressure and temperature measurements were obtained using two separate monitoring systems. The pressure monitoring equipment was a capillary tube system which utilized a gas filled, volumetric chamber downhole connected to a very -15- -9l- FIGURE: 2 MAKUSHIN WELL TEST EQUIPMENT FLOW LIP RECORDER PRESSURE T PT art if ORIFICE =< SAMPLES WELLHEAD LA BYPASS RG! E 1697 small diameter capillary tube with a surface recording pressure transducer. This equipment was filled with helium gas as the pressure transmitting medium from the bottomhole location to the surface transducer. The equipment utilized in this test has a reported accuracy of +0.3 psi, with a sensitivity of +0.1 psi on the transducer. The temperature measurements were obtained using a thermocouple cable system completely separate from the capillary tube. This required that the temperature data and the pressure data be acquired during separate runs in the well. The thermocouple was a chromel-alumel, grounded junction-type with a reported accuracy of + 3 degrees F and a sensitivity of + 3/4 of a degree F. The thermocouple cable and the capillary tube were contained on two separate spools. The surface arrangements for both systems are illustrated in Figure 3. The datum used for all the downhole temperature and pressure survey measurements was 4 feet above ground level, meaning, for example, that survey data herein reported at 1,950 feet was recorded at a depth of 1,946 feet in the well. 2. Flow Test Measurements The test of ST-1 consisted of two flow periods of approximately 33,000 lb/hr and 63,000 1b/hr each. The test rate/wellhead pressure/bottomhole pressure history is shown in Figure 4. The first flow period lasted 15 days, while the second flow period at the higher rate lasted 19 days. During the 34 days of flow there were several minor changes in the flow rate and/or a bypass of the measuring system in order to perform sampling experiments or to modify the flow equipment. However, the test proceeded relatively smoothly, with the two flow rates being maintained at essentially constant conditions throughout their respective test periods. Prior to the initiation of flow from ST-1, a static temperature profile of the wellbore was obtained on July 3 and a static pressure profile was obtained on July 4. 2172 FIGURE: 3 SURFACE EQUIPMENT FOR ST-1 DOWNWELL MEASUREMENTS HYDRAULIC STUFFING BOX COLLAR LIFTING CLAMP CAPILLARY TUBE LUBRICATOR GIN POLE LIFTING CABLE BLEED-OFF VALVE KNOCK-OFF UNION WINCH 3 pe GIN POLE BRACKET —™ CAPILLARY TUBE OR THERMOCOUPLE WIRE MEASURING DEVICE 600 FLANGE HAY PULLEY AGI E 1627 —18- FIGURE: 4 MAKUSHIN ST-1 FLOW TEST July-August 1984 %e, ; 63000 Ib/hr rate WHP *, Ce maccrncacccscccencccscusecencuucucsanneseseuss 33000 Ib/hr rate i. oe mennencceucccccaccascccnrcencunncucsansaeuentncnsacaccuscensens LOW RATE HIGH RATE 2.07” Nozzle 3.0” Nozzle 1.75” Orifice 3.4” Orifice BOTTOMHOLE PRESSURE (psig) cc £ < 2 ° ° 3S = w Ke q iv & i) wv & w oc a Ww ox a Q qt ui a a a w = 20 TIME (days) Revised (3/22/85) (3/26/85) RG! E-1698 After flow was initiated on July 5, 1984, the well stabilized at a flow rate of about 33,000 lb/hr, and the first set of flowing pressure and temperature surveys were obtained on July 6. This first flow period was then maintained until July 20, 1984, during which the pressure tool was left at the bottom of the well (at 1,946 feet) to continuously record the bottomhole pressure, except for the times when wellbore pressure and temperature surveys were made. A second set of pressure/temperature profiles was obtained on July 19 and 20. About 0.6 psi of drawdown was observed over the 15 days of low rate flow. Following the increase in flow rate to 63,000 lb/hr, on July 20, another set of pressure/temperature profiles were obtained on July 20-21. On August 7, 1984, a final pressure profile was obtained prior to shutting-in the well. During the high-rate flow period, the pressure tool had again been left at the bottom of the hole continuously recording bottomhole pressure except when profiles were run. An additional 0.8 psi of drawdown was observed during the 19-day high rate period. The well was shut-in on August 8, 1984, with the pressure tool hanging in the well at bottom. The pressure tool recorded buildup data for the next 17 days, showing about 0.5 psi of increase in bottomhole pressure. a. Downhole Pressure Survey Results The static and flowing pressure survey measurements in ST-1 were recorded to the nearest 0.1 psi. All of the recorded pressure survey measurements required minor correction (adjustment) in order to convert the surface-observed pressure values to true downhole pressure values. This correction is necessitated by the fact that the length (and consequently the weight) of the pressure- transmitting helium gas column in the -20- capillary tubing progressively increases as the tubing is progressively lowered down into the well. The gas column weight effectively reduces the observed downhole pressure, as measured within the tubing by the surface pressure cell. The amount of required "helium weight" correction naturally increases with depth, increasing from 0 at the surface to a maximum of +2.99 psi at the maximum recording depth of 1,950 feet. A more detailed discussion of the correction computations is provided in Appendix Bl (p. 1 thru 8). The availability of multiple bottomhole pressure Measurements permitted their averaging, which improves the statistical precision of the overall true pressure measurements while providing a measure of that precision. Two methods were used: 1) a linear least squares line was fit to the profile data, evaluating the fitted line at 1,950 feet; and 2) the average of several independent measurements of pressure that were in the same context at the 1,950-foot survey depth was calculated. Both methods yield similar results. Consequently, the independent results of both were combined using statistical principles to provide an even higher precision for the bottomhole pressure determinations. Appendix Bl (p. 8 thru 10) contains a more detailed discussion of these data and their statistical analysis. This procedure is not commonly required, but it was useful in this case because of the very small pressure differentials involved, which were near the resolution capability of the instrumentation. It was especially useful to provide ranges of uncertainty for the pressure differences. The precision for the pressure determinations during most of the flow was excellent, generally better than +0.2psi. The precision of the static pre-flow pressure measurement was a little less, on the order of +0.8 psi. -21- Tables 2 and 3 list the measured and corrected (true) pressure survey data obtained in ST-1 prior to and during the 1984 long term flow test. Also listed is the result at 1,950 feet of the linear least squares fit to each profile data set, plus the average pressure value ascribed for that depth as obtained by combining both profile and fixed point (bottomhole) measurements. Plots of the true pressure data are shown in Figures 5 thru 9, and were used in Figure 4. b. Downhole Temperature Survey Results The static and flowing temperature survey measurements were recorded to the nearest 0.1 degree Fahrenheit. The initial (static) temperature survey was begun on July 3 by lowering the thermistor progressively down the ST-1 wellbore. Physically, the thermistor responds to different temperatures by causing changed voltages to appear between ends of lead lines at the surface. The voltages are then translated into temperature values by a readout device, located at the surface. This survey was conducted by first using one Sperry-Sun readout device box ("Box #1"), immediately followed by obtaining independent results at five duplicate depths using a second ("Box #2") Sperry-Sun readout device. The two different data sets, obtained by simply connecting first one then the other box without moving the thermistor, are listed in Table 4. The differences between the replicate measurements, many individually repeated with uniform results, range from 11.3°F to 13.7°F and average 12.1°F. This amount of difference is unusual and excessive, particularly in that both boxes had reportedly been pre-calibrated in Anchorage prior to shipment to the well site. -22- TABLE 2 MAKUSHIN ST-1 STATIC PRESSURE SURVEY JULY 4, 1984 Recorded Measured Corrected (1) Depth Value True Value (Feet) (PSIG) (PSIG) 100 72.5 72.56 200 70.9 71.02 500 70.5 70.81 800 70.7 71.19 825 71.2 71.71 850 81.4 81.92 950 118.2 118.79 1050 153.0 153.65 1150 189.1 189.81 1250 231.5 232.43 1350 270.1 271.26 1450 303.8 305.19 1650 377.3 379.25 1850 457.5 460.14 1950 493.7 496.69 1950 (2) 490.94 496.62 1950 ‘3) 493.85 496.84 (1) Helium weight corrected. Values plotted in Figure 5. (2) Linear least squares value. (3) Best value combining profile and fixed point measurements. Value identified in Figure 5. -23- -p2- TABLE 3 MAKUSHIN ST-1 1984 FLOWING PRESSURE SURVEYS (PSIG) July 6 Survey July 19 Survey July 21 Survey August 7 Survey Recorded Measured Corrected(!) Measured Corrected(1) Measured Corrected(1) Measured Corrected(1) Depth Value True Value Value True Value Value True Value Value True Value (Feet) _(PSIG) (PSIG) _(PSIG) (PSIG) (PSIG) _ (PSIG) (PSIG) (PSIG) 100 67.1 67.16 67.2 67.26 300 84.3 84.49 83.2 83.39 500 101.2 101.51 101.3 101.61 91.3 91.61 90.5 90.81 700 120.0 120.43 119.0 119.43 114.0 114.43 W107 112.13 825 133.5 134.01 850 135.8 136.32 900 143.8 144.36 140.9 141.46 138.4 138.96 136.0 136.56 1000 155.1 155.72 1100 170.4 171.08 170.2 170.88 171.0 171.68 1200 208.1 208.91 1300 245.3 246.32 243.8 244.82 244.8 245.82 1450 302.5 303.89 1500 321.2 322.72 320.7 322.22 320.9 322.42 1700 397.1 399.21 398.0 400.11 397.5 399.61 396.9 399.01 1950 492.5 495.49 493.5 496.49 492.8 495.179 492.5 495.49 1950(2) 492.22 495.13 493.45 496.38 493.01 495.94 492.37 495.30 1950(3) 493.34 496.33 493.31 496.30 492.90 495.89 492.50 495.49 (1) Helium weight corrected. Values plotted in Figures 6 thru 9. (2) Linear least squares value (using lower one-phase interval). (3) Best value combining profile and fixed point measurements. Bottomhole value identified in Figures 6 thru 9. TABLE 4 MAKUSHIN ST-1 STATIC TEMPERATURE SURVEY JULY 3, 1984 Recorded Measured Values °F Depth Instrument Instrument Adjusted (1) Interpreted (2) (Feet) Box #1 Box #2 Value Value 250 314.1- 314.1 316.6 300 326.6 314.5 317.0 350 326.2 314.1 316.6 400 326.3 314.2 316.7 450 326.2 314.1 316.6 500 326.2 314.6 Se 316.6 550 f 325.8 313.7 316.2 600 326.0 313.9 316.4 650 326.5 314.4 316.9 700 326.6 314.5 317.0 750 326.5 314.4 316.9 800 326.5 314.4 316.9 816 329.5 317.4 319.9 825 331.2 319.1 321.6 850 337.0 324.9 327.4 900 349.7 337.6 340.1 950 360.4 348.3 350.8 1000 370.9 359.2 358.8 361.3 1050 379.6 367.5 370.0 1100 385.9 373.8 376.3 1150 391.0 378.9 381.4 1200 394.1 382.0 384.5 1250 395.4 383.3 385.8 1300 396.4 384.3 386.8 1350 397.4 385.3 387.8 1400 398.1 386.0 388.5 1450 398.8 386.7 389.2 1500 399.8 386.1 3875-7 390.2 1550 399.6 387.5 390.0 1600 398.3 386.2 388.7 1650 397.9 385.8 388.3 1700 397.4 385.3 387.8 1750 397.0 384.9 387.4 1800 396.2 384.1 386.6 1850 395.5 383.4 383.4 385.9 1900 395.1 . 383.0 385.5 1950 394.7 383.4 382.6 385.1 (1) Box #1 values minus 12.1°F, the average diff. of #1 vs. #2 (2) "Adjusted" value plus 2.5°F, the interpreted calibration correction. NOTE: These values are plotted in Figure 5. -25- -92- TABLE 5 MAKUSHIN ST-1 1984 FLOWING TEMPERATURE SURVEYS Recorded duly 6 Survey July 20 Survey(1)__ July 20 Survey(2) _ Depth Measured Interpreted (3) Measured Interpreted (3) Measured Interpreted(3) (Feet) Value, °F Value, °F Value, °F Value, °F Value, °F Value, °F 10 301.3 303.8 100 308.3 310.8 308.0 310.5 290.0 | 292.5 300 321.5 324.0 324.0 326.5 308.0 - 310.5 500 334.1 336.6 337.0 339.5 327.0 - 329.5 700 347.5 350.0 348.0 350.5 343.0 © 345.5 825 354.8 357.3 850 356.2 358.7 900 359.5 362.0 360.0 362.5 358.0 360.5 1000 366.6 369.1 1100 375.0 377.5 374.1 376.6 1200 378.4 380.9 : 1300 379.2 381.7 379.4 381.9 1450 379.2 381.7 : 1500 379.7 382.2 379.4 381.9 1700 379.2 381.7 379.6 382.1 379.6 382.1 1943 379.6 382.1 379.7 382.2 1950 379.2 381.7 (1) Conducted before increasing flow rate (2) Conducted after increasing flow rate (3) Measured value plus 2.5°F, the interpreted calibration correction. NOTE: These values are plotted in Figures 6 thru 8. DEPTH IN rceT FIGURE 5 STATIC TEMPERATURE (JULY 3, 1984) AND PRESSURE (JULY 4, 1984) IN ST-4 TEMPERATURE (DEGREES F) 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 400 0 0 200 200 400 400 600 600 800 800 4000 4000 4200 4200 4400 4400 4600 4600 4800 —+*— TEMPERATURE 4800 —4— PRESSURE 2000 ss 2000 O 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 PRESSURE (PSIG) -27- eT DEPTH IN ict 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 FIGURE 6 FLOWING TEMPERATURE AND PRESSURE (JULY 6, 1984) IN ST-4 TEMPERATURE (DEGREES F) 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 —*— TEMPERATURE + 1800 —4«— PRESSURE 2000 O 50 100 450 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 PRESSURE (PSIG) -28- ET DEPTH IN vu FLOWING TEMPERATURE (JULY 20, 0 200 400 600 B00 1000 1200 41400 1600 41800 2000 FIGURE 7 (JULY 19, 41984) PRIOR TO RATE CHANGE IN ST-4 TEMPERATURE (DEGREES F) 270 280 2980 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 0 —*— TEMPERATURE —4— PRESSURE 50 100 1450 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 PRESSURE (PSIG) -29- 1984) AND PRESSURE 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 4800 2000 » oET DEPTH IN FIGURE 8 FLOWING TEMPERATURE (JULY 20, 41984) AND PRESSURE (JULY 24, 1984) AFTER RATE CHANGE IN ST-4 TEMPERATURE (DEGREES F) 270 280 290 300 310 320 330 340 350 360 370 380 390 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 4800 —+*— TEMPERATURE —4— PRESSURE 2000 . 0 50 400 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 PRESSURE (PSIG) -30- 200 400 600 800 1000 4200 41400 4600 1800 2000 LIN FEET DEPTH 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 FIGURE 9 FLOWING PRESSURE (AUGUST 7, 1984) IN ST-4 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 PRESSURE (PSIG) ~31- 200 400 600 B00 1000 4200 1400 1600 4800 2000 The only field test available to determine which box was giving the more accurate results, performed that same day, indicated that Box #2 was definitely more accurate in recording the temperature of 32°F ice water. Box #2 was consequently used for all subsequent temperature measurements, and the results of those profile surveys recorded during well flow are listed as the measured values in Table 5. To bring the July 3 static temperature survey results into accord with those subsequent (Box #2) survey data requires one of two alternative actions. The Box #2 data can be used by itself, interpolating values for intermediate depths that were not recorded with that box. Or, in that the Box #1 results appear to be an equally valid representation of relative temperature variations, and because they were obtained at a uniform and minimally spaced depth interval of 50 feet, the Box #1 measured values can be uniformly adjusted (reduced) by the average 12.1 degree discrepancy obtained through Box #2 comparisons. We prefer this second approach, and those adjusted values are also listed in Table 4. Unfortunately, the previous reporting of preliminary results of the 1984 data, including Economides, et al (1984) and our own preliminary draft “Executive Summary Report" of December, 1984, did not include the 12.1°F adjustment that is required to bring the Box #1 static temperature survey results into a rational basis for direct comparison with the Box #2 flowing temperature survey results. It is regrettable that those inappropriate Box #1 static temperature values were pre- liminarily reported. Finally, the following approach was made to independently access the absolute accuracy (calibration) of the temperature Measurement values obtained by use of the thermistor and the Box #2 recording device. -32- cl Reconciliation of Pressure-Temperature Data After the field measurements of temperature and pressure were collected and returned to the RGI office for review and further interpretation, they were subjected to tests of quality. The quality assessment resulted in our determination that the pressure data for the flowing surveys was the most precise and reliable of all the data obtained, being consistently better than +0.2 psi. With this knowledge, two further methods are available to assess the absolute accuracy of the temperature data in order to determine if a calibration adjustment to the (Box #2) temperature measurements is warranted. The first method recognizes that the density of any hot liquid water is dependent on only its temperature, gas content, chemical composition, and pressure. Each profile of pressure measurements obtained within the lower liquid-filled (one-phase) portion of the ST-1 wellbore yields a precise determination of the pressure gradient present in the liquid column, which is directly dependent on the liquid's density. Consequently, after the chemical data became available for ST-1, it became possible to check the logical (numerical) consistency between the pressure and temperature data by quantitatively determining at what temperature the liquid must have been at to yield its observed density. These detailed calculations are described in Appendix Bl (p. 10 thru 18), resulting in four separate determinations of the bottomhole (resource) temperature that average 382.83°F. The four comparable Box #2 bottomhole Measurements average 380.28°F, a difference of -2.55°F. The second “calibration” method is based on the fact that the temperature at which liquid water boils (flashes) is dependent on only the vapor pressure present, and the water's gas content and chemical composition. Using the profile of -33- pressure data obtained in the upper liquid-steam (two-phase) portion of the ST-1 wellbore, a determination can be made of the boiling temperature that is necessary to satisfy the physio-chemical demands of the two-phase co-existence. Wellbore flow computer model results were obtained for all four flowing condition pressure surveys, as described in Appendix Bl (p. 18 thru 20). Those results independently determined that the boiling (flash) temperature in ST-1 averaged 379.95°F, compared to the average value of 377.53°F as measured at that flash depth by the Box #2 temperature equipment (a difference of -2.42°F). The results of these two independent calibration checks methods indicate that the thermistor equipment, with the Box #2 recording device, was very close to being correctly calibrated. For most purposes those (raw) temperature values could be reasonably used as simply recorded. However, for the purposes of performing the further wellbore flow modeling that is required to predict the performance of full-sized production wells, it is appropriate and necessary to recognize the thermodynamic requirements of pressure-temperature interdependence under saturation conditions in a dynamic flowing well. The amount of adjustment therefore required to bring the temperature values into physical-chemical accord with the pressure values is to add 2.5 degrees to the Box #2 measured values. This final adjustment results in the best interpretation of the downhole temperature values that existed when the temperature and pressure surveys were conducted in ST-1 during 1984. These interpreted values are listed as such in Tables 4 and 5 and are the values plotted in Figures 5 thru 8. 3. Interpretation of Results The inflow bottomhole temperature during both flow periods in 1984 is indicated to be 382°F, slightly lower than the -34- initial static temperature survey value of 385°F. For practical purposes the resource temperature of the ST-1 reservoir should be considered to be 382°F + 3°F. Above the inflow depth the wellbore fluid was essentially isothermal until reaching the flash point at about 1,180 feet. These temperature results are very similar to those results obtained in 1983 with substantially different (mechanical) Kuster equipment. Those 1983 results indicated a maximum flowing and final static temperature of 379.7°F. The resolution of the pressure equipment during this test was far superior to that used during the 1983 test program. However, it was again found that the drawdown pressure response in ST-1 was extremely small, approaching the sensitivity of the instrumentation used. It appears that the pressure drawdown during the low-rate flow period was less than one psi, while the total pressure drawdown in ST-1 during the high flow rate was less than two psi. Thus, the productivity index derived from the two flow periods is on the order of 30,000 1b/hr/psi. This value is very large (an order of magnitude more than the one postulated in 1983), and indicative that the productivity of the Makushin reservoir is extremely high. Precise calculation of the permeability-thickness product is not possible with these data, although it is easy to infer that the value is phenomenally large (1.e., 500,000 to 1,000,000 md-ft). After shut-in, the wellbore should re-equilibrate to its static condition. Thus, the fluid density within much of the wellbore column will lighten over a period of time as the well returns to the slightly higher static temperatures that exist from above the inflow point to the depth of 1,500 feet, and also in the zone cooled by flashing above 1,200 feet. Because there is essentially only one inflow point, however, and pressure -35- buildup was measured opposite this point, the re-equilibration of the wellbore fluid density should have no effect on the accuracy of the measured reservoir pressure. Therefore, the lack of full pressure recovery (less than one psi rather than two) is not explained by thermal equilibration, but rather may be attributable to a real decrease in average reservoir pressure. a. Reserve Estimation Using a Material Balance Calculation Material balance calculations for largely incompressible systems, such as the Makushin geothermal reservoir, have been developed and used by a number of investigators in the petroleum literature. The initiating step is an expression providing the total isothermal compressibility (c,). c = - 1 (dV) T; where V=reservoir volume, p=pressure, T=time t V (dp) Assuming that the total compressibility of the system is constant, Equation 1 may be integrated to: ‘2 y . ec thP ; where Vj=initial volume, Vo=vo lume at time T and because the recovery (r) in terms of reservoir volumes is defined as: 2 1 r= Vi then a combination of Equations 2 and 3 results in: Vo _ yy _ ,c,Ap VI set -1 -36- (1) (2) (3) (4) The cumulative production in terms of reservoir volumes is, of course, Vo-Vy and, because the fluid is considered as incompressible, then the ratio: may be taken as: Wp W which is the ratio of the cumulative mass produced (W,)to the initial mass-in-place (W). Hence, Equation 4 becomes: ef Ap 7 Wp = 1 (5) W Of the variables in Equation 5, W, is the one known with certainty. In this case W 4s equal to: W, = 33,000 Ibs/hr x 15 days x 24 hrs/day + 63,000 Ibs/hr x 19 days x 24 hrs/day = 4.06 x 107 Ibs reflecting the two flow periods. The variables contained in the exponential expression consist of the total compressibility of the system and the average reservoir pressure drop observed during the flow period. In this system, the total compressibility is the sum of the individual rock and fluid compressibilities (c. and Ce): Ce = Cr + Cf (6) -37- Water compressibility is about 3 x 107° psi, while the compressibility of the rock could reasonably range between 2x 10° psi” and 10 x 107° a depending on the lithology and the elasticity of the geologic features. For most reservoirs the value of the compressibility is taken as equal to 6 x 107° =e This value will be used here with the knowledge that it could be somewhat higher or lower. The total observed bottomhole pressure drop at ST-1 during the 34 days of the flow test was about 1.4 psi. The subsequent pressure buildup test resulted in about 0.5 psi pressure gain. Both tests indicate an extremely large permeability-thickness product which is consistent with the small pressure differences observed. The total average reservoir pressure drop is assumed to be roughly one psi. Using Equation 5, the initial-mass-in-place may then be calculated as: 4. 06 x 107 = e (6 x 10-6 x 1)_y W yielding W = 6.8 x 10'* lbs. Given the uncertainties inherent jin this calculation, the value of "W" can be considered order of Magnitude only. Nonetheless, assuming a single 16 inch full- size production well drilled on the site of ST-1 yielding (for example) 1,500,000 1b/hr, and (depending on the power cycle used) generating between 7-13 MWe, the longevity of this reservoir is extremely large relative to the needs of Unalaska Island. The calculated initial-mass-in-place could deliver this flow rate for over 500 years. b. Well Potential The estimation of individual well power potential for commercial operations requires the fundamental assumption -38- that an extensive reservoir can be represented by the fluid properties, initial pressure, temperature, and productivity index derived from slim hole data such as that from ST-1. Given this as a basis, a wellbore flow model yielding wellhead pressure vs rate must first be validated against the measured slim hole conditions. Once a match is achieved, then wellhead pressure vs rate curves for various commercial-size wellbore configurations may be generated and related to appropriate power cycles with some degree of confidence. The flow simulator used for this study was developed by Intercomp and has been used extensively by the industry for geothermal and geopressured wellbore flow calculations for several years. It is a vertical, multiphase flow simulator which incorporates treatment for variable well diameter with depth, heat losses, and noncondensable gases. The "nominal" commercial well conditions arrived at were as follows: Initial Pressure 497 psig at 1,946 feet 382°F at 1,946 feet 5,800 ppm TDS 170 ppm 30,000 1b/hr/psi Inflow Temperature Salinity CO, Content 2 Productivity Index 13-3/8 or 16 inch Wellbore Using these conditions, simulator-generated curves for wellhead pressure vs flow rate were constructed for the two different "commercial" wellbore sizes (Figure 10). Ata reasonably optimum wellhead pressure (WHP) of 60 psig for power generation from this temperature resource, flow rates of 1,170,000 to 1,860,000 lb/hr are predicted, depending on wellbore size. -39- Q eo ° o WELLHEAD PRESSURE -— psig > o FIGURE: 10 MAKUSHIN COMMERCIAL SIZE WELL PREDICTED FLOW RATE vs. WELLHEAD PRESSURE | = ie 3/8” WELLBORE 750 1000 —40- 1250 1500 2000 FLOWRATE — 1000 Ib/hr RGI E 1729 4. Reservoir Fluid Analysis Preliminary results from the 1983 short term (3-day) flow testing of ST-1 had previously indicated the presence of a liquid-dominated resource of moderately high (380°F) temperature, low salt content, low gas content, and a possibly complex inflow of fluids into the wellbore. The chemical testing of ST-1 in 1984 was therefore aimed primarily at obtaining detailed chemical descriptions of the fluid produced over the course of the long term (34-day) flow test, thereby providing an improved identification of the chemistry of the geothermal reservoir fluid. Both liquid and gas samples were collected and analyzed during the 1984 test period, and an assessment was made of the extent of calcium carbonate scale deposition in the well. a. Summary Utilizing standard geothermal industry methods, 16 liquid and 24 gas samples were collected in 1984 from ST-1 during the 34-day production flow test. These samples were then analyzed to define the chemical character of the Makushin geothermal resource. All fluid sampling of ST-1 was necessarily conducted at the surface during flashing flow of the well. The natural steam separation process causes the (sampled and analyzed) residual liquid fraction to become more concentrated in dissolved solids, while simultaneously causing the steam fraction to contain all of the noncondensable gases. The reconstituted composition of the original (unflashed) geothermal reservoir fluid can be calculated by appropriately applying the effective flash percent, as determined by physical measurements, to the values obtained by direct analysis (see Table 6). -41- TABLE 6 CALCULATED ST-1 RESERVOIR FLUID COMPOSITION 277.8 mg/1 Mg <0.49 = mg/1 125 = mg/1 Fe <0.024 mg/1 1,836 mg/1 Hg <0.0002 mg/1 232 = mg/1 TOS 5,823 mg/1 10 = mg/1 80.8 mg/1 C02 173 mg/1 3,180 mg/l No 11.9 mg/1 0.1 mg/1 HoS 1.7 mg/1 11.2 mg/1 Ar -158 mg/1 8.6 mg/1 NH4 -10 = mg/1 44.7 mg/1 Ho .024 mg/1 14.0 mg/1 CH4 008 mg/1 2.7 mg/1 He -001 mg/1 This is a relatively simple, low salinity (5,823 mg/1 total dissolved solids) NaCl type reservoir fluid that is typical of non-sea water geothermal reservoirs situated in igneous rocks. The total noncondensable gas concentration of 0.0187 weight percent is extremely low when compared to other geothermal systems, and would only reach 0.08 to 0.12 weight percent in the steam if the reservoir fluid is flashed to atmospheric pressure. Geochemically, the Makushin geothermal resource appears to be ground water which originates on the flanks of Makushin Volcano and percolates downward to become the liquid within the reservoir. This liquid is heated to a resource temperature of 382°F and dissolves minor amounts of chemical components. These chemical components’ concentrations are normal or lower than identical components in comparable geothermal systems. The only chemical problems that the Makushin geothermal resource could present during exploitation are the possibility of forming a very minor amount of calcium carbonate scale, and the arsenic and boron content of the produced liquid must be seriously -42- considered when choosing a disposal method. Several practical chemical treatment approaches to calcium carbonate scale inhibition are available, so scaling should not be a serious problem. The potential environmental problems of water disposal are discussed in Appendix D. Injection of the produced fluids back into the reservoir represents one practical solution to these disposal problems. b. Liquids Samples of flashed liquids were collected on four occasions during the 1984 long term flow test, with a total of 16 samples analyzed. Six samples were taken during July 5 through 7, soon after flow was initiated; two on July 25, two on July 31, and six during August 7-8. Liquid for the samples was captured in containers open to the atmosphere, then immediately placed into polyethylene bottles, sealed with sturdy polypropylene caps, and labeled for identification. Samples collected July 5-7 were taken from the plume discharge of a James tube. * Samples of July 25 and 31 were of liquid draining off the lip of the James tube. The August 7 samples were only partly flashed, being collected through a portable separator at 26 psig (269°F), compared to open flashing to the atmosphere for the other samples. Fluid exiting the James tube on August 8 was directed into an improvised silencer in which the temperature stabilized at 178°F. Samples on that date were collected from the silencer drainage at a lower temperature, which is defined later by an indirect method. The sample compositions are simple and stable so that few special precautions were needed for sample preservation and transport. Some were acidified with dilute nitric acid -43- but there were no systematic differences between acidified and unacidified samples. Most of the samples were collected and transported without dilution or preservatives. Mercury samples were preserved with a solution of potassium permanganate-persulfate in glass bottles. Most cations were analyzed by inductively coupled plasma (ICP), mercury was by atomic absorption, and anions were analyzed by standard wet methods. Analytical data with chemical indexes are listed for the 16 samples in Table 7A. Quality control on the analyses appears good. Charge balances average a slightly negative - -021 (2.1 percent imbalance) with a standard deviation of 0.0085 (0.85 percent). The standard deviation value represents the overall relative precision of the analytical work. The stability of the liquids' composition can be assessed by several criteria. The simplest, a straightforward review of the data in Table 7A, indicates a slight concentration decrease from beginning to end of the flow period. Total production was slightly more than 40 million pounds (40 mmp) of liquid plus steam. Statistical data for the analytical results contained in Table 7A are presented in Table 7B. Column 22 in Table 7B shows the increments of concentration changes over the 40 mmp, based on linear least squares fitted lines. Column 23 contains the increments divided by the mid-range values (concentrations at 20 mmp) and is thereby an index of relative change. Column 24 contains the root-mean-square (RMS) deviations for data relative to the least squares lines. These are the counterparts of standard deviations for sample values where there is no trend. -44- -S¢- Row Column 1. Sample No. 2. Day 3. Hour 4. Elapsed Hours 5. Production (million 1b) 6. Acidified? 7. Sodium 8. Potassium 9. Calcium 10. Lithium 11. Strontium 12. Iron 13. Magnesium 14. Chloride 15. Sulfate 16. Boron 17. Bicarbonate 18. Arsenic 19. Fluoride 20. Bromide 21. Mercury 22a. Silica measured 22b. Silica adjusted (4) 23. Summation (TDS) 24. lon Balance 25. THN, Geothermometers (°F) 26. Quartz full flash (4) 27. NakCa 28. Na/K 29, Na/Lli Ratios 30. C1/Na 31. C1/B 32. €1/S0q *Not used in regression RESTDUAL LIQUIDS -- FU TABLE 7A CHEMICAL DATA -- MAKUSHIN ST-1 -- 1984 = FLASH 10 ATMOSPHERE (1) 1 2 3 4 5 6 z 8 9 10 un Zyoin ead 15 16 1 2 3 A-4 4 5 16 18 21 22 26(2) 36(2) 28 32. 29 35 July 5 July 5 July 6 July 6 July6 July7 July 25 July 25 July 31 July 31 Aug 7 Aug 7 Aug 8 Aug 8 Aug 8 Aug 8 1524 1950 1106 1315 1700 1025 1700 1700 1730 1730 1900 1900 0915 0915 1110 115 1.47 5.90 21.17 23.32 27.07 44.48 483.1 483.1 627.6 627.6 797.0 797.0 811.3 811.3 813.2 813.2 -0485 195 +699 -770 +893 1.468 19.6 19.6 28.7 28.7 39.4 39.4 40.3 40.3 40.4 40.4 no no no no no no yes no no yes yes no yes no yes no 2480 2402 2397 2423 2427 2379 2345 2343 2363 2388 2028* 2031* 2308 2261 2296 2350 313 300 301 302 300 295 298 296 306 302 260* 258* 296 287 293 297 166 162 160 161 160 157 162 162 164 164 138* 138% 158 155 158 160 11.81 11.32 11.32) «10.49 11.40 10.15 10.87 10.90 11.14 11.04 9.44* 9.45* 10.77 10.49 10.66 10.91 3.63 3.56 3.53 3.56 3.56 3.48 3.43 3.43 3.50 3.49 2.99% 2.97% 3.41 3.32 3.41 3.44 +04 <.024 <.024 <.024. <.024 <.024 -04 -07 16 14 <.024 <.024 <.024 <.024 <.024 <.024 <.49 <.49 <.49 <.49 <.49 <.49 <.49 <.49 <.49 <.49 «49 <.49 <9 <9 <<. 49 <<. 49 4210 4170 4155 4170 4170 414 4110 3539* 3450* 3952 3940 4060 4060 W 99 105 107 108 106 108 92* 92* 78* 107 58.3 57.2 57.4 56.6 58.2 58.4 56.8 57,3 58,6 58.3 50.3* 49.7* 60.0 55.0 57.1 57.0 26(3) 263) 13.8 13.6 13.7 13.5 13.8 13.7 15.6 15.4 15.0 15.6 12.3* 14.0% 14.3 14.1 14.3 14.6 213 13 13 14 14 16 19 <.0002 <.0002 <.0002 <.0002 <.0002<.0002 364 354 348 352 354 351 372* 377* 361* 388* 320* 312* 365 354 363 368 282 275 270 273 275 273 289* 293* 280* 301* 280 273 283 275 282 286 7368 7573 7552 7600 7547 7484 7526 6452* 7260 7158 7363 -.0042 -.0186 -.0200 -.0138 -.0296 -.028 -.024 -.025 -.013 -.021 -.034 719 -696 694 701 -702 -688 -681 +680 -687 +693 .589* .589* .670 .656 .667 .682 401 397 395 396 397 396 404* 406* 400* 410* 400 396 401 397 401 403 440.1 438.2 438.9 438.3 437.5 437.5 438.5 438.5 441.5 438.2 437.7 436.7 440.2 438.5 439.4 438.9 460.0 458.3 459.2 457.9 456.5 457.1 461.2 460.2 462.1 460.4 462.7 461.1 462.7 461.0 461.9 460.2 365.4 363.7 364.0 364.7 363.1 362.8 361.0 361.6 363.7 360.6 361.7 361.6 362.1 361.1 361.2 361.2 1.698 1.736 1.733 1.721 1.753 1.754 1.739 1.745 1.699 1.712 1.743 1,768 1.728 72.2 72.9 72.4 73.7 71.4 72.4 70.1 70.4 69.4 65.9 71.6 71.1 71.2 37.9 42.1 39.6 39.0 38.6 38.8 38.0 38.5 43.0* 50.5* 37.9 (1) Analytical results, no adjustment for flash (2) Collected at 269°F, not adjusted for flash (3) 10 ppm (pre-flash) based on calculation for calcite equilibria, bicarbonate. (4) Based on 22.4 percent steam loss from 382°F, except Aug. 7 samples. See text for explanation. with measured C02 and Ca, is considered superior to the direct measurement of -9p- Row Column 7. Sodium 8. Potassium 9. Calcium 10. Lithium 11. Strontium 12. Iron 13. Magnesium 14. Chloride 15. Sulfate 16. Boron 17. Bicarbonate 18. Arsenic 19. Fluoride 20. Bromide 21. Mercury 22a. Silica measured 22b. Silica adjusted (2) 23. Summation (TDS) 24. Ion Balance 25. THNeg Geothermometers (°F) 26. Quartz full flash (2) 27. NakCa 28. Na/K 29, Na/Li Ratios 30. C1/Na 31. C1/B 32. €1/S04 (1) 10 ppm based on calculation for calcite measurement of bicarbonate. TABLE 7B CHEMICAL DATA -- MAKUSHIN ST-1 - 1984 LINEAR LEAST SHOVES FITS TO DATA ND SELEC Nl WV 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 A Over Pre-Flash Intercept Slope n P29 r 40 mpp Rel. Chg. RMS M40/RMS Composition 2419.6 -2.712 14 2365.4 -.828 =-108.5 = -.0459 12.7 -8.5 1836 302.3 -.1787 14 298.8 -.513 -7.15 - .0239 4.9 -1.5 232 161.7 - 0584 14 (160.5 -.345 -2.34 -.0146 2.7 -.87 125 11.412 -.0171 4 11.07 -.846 -.686 - .062 -0061 = -112. 8.60 3.556 -.00376 14 3.481 -.824 -.150 -.043 -020 -7.5 2.70 <.024 <.024 <.49 <.49 4182 -4.185 11 4098 -.884 -167. ~.0408 20.3 -8.2 3180 106.5 -.120 9 104.1 -.368 -4.80 - .046 5.2 -.92 80.8 57.68 -.00516 14 57.58 -.077. -.206 -.0036 1.18 -.17 44,7 26 10!) 13.98 0213 14 «14.40 -480 -853 -0592 -65 1.3 tea el 14.0 353.7 +216 10 358.0 -635 8.6 -0240 5.3 1.6 274.7 135 12 277.8 522 5.4 -0195 4.5 1.2 277.8 7546 - 596 10 (7497 -.745 -238. - .032 80.2 -3.0 5823 -.0179 -.000164 11 -.021 +365 -.0066 -.313 -0078 = -.85 - 7006 -.000734 14 .686 -.802 -.0294 -.0429 -0048 -6.1 ~532 391 -071 - 12 399 513 2.84 -0072 2.43 1.2 399 439 -00806 16 439 121 32 -0007 1.18 .27 434 458 -0759 16 460 -765 3.03 -00800 +827 3.7 460 364 - 0582 16 363 -.727 -.233 - .00887 173 -3.0 363 1.7304 -000118 =-13)-—-1.7327 «105 +0047 -0027 021 +22 25.5 72.00 -.0296 13 (71.40 -.329 -1.18 -.0615 1.90 -.62 71.1 39.45 - .0353 9 38.74 -.474 -1.41 - .036 5.31 -.26 39.4 (2) Based on 22.4 percent steam loss from reservoir temperature of 382°F. Column 20; Mid-range concentrations, when cumulative produced volume was 20 million pounds. Column 21; r-values, goodness of fit for linear regressions. Column 22; Concentration changes through 40 million pounds of production (ppm units). 40 million pounds of production (Col 22:Col 20). Column 23; Relative changes in concentrations through Column 24; RMS = root-mean-square difference between data and least squares line. Column 26; Pag-values adjusted for flash fraction of 0.224 (see text) (ppm units). equilibria with measured C02 and Ca is considered superior to the direct Column 25 shows the ratio of increment (Col. 22) to the RMS values, yielding an index of how statistically certain the trend of the least squares line may be. Values in column 25 that are less than unity indicate that a trend is not demonstrated in a statistical sense, although there may in fact be a trend. Values larger than about 2 are considered statistically significant and values larger than about 3 indicate that a trend is demonstrated with a statistical certainty greater than 0.999. Lithium, sodium, chloride, and strontium show highly significant trends. For the other components, the intensities of their trends are perhaps masked by analytical uncertainties. Note that by this criteria the increasing trends for arsenic and silica are of low statistical certainty. A novel term, les is listed in Table 7B, row 25, which relates to calculations for thermodynamic properties of the fluid. It accounts for the fluid's being neither pure water, nor a pure sodium chloride solution, for which laboratory data are available. Thermodynamic data are not available for the mixed-salt compositions of geothermal liquids. Numerical values for miley permit laboratory (or tabular) data for pure sodium chloride brines to be used for mixed-salt compositions. Specifically, the Ty, q-value is the (equivalent) weight percent of NaCl in a simple solution which has the same thermodynamic properties as the ST-1 (mixed salt) fluid. The computed pre-flash composition of the reservoir liquid produced from ST-1 is shown under column 26 of Table 7B. It is based on the Poo values modified for 22.4 percent steam loss. This amount of steam loss -47- corresponds to adiabatic flashing from 382 to 133°F, as deduced through a method described in Appendix B2. The reservoir's composition will present few problems for development. However, the arsenic content must be considered when choosing a disposal method. Carbonate scaling tendency upon production appears to be small to nil. Silica scaling would not be a production problem, but could be troublesome for some designs of heat extraction and fluid disposal. Sulfide scales are not indicated. Finally, with respect to the liquid analyses, they do provide the basis to calculate four chemical geothermometers commonly used to estimate reservoir temperature. Tables 7A and 7B contain the quartz, alkali (Na/K), NaKCa, and Na/Li geothermometer results for each analysis, including the calculated pre-flash composition (Column 26). The quartz geothermometer, adjusted for the total steam flash fraction of 22.4 percent, indicates a reservoir temperature of 399°F compared to the bottomhole flowing temperature of 382°F. This 4 percent discrepancy in temperature is certainly within the expected “accuracy” range of any geothermometer. The alkali (Na/K) and NaKCa geothermometer results are significantly higher, at 460°F and 434°F respectively, while the Na/Li geothermometer is slightly (5%) low, at about 363°F. We suspect that the alkali and NaKCa results are artificially high due to an “excess" of potassium in the water, possibly caused by a scarcity of potassium-incorporating alteration minerals within the mafic gabbronorite reservoir rock. In that the two other geothermometers, which do not depend on potassium, both -48- provide reasonable results, we conclude that the maximum temperature of this reservoir is in fact 380-385°F, as observed in ST-1. c. Gases This presentation of gas chemical data for ST-1 will address both the basic chemical composition of the gases and the issues of inflow. It will be shown that minor, but clear differences occur between the gas mixtures obtained from the static, shut-in wellhead and from the flowline. Additionally, the flowline gases were not of constant composition during the test. Gases were sampled from the wellhead of ST-1 both prior to turning on the well for the 34-day flow test, and, after turn-on, the steam was sampled from the flowline to recover gases. Glass bulbs were used to collect samples from the wellhead and from the in-line separator. The gas in the glass bulbs was analyzed by mass spectrometer to identify and quantify the nonreactive gases. Liquid in the glass bulbs was analyzed to determine the carbon dioxide content in condensate (steam from the in-line separator). During flow, the syringe method was used to collect gases in steam from an in-line separator. The syringe data yield the carbon dioxide content of the steam and the fraction of the gas suite comprised of nonreactive gases. Samples from the syringes are also used to quantify hydrogen sulfide and ammonia in the steam. 1) Gases Measured by Mass Spectrometer Reduced data from the mass spectrometer are shown in Table 8. Their interpretation requires detailed descriptions of the sampling procedures. -49- Pre-flow wellhead gases were collected in air-evacuated glass sampling bulbs (250-m1 capacity with stopcocks at each end). Samples 1 and 2 involved bulbs that had been preloaded with NaOH solution so that the carbon dioxide and other reactive gases would be solubilized. This leaves the nonreactive gases in a more concentrated form which increases analytical sensitivity of the mass spectrometer. Sample bulb No. 3 contained only enough distilled water so that air-evacuation could be achieved by boiling. Thus, bulb No. 3 yields quantitative data for carbon dioxide as well as for non-carbon dioxide gases. Data for the pre-flow wellhead gases are shown in Table 8, samples 1, 2, and 3. Sample 2 acquired substantial contamination by air (raw oxygen content was 7.34 mole percent upon analysis). Adjustments for contamination were made on the basis of apparent oxygen content, reducing oxygen to zero and making proportionate reductions in nitrogen and argon contents. However, since air contamination by a diffusional mechanism cannot be ruled out, the adjusted results for bulb No. 2 are somewhat uncertain. The results for bulb No. 3 are presented in two ways; with and without carbon dioxide. Without carbon dioxide, the bulb No. 3 results can be compared with the bulb-collected gases from the flowline (samples 4 et al) to assess whether there is a difference between nonreactive gases in the flowing steam and those in the shut-in wellhead. By including carbon dioxide in the listing, the bulb No. 3 results can be compared with the titration data from the other bulbs. -50- TABLE 8 GAS CONCENTRATION (MOLE %) DETERMINED BY MASS SPECTROMETRY, CORRECTED FOR AIR CONTAMINATION SHUT-IN WELLHEAD GAS FLOWLINE GASES Sample Number 1 2 3 3 (2) 4 5 6 7 Sample Day July 2 July 2 July 2 July 2 July 6 July 6 July 6 July 7 Sample Hour 1620 «+1640 1700 1700 1050 «1215. = 1300-=—- 1020 Elapsed Hours 0 0 0 0 20.9 22.4 23.2 44.4 Raw Oxygen (1) .004 7.34 .018 .018 16.7 -0064 .0058 .058 Carbon Dioxide 93.534 Nitrogen 88.041 91.698 91.109 5.464 98.362 94.811 95.422 96.244 Argon 1.052 1.037. 1.179 = .071 -671 1.123 = .936 -694 Hydrogen 10.659 7.062 7.443 .446 -927 3.928 3.532 2.936 Methane 249 -204 = .269 016 041 138° 111 125 Helium (3) c c Cc c 0 0 0 0 Argon/Methane 4.22 5.08 4.38 16.8 8.14 8.43 5.55 N2/H2 8.26 13.01 12.2 106 24.1 27.01 32.8 H2/Argon 10.13 6.81 6.31 1.39 3.5 3.77 4.23 (1) Air Contamination, Mole Percent in Bulb (2) Alternate Presentation Sample also held H2S (3) C - Contaminated, D - Below Detection Limit -51- 13 12 Aug 7 Aug 8 2105 1105 799.2 813.1 11.116 .078 97.66 96.169 1.168 = .895 1.096 2.751 -052 «111 :023 .075 22.5 8.14 89.1 35.01 -938 3.07 Samples of steam from the flowing fluid (in-line separator) were collected in bulbs 4, 5, 6, 7, 13, and 12 and their analytical results are similarly listed jin Table 8. Samples 4 and 13 were highly contaminated with air, and samples 4, 5, 6, and 7 contained helium from the downwell pressure detector (capillary tubing assembly) which was intermittently being recharged. Results for samples 4, 5, 6, and 7 in Table 8 have therefore had the helium removed mathematically. However, the helium reported for samples 12 and 13 were collected on a day when the pressure apparatus was not being used and those results reflect the native content of helium in the suite of geothermal gases. The NaOH-dosed bulbs (for sampling the inline separator) were weighed before and after sample collection. Analysis of the mixture of condensate and NaOH solution by titration with standard acid yields the concentration of carbon dioxide in the stream. These are the most reliable samples for the carbon dioxide content of the fluid and are used to augment the syringe data in a nonstandard way described later. 2) Carbon Dioxide in Flowline Gases The carbon dioxide content of the ST-1 fluid is relatively small. The glass bulbs dosed with NaOH solution yielded liquids that could be titrated with a standard acid to determine how much of the NaOH added originally was consumed by carbon dioxide. Allowances were made for C0, blanks in the NaOH solutions that were unrelated to the geothermal fluid compositions. -52- The results listed in Table 9 show excellent repeatability for samples collected on the same day and indicate about 8 percent (relative) decrease in carbon dioxide by the end of the test. TABLE 9 CARBON DIOXIDE IN STEAM CONDENSATE COLLECTED IN GLASS BULBS Bulb # 4 5 6 7 13 12 Date July 6 July 6 July 6 July 7 Aug 7 = Aug 8 Hour 1050 1220 1300 1020 1105 2115 ppm co, in cond 2064 2060 2020 2230 1396 1420 Line temp (°F) 300 300 300 300 268 268 Percent flash 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.1 12.2 12.2 ppm co, in total flow 188 187 184 203 170 173 3) Non-CO,, Gases in Flowline Samples Additionally, samples of gases taken by the syringe method yield the proportion of non-carbon dioxide gases in the total noncondensable suite. In the normal mode of operation, the syringe method involves two collections. One utilizes NaOH solution to solubilize the carbon dioxide, leaving the non-carbon dioxide gases as a bubble, the volume of which is measured in the syringe. For the circumstances at ST-1 the small overall amount of gas, and especially the small proportion of non-carbon dioxide gas, made this measurement unworkable because of the very small size of the gas bubble. -53- However, the other standard syringe collection involves the total gas mixture over condensate. That vapor volume contains carbon dioxide, and was large enough to be measured in all cases. By incorporating the results for carbon dioxide, derived by titration and given in Table 9, the syringe data from the total gas collection by syringe could be used to determine the fraction of non-carbon dioxide gases. The results are listed in Table 10. They show a continuous decline in concentration of the non-carbon dioxide gases (N-values) through the first day of flow. A concomitant increase occurs in the carbon dioxide fraction of the total gas content (C/(C+N) values) during that first day, followed by a slightly decreasing content of carbon dioxide during the remaining flow period, as shown in Table 9. The August 7 and 8 samples indicate lower concentrations of both carbon dioxide and non-carbon dioxide gases, although the C/(C+N) values are not much different from earlier. -54- TABLE 10 CARBON DIOXIDE AND NON-CARBON DIOXIDE PROPORTIONS IN THE SUITE OF NONCONDENSABLE GASES Day Hour ce) n(2) C/(C+N) July 5 1427 1.0436 - 1967 -841 5 1441 1.0436 .1975 -841 5 1504 1.0436 - 1949 - 843 5 1549 1.0436 - 1661 . 863 5 1606 1.0436 . 1868 . 848 5 1920 1.0436 - 1258 .892 5 1946 1.0436 - 1236 -894 6 1010 1.0436 -1052 -908 6 1021 1.0436 -0939 .917 6 1637 1.0436 -1012 -912 6 1658 1.0436 -0955 -916 7 0937 1.1353 -1012 .918 7 1000 1.1353 .0987 -920 Aug 7 1800 0.7107 -0636 -918 7 1810 0.7107 .0955 - 882 7 1820 0.7107 .0764 -903 1 1930 0.7107 -0878 - 890 7 2005 0.7107 -0963 -881 8 1003 0.7229 - 0862 -894 8 1007 0.7229 .0759 -905 8 1015 0.7229 .0798 -901 (1) STP ml of carbon dioxide per ml of condensate, determined by titration as listed in Table 9. (2) STP ml of non-carbon dioxide gases per ml of condensate. (Non-carbon dioxide gases are mainly nitrogen, see Table 8) Ise n Utilizing Tables 8, 9 and 10, the absolute concentrations of the individual gas species can be calculated. The main values used in the computations are shown in the upper rows of Table 11, the results in the lower rows. During the transient period of July 6 and 7, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, and, to a lesser extent, methane, were relatively stable while hydrogen and argon diminished. TABLE 11 ABSOLUTE CONCENTRATIONS OF INDIVIDUAL GAS SPECIES TOTAL FLOW BASIS (1) Bulb No. 5 6 7 12 Collection Day J6 J6 J7 A8 Hour 1215 1300 1020 1105 ppm COo (total flow) 187 184 203 173 mmoles C02/kg 4.25 4.18 4.61 3.93 non-C02/CO (molar)! .0967 .0965 .0877 -1126 moles non-C02/kg -4110 .4034 .4089 - 4420 ppm non-C02 gases (total flow) Nitrogen 10.9 10.8 11.0 11.9 Argon - 184 7151 -114 -158 Hydrogen 0323 .0285 .0240 -0243 Methane x103 9.08 7.16 8.18 7.718 Helium x103 -- -- -- 1.33 Weight ratio to Nitrogen Carbon dioxide 17.2 16.9 18.6 15.9 Nitrogen 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Argon .0169 =.0138 =.0105 -0145 Hydrogen x103 2.96 2.61 2.20 2.23 Methane x103 833 657 .750 714 Helium x103 -- -- -- 122 Based on regression of data in Table 10 The most stable concentration is shown by nitrogen. Accordingly, the ratio of other gas concentrations to the nitrogen concentration are computed and listed in Table 11 to show most clearly the relative changes. -56- The nitrogen concentrations are low compared to those found in waters equilibrated with the atmosphere at temperatures reasonable for ground surface conditions at Makushin. The ST-1 fluids are only 50 percent saturated in nitrogen for the estimated surface temperature. Although it is reasonable to expect meltwater to become isolated from the atmosphere before saturation, a uniform level of 50 percent undersaturation seems surprising. A nitrogen partial pressure of 0.78 atm (atmospheric air contact) and the average nitrogen content in ST-1 of 11.5 ppm would correspond to a case of complete saturation with atmospheric nitrogen occurring at a temperature of 103°F. Since this temperature is unreasonably high for atmospheric contact on Unalaska Island, the control of the nitrogen content in ST-1 fluids is not atmospheric. The actual control may lie instead with water-rock interactions. Argon content is similarly small. Saturation against air at 32°F would yield 0.94 ppm Ar, compared to the observed values of 0.114 to 0.184. Even the minimum solubility of argon at 174°F would yield 0.37 ppm against the atmosphere. Thus, like the nitrogen, if the argon originates from the atmosphere it appears not to have reached equilibrium with it. 4) Hydrogen Sulfide The syringe collection which uses NaOH solution solubilizes hydrogen sulfide as well as carbon dioxide. It provides a suitable sample for hydrogen sulfide upon adding a few milliliters of zinc acetate -57- Day July 5 July 5 July 6 July 6 July 7 Aug 7 Aug 7 Aug 8 Hour 1447 1930 1010 1647 0948 1900 2000 1100 solution. The samples were sent to a laboratory where sulfide was analyzed by iodometry. Results are given in Table 12. TABLE 12 HYDROGEN SULFIDE IN FLUIDS FROM ST-1 ppm in Steam Percent Flash ppm in Total Flow 71. 26. 41. 35. 54. 19. 18. 19. Siete letters san TONOL— COMM WM FwWWw MNMNMwWWWWW Meal ile isl iliisll' sil iiss mrmnwmHsaao os aS HH PWWNM~ orn a The higher and more variable results for the July samples are due to a procedural error in the laboratory analysis. The values represent upper limits for the hydrogen sulfide contents and may be high by a factor of two or so. Results for the August samples are based on a correct procedure and are believed to be accurate. Although the August results are numerically lower than the July results, it is not certain that a trend is represented for the flow period. However, the CO,/H,S ratio value of 74.2 by weight for the August results can be compared to the mass spectrometer (MS) results for glass bulb #3 that was used to collect static wellhead gas prior to turning on the well. Specifically, the raw MS data -58- showed mole percent values for C0, and HS of 92.7034 and 0.4648, respectively. Those values yield a weight ratio of 258 which is significantly different from the 74.2 for flowline steam and probably indicates less H,$ in the source which filled the wellhead. Given that the co, jin steam decreased with time from about 2000 to 1400 ppm in whole (produced) fluid, the contrast in ratios indicates that the amount of HS in the flowline gases 2 relatively decreased with continued production. The contrast of ratio values, 258 versus 74.2, could be greater if the fates of reactive gases ina static wellhead are considered. Specifically, one could expect carbon dioxide and hydrogen sulfide to become involved with corrosion reactions on the metal interior of the wellhead. Such reactions would cause the nonreactive gases (such as nitrogen) to increase in relative amounts over their initial concentrations. However, the nitrogen proportion in the static wellhead gas (glass bulb sample 3) is the lowest of all samples measured from ST-1. Consequently, such corrosion reactions are believed to have been minimal or nonexistent. 5) Ammonia/Ammonium Samples for ammonia in steam can also be obtained with the syringe. When the steam is condensed, carbon dioxide and ammonia react to form ionized ammonium carbonate. By adding a small amount of strong acid, the ammonium is stabilized against loss of carbon dioxide by depressurization. These preserved samples can be sent to laboratories for analysis by standard -59- Day July 5 July 5 July 6 July 6 July 7 Average Hour 1549 1920 0950 1010 0937 methods, namely ion specific electrode. Results for ST-1 are given in Table 13. The observed content near 0.1 ppm is low compared to most geothermal resources which range from 5 to 500 ppm NH, on a total flow basis. 4 TABLE 13 AMMONIUM IN FLUIDS FROM ST-1 ppm_in Steam Percent Flash ppm_in Total Flow 1.1 9.1 0.10 0.9 9.1 0.089 1.6 9.1 0.15 0.9 9.1 0.082 1.1 9.1 0.10 0.10 + .03 6) Conclusions Overall, there were clearly observed variations of gas contents during the production testing of ST-1, especially in the early stages of the 34-day flow test. One important fact in this regard is that the relative abundance of noncondensable gases significantly decreased during the initial flow period. This trend continued, at a slower pace, to the final sampling in August. The August samples also demonstrate a reduction in the absolute concentration of carbon dioxide. These changes suggest the possibility that more than one zone is open and contributing to the wellbore in ST-1, and that these two zones have somewhat -60- d. different gas compositions in terms of carbon dioxide and total noncondensables. Since the gas samples collected from the static wellhead, prior to flow in 1984, had the highest hydrogen and argon, and the lowest hydrogen sulfide contents of all the samples, those initial samples appear to have included the contribution of an (upper) entry zone that depleted or drew down fairly soon during flow. If so, then the later gas compositions may be taken as representative of the major fluid entry at 1946-1949 feet in ST-1, without significant modification by a more shallow source. Calcium Carbonate Scale Deposition A thin scale of calcium carbonate deposited, for a time, in the wellbore during the initial low rate flow period prior to July 20. Scale samples were recovered on July 19 from the stainless steel tubing used in the downwell pressure measuring assembly. The tubing had been in place since July 7. No scale was observed to have formed during any other time that the pressure tubing or thermocouple cable was in the well. 1) Recovered Scale After the well flow was begun on July 5 and downwell pressure profiles were measured on July 6, the pressure measuring assembly was left intact in the wellbore with the bottom chamber located at a depth of 1946 feet. On July 19, the tubing was removed when the pressure profile was again measured. Elapsed time downhole was 308 hours. -61- During retrieval of the tubing a thin (1 mm) white solid (scale) was found to coat that portion of the tubing that had been within the 1050 to 1150 ft. depth interval of the well. This position is just above the bubble point which was identified to be at 1180 feet. Wellbore modeling indicates that flash development in the zone 1150-1050 feet is 0.24 to 1.25 weight percent steam. Carbon dioxide pressures decrease from 4.0 to 1.2 psia in that zone, compared to the pre-flash pressure of 8.0 psia. Modeling indicates that the temperature in this adiabatic zone spans about eight degrees, from 381 to 373°F. Pieces of the scale were examined in detail with a binocular microscope, at magnifications of 10 to 40x. Thickness measured normal to the curvature of the tubing is nearly uniform at 1.0 mm. The color is white, and grains are transparent to translucent. Crystal facets were common with crystals being prismatic with pinacoid terminations. An X-ray diffraction study shows the scale to be an unusually pure aragonite, and the chemical composition is given in Table 14. The weight of the listed components, when converted to carbonate, gives an estimate for the anions which were not analyzed. The analysis does not account for 3.05 percent of the sample, but that discrepancy could be a propagation from an ordinary uncertainty in the calcium measurement. It appears reasonable to conclude that noncarbonate material is as scarce as the chemical analysis indicates. -62- TABLE 14 COMPOSITION OF RECOVERED CARBONATE SCALE MAKUSHIN ST-1 - 1984 Component ppm_in Scale C03 Equivalent Calcium 384,000 574,850 Strontium 5,886 4,060 Silica 342 --- Sodium 173 --- Bar ium 102 45 Iron 15.4 16 Magnesium <80 Manganese <40 SUM 390,518 578,971 Total = 969,489 Unaccounted = 30,511 2) Discussion It can be presumed that the scale found on the tubing also decorated the wellbore in the same zone and to the same thickness. The overall amount of scale that deposited can be estimated on a geometrical basis. For a pipe 2.98 inches in inside diameter plus the tubing (2.5 mm 0D), the depositional perimeter is about 24.5 cm. The length and thickness of the zone are 3048 and 0.1 cm, respectively, so the volume is 7468 ml. The density of aragonite is near 2.8 grams/cc, which will not be discounted for porosity in this case. The computed weight of the deposit is 20,900 grams (46 pounds). The contribution of calcium from the brine to the scale can be estimated on the basis of an average deposition rate during the 308 hour interval. The total amount of brine produced in 308 hours at -63- 33,000 1b/hr was 10.16 million pounds. Thus, the brine appears to have contributed about 3.6 percent of the pre-flash calcium content of the brine, for which analysis of the residual liquid alone indicated 125 ppm Ca. The effect of aragonite deposition on the carbonate/bicarbonate component of the brine is more significant, 6.9 ppm was the average contribution of carbonate. That is about 40 percent of the pre-flash carbonate/bicarbonate content. The absence of any evidence of scale formation during the later, higher flow rate period is an encouraging sign. It appears that scale deposition is a borderline process in terms of the chemical conditions in the wellbore. Perhaps, mild chemical treatment would be sufficient to alter the flashing conditions to a non-depositing mode. Several practical approaches to calcium carbonate scale inhibition are available. Environmental Impact Mitigation and Monitoring and Regulatory Compliance Well flow production testing operations at well ST-1 conducted during 1984 were monitored by environmentally trained personnel from Republic and Republic's environmental subcontractor Dames & Moore, to: 1) assure the implementation of designed environmental mitigation measures; 2) assure compliance with the terms of the permits; 3) establish baseline values for certain environmental parameters; and 4) detect and measure environmental impacts resulting from the operations. Although three separate visits to the operation site were made in 1984, -64- two were specifically designed for the water quality monitoring program from the discharge of geothermal fluids from ST-1: one in early July which coincided with the advent of the well flow test, and one in early August, which coincided with the termination of the well test. The primary interest of the field inspections was in assuring permit compliance during the well testing operations. Additionally, special environmental mitigation measures were implemented to minimize sediment and temperature impacts to the river from the geothermal fluid discharged by the flow test. For example, sediment and temperature impacts to the Makushin Valley river from the well test were to be prevented by discharging the fluid at high pressure out over the plateau and allowing it to cool while falling as a mist into a tributary of the Makushin Valley river. As in 1983, the program to detect and measure environmental impacts resulting from the 1984 operations was designed to establish proof of compliance with permit conditions during the well test and establish the level of impact from the 1984 well test. This latter information would allow for an estimation of the level of impact that may be expected should more significant discharges of geothermal fluid be required during future operations. The program to detect these impacts consisted of monitoring water quality and flow rates in Makushin Valley river and its affected tributaries during and following discharge of the geothermal fluid through measurements of conductivity, chloride, and temperature. Permits from ADEC and the EPA called for protection of various water quality parameters at Station MVB (located approximately 0.6 miles downstream in Makushin Valley river from the point of discharge). The Alaska Department of Fish and Game ~65- was more concerned with meeting the Alaska Water Quality Criteria at Station MV (downstream from MVB), which was the point immediately upstream of the spawning area of the pink salmon in Makushin Valley River. However, many other water quality and flow rate sampling and monitoring stations were established in Makushin Valley river and its tributaries upstream and downstream of Station MVB to allow the tracing of geothermal fluid through the tributary system and collection of water samples for field and laboratory analysis at the peak concentration of geothermal fluid. Measurements of flow rate, temperature, chloride, conductivity, and other field-measurable water quality parameters were taken at three stations in Makushin Valley river and four stations in Plateau Creek (a very minor tributary to Makushin Valley river). Samples for later laboratory analyses were also collected during the program. The 1984 water quality program was a complement of the 1982 baseline data collection effort and the 1983 well test monitoring effort. Background information regarding water resources characteristics of the project area, drainage basin descriptions, Makushin Volcano geothermal manifestations, and results of 1983 well test monitoring was previously presented in the Phase 1A, 1B and Phase II reports and is not reprinted herein. The baseline sample effort was limited in scope and areal extent compared to the 1982 baseline program, but was similar to the 1983 sample effort. As mentioned, the major focus of the 1984 program was to measure stream water quality and flow to assess potential water quality impacts on receiving streams during geothermal resource well testing. The early July site visit was conducted by both the Dames & Moore subcontractor for water quality and Republic's environmental personnel. Pre-testing baseline water quality and flow data were collected in order to establish the level of -66- environmental impacts created by the well test. Samples were also taken and tests conducted immediately after the well was opened for production testing. Monitoring during the well test continued during the second site visit in early August. During this visit, the well test was completed, and monitoring was continued to determine the degree of impact, if any, caused by the release of geothermal fluid, and the amount of time required for baseline conditions to return after flow from the well was stopped. Permit compliance at ST-1 during 1984 operations was excellent. The results of the 1984 water quality program, as expected, indicated that levels of parameters measured at station MVB during the well test complied with Alaska water quality criteria and the ADEC and EPA permits. Appendix B3 presents all of the data obtained during the 1984 water quality program. Geothermal fluid, at a temperature of approximately 210°F (99°C) and total dissolved solids (TDS) concentration of approximately 7,900 milligrams per liter (mg/1), was discharged over a 34 day period at a maximum rate of 0.11 cubic feet per second (cfs) for the first 15 days, and at a maximum rate of 0.21 cfs for the last 19 days. Rapid atmospheric cooling of the discharge from 210°F (99°C) resulted in a maximum measured temperature of only 81°F (27°C) at Station PCD, the station in a minor tributary to Plateau Creek which was only 300 feet from the well. Water temperatures decreased downstream in Plateau Creek and were near or at baseline levels at the mouth of Plateau Creek prior to its discharge into Makushin Valley river. Only chloride, conductivity, and TDS values were slightly elevated above baseline levels of these parameters in Makushin Valley river immediately downstream from the mouth of Plateau Creek, where the minimum dilution from the -67- well to the station below the mouth of Plateau Creek was 480:1. The minimum dilution factor from the well to station MV was at least 1,200:1. During the course of operations at ST-1, contact with regulatory agencies was necessary to request and obtain approval of revisions to certain permits, to keep the agencies informed of the status of the project, and to discuss details of permit approval conditions as they related to specific field operations. Copies of written correspondence, reports, and applications for permit revisions for ST-1 are included as Appendix B4, as follows: 1) Letter to the Alaska Office of Management and Budget regarding project modifications, stating that previously approved 4-day flow test from ST-1 would not be conducted, dated August 17, 1984. 2) Letter of notification regarding project modifications to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation stating that previously approved 4-day flow test from ST-1 would not be conducted, dated August 24, 1984. 3) Letter to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation requesting a short-term water quality variance for a 2-hour flow test from ST-1, dated August 31, 1984. 4) Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation approval of short-term water quality variance for a two-hour flow test for discharge of geothermal fluid from ST-1, dated September 4, 1984. 5) Letter to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation withdrawing application for disposal of solid wastes from proposed deepening of ST-1, dated September 17, 1984, -68- STAGE III, DRILLING, EVALUATION OF SUGARLOAF HOLE "“A-1" 1. Drilling Equipment The main components of drilling equipment used during the 1984 drilling season consisted of the same equipment which had been used in 1983 for the drilling of the production well ST-1. That equipment had been stored for the '83-'84 winter ina warehouse provided by the Ounalashka Corporation. The warehouse was conveniently located on Mt. Ballyhoo overlooking the Unalaska Airport, and the same warehouse was used throughout the 1984 summer field season as the main storage and staging area for the bulk of drilling equipment and supplies. The core drilling unit consisted of a Longyear 44, capable of drilling a BQ size hole (2.36") to 4,000 feet, and the unit was able to be dismantled for mobilization and demobilization in loads weighing less than 1,400 pounds. The core drill was secured on a 10 foot high base made of a timber framework surrounding the wellhead. During drilling of the deeper part of the hole, the wellhead consisted of a master valve, single gate blowout preventer with pipe rams, flow tee, and a rubber stripper head. 2. Drilling Program The drilling program for A-1 is summarized in Figure 11. After mobilization of the Longyear 44 core rig by helicopter, it was proposed to rotary drill an 8-1/2" hole to 150 feet, set a 5-1/2" 0.0. casing with class "G" cement, and after cement setting, nipple up blowout prevention equipment (BOPE) consisting of a master valve, 6" BOP, flow tee and stripper head. It was planned to then drill out cement with a 4-1/4" rotary bit, and core an NQ size (2.980 inch diameter) hole to a -69- FIGURE:11 SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM OF _ PROPOSED CASING PROGRAM FOR A—1 TEMPERATURE GRADIENT HOLE _ SCREW CAP SURFACE Y CEMENT TOP 20FT. OF ANNULAR SPACE 8 1/2" HOLE 5 1/2” CASING TO 150 FT. 209 FT. (ACTUAL) 1 1/2” GALVANIZED PIPE -—_—— 4 1/2" AND/ OR NQ (2.98”) HOLE e@+————CLABBERED MUD IN HOLE TO T.D. 4300 FF SCREW CAP EXTENDED TO Lt] 2,000 FT. —= “RGI D-147 4 -70- total depth of 1,200 feet. The planned total depth was extended in August 1984 to approximately 2,000 feet. After reaching total depth, it was planned to clabber the drilling fluid with cement, circulate, and run 1-1/2 inch steel tubing to total depth, fill the tubing with water, cap the tubing, and cement the top 20 feet of annular space. It was planned to run a temperature log in the well approximately 10 days after completing the well. 3. Drilling Results a. Summary of Drilling Operations Temperature gradient hole A-1 was spudded on July 22nd and was completed at a total depth of 1,867 feet on August 29, 1984. Appendix Cl describes daily mobilization, drilling and demobilization operations from July 19, 1984 to September 7, 1984. Two 3-man crews were always present, in addition to a drilling manager and mechanic supplied by the drilling subcontractor, which therefore provided for continuous 24 hour drilling operations. After mobilization, which lasted from July 19th to July 22nd, an HQ size hole (3.782") was cored to 150 ft, opened with a 6 inch bit and deepened to 162 feet. The 6 inch hole was then opened with a 7-3/8 inch bit to 162 feet, and after resolving mechanical problems with the rig and the helicopter, and a delay caused by adverse weather conditions, the hole was opened with an 8-1/2" bit. At the depth of 162 feet, the formation was considered too soft to be suitable for the casing shoe and the hole was deepened with the 8-1/2 inch bit to a depth of 210 feet. Surface casing (5-1/2 inch 0D) was cemented at 210 feet, and coring -7T1- with NQ size (2.98 inch OD) started below 210 feet on August 9th. Coring continued to a depth of 346 feet where total loss of circulation occurred, and coring with total loss circulation continued to a depth of approximately 500-550 feet, at which depth the bottom part of the hole started to maintain water. The water level remained at approximately 500 feet during all deeper drilling, and from depths of below 775 feet the core was noticeably warm upon retrieval at the surface. Coring continued with several interruptions due to mechanical breakdowns or bad weather conditions until August 28th. That day, while coring at a depth of 1,867 feet, the core pipe twisted off at 1,500 feet. All of the core pipe was immediately recovered, and it was decided to complete the well at that depth rather than further risk losing the hole. Tubing of 1-1/2" diameter was run to bottom and the top 20 feet was cemented on August 29, 1984. Rigging down, demobilization to Dutch Harbor, and drill site clean-up were completed by September 7, 1984. During the total mobilization-drilling-demobilization operations period of from July 19 to September 7, 1984, a total of 77% of the available time was actually used in beneficial operations. The 23% of “down" time was attributable to mechanical (rig) repairs (10.5%), weather delays (8%), and helicopter repairs (4.5%). b. Geologic Interpretation The examination, description, and sampling of the core of temperature gradient hole A-1 were conducted on a continuous basis in the field. Additionally, 18 samples of lithologic units and altered zones were selected for thin _72— section and microscopic studies. The results of the lithology and hydrothermal alteration studies are summarized in Table 15. As shown in Table 15, the upper 122 feet of rock encountered in A-1 consisted of soil, rubble zones and Quaternary Makushin volcanics, mostly unaltered. Below these volcanic rocks, the hole encountered Miocene rocks belonging to the Unalaska Formation from a depth of 122 feet to 1,603 feet. The Unalaska Formation is here divided in two interlayered rock types, consisting of lavas and volcanic agglomerate. Both rock types have undergone pervasive chloritic alteration, with accompanying Mineralization of epidote, calcite and sulfides, similar to outcrops of the same Unalaska Formation in other areas on Unalaska Island. The rocks of the Unalaska Formation in A-1 are locally transected by seven younger, mostly unaltered dikes probably associated with the Quaternary Makushin volcanic activity. At 1,603 feet, the A-1 gradient hole encountered a fine-grained intrusive formation which has been recognized in outcrops on Unalaska Island and in other geothermal wells and temperature gradient holes as the Unalaska gabbronorite. The gabbronorite is altered ina Manner similar to the Unalaska Formation, displaying overall chloritic alteration. The hydrothermal alteration related to the present geothermal activity in A-1 is masked by a pre-existing alteration of the Tertiary rocks (Unalaska Formation and Unalaska gabbronorite), and therefore the observed mineral assemblage (epidote, chlorite) is representative instead of those higher temperature Tertiary regional metamorphic -73- Depths 0-11' 11'-122' 122'-342' 342'-368' 368'-387.5' 387.5'-429' 429'-533' 533'-573.5' 573.5'-586' TABLE 15 Lithology of A-1 Temperature Gradient Hole Formation & Litholo Surface Deposit Makushin Volcanics Unalaska Lavas Unalaska Dike Unalaska Lavas Makushin Dike Unalaska Lavas Unalaska Volcanic Agglomerate Makushin Dike Rock Description Soil and unconsolidated ash. Black andesitic lavas, poyhyritic locally vesicular, intercalated with rubble zones and lava flow basal brecciated zones. Hydrothermally altered greenish gray andesitic lavas. Mostly fine grained, with plagioclase and few mafic phenocrysts ina fine grained recrystallized groundmass. Fairly common fractures and common mineralized veins. Brecciated zone with argillic alteration at 310'-313'. Light greenish gray fine grained intrusive unit, altered to chlorite. Upper and lower contacts with surrounding rocks are 65° angle. Greenish gray altered lavas similar to interval 122'-342'. Gray andesitic dike with common phenocrysts. Greenish gray altered lavas with altered phenocrysts ina recrystallized groundmass. Light greenish gray altered volcanic agglomerate, with tuffaceous matrix surrounding phenocrysts and angular fragments up to 1/8" size. Gray andesitic dike mostly un- altered with pyroxene phenocrysts. -74- Layered alteration contacts. Hydrothermal Alteration quartz, calcite, pyrite, anhydrite zeolite, epidote, chlorite, local quartz & zeolite Mineralized vugs chlorite, calcite, zeolite, pyrite chlorite, calcite, pyrite calcite veins quartz, calcite, chlorite, epidote, minor calcite vugs chlorite, calcite, epidote, pyrite calcite ee pths 586'-720.5! 720.5'-763! 763'-953! 953'-1021' 1021'-1116! 1116'-1123! 1123'-1199! 1199'-1205' 1205'-1246! 1246'-1254! Formation & Litholo Unalaska Volcanic Agglomerate Makushin Dike Unalaska Volcanic Agglomerate Makushin Dike Unalaska Volcanic Agglomerate Unalaska Lava Unalaska Volcanic Agglomerate Makushin Dike Unalaska Volcanic Agglomerate Makushin Dike Rock Description Massive altered greenish gray volcanic agglomerate, chloritized with pervasive calcite and pyrite, containing angular lithic fragments up to 1-1/2" long. Andesitic dike, mostly unaltered, with pyroxene and plagioclase phenocrysts, and local hydrothermal veins. Massife soft to medium-hard greenish gray altered volcanic agglomerate, with pervasive chloritization and common calcite and pyrite. Local fractured and mineralized zone, and local clay zone from 763' to 788'. Open fractures at 848'. Massive hard andesitic dike similar to interval 720.5'-763', with minor alteration of mafic phenocrysts and local hydrothermal veins. Massive medium-hard greenish gray altered volcanic agglomerate. Brecciated zone at 1047'-1051'. Local silica veins. Black hard altered glassy andesitic lava, with pervasive chloritic alteration. Same as above intervals. Mostly unaltered hard andesitic dike. Same as above intervals. Same as 1199'-1205' interval. -75- Hydrothermal Alteration quartz, chlorite, calcite, pyrite, epidote. Several open fractures with mineralized quartz pyrite, minor chlorite, quartz, laumontite, calcite chlorite, epidote, pyrite, calcite, quartz. Locally open fractures with terminated calcite crystals minor veins with calcite, chlorite calcite, pyrite, chlorite, quartz, anhydrite calcite, pyrite, chlorite Same as above intervals Minor calcite veins chlorite, calcite, pyrite, quartz Minor calcite veins Formation & iths Lithology 1254'-1308' Unalaska Volcanic Agglomerate 1308'-1317.5' Makushin Dike 1317.5'-1350' Unalaska Volcanic Agglomerate and Lavas 1350'-1445' Unalaska Volcanic Agglomerate 1445'-1475' Unalaska Lava 1475'-1525' Unalaska Volcanic Agglomerate and Lavas '5'-1603' Unalaska Lavas 1603'-1867' Unalaska Gabbronor ite Rock Description Same as above intervals. Open fractures from 1257' to 1277'. Same as 1199'-1205' interval. Alternating agglomerate and lava units, pervasively altered to chlorite. Greenish gray altered volcanic agglomerate, same as above intervals. Clay zone at 1402' and 1424'. Altered greenish gray andesitic Javas. Lavas in interval 1465-1475 have glassy groundmass mostly recrystallized. Same lithologies and alteration as above. Altered andesitic lavas, with chloritic and calcite alteration. Open fractures from 1527' - 1535' and at 1602'. Light greenish gray hard fine grained intrusive rock. Probably of gabbronorite composition as described by the Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys. Pervasive chloritic alteration with epidote, common calcite and silica veins. Upper zone near contact with Unalaska Formation contains interfingered hornfels zones. Open fractures at 1621'-1625', 1659'1673'-1677', 1722' and 1741'. -76- Open fracture at 1319'. Hydrothermal Alteration Same as above intervals Minor veins chlorite, calcite, anlydrite, pyrite, silica Same as above chlorite, silica, calcite, anhydrite chlorite, silica calcite, pyrite, anhydrite chlorite, silica, calcite, pyrite, anhydrite, epidote events. In view of the reasonably high temperature gradients now observed in A-1, it is possible that some of the open fractures and veins observed in A-1 may be related to some more recent or current geothermal activity. However, the clear absence of any significant degree of hydrothermal alteration in the recent volcanic dikes in A-1 suggests to us that at best, only a very limited amount of hydrothermal alteration is presently taking place in the Sugarloaf area. c. Temperature Distribution The first temperature survey of A-1 was attempted on September 16, 1984 with a Sperry-Sun thermocouple unit that had recently undergone repairs on site after having been damaged during transportation. The temperatures recorded during this survey indicated a maximum temperature of 507°F at 1800 feet, and the unusually high values recorded were suspected to be incorrect and attributable to instrumental error. A new series of temperature measurements were therefore obtained in A-1 from October 6-8, 1984 with both an Envirolab Thermistor unit and a Kuster tool operated by Otis Engineering. The results of these measurements are listed in Table 16 and are shown on Figure 12, along with a summary of the lithology. As shown in Figure 12, the Kuster tool temperature measurement of October 7, 1984 is approximately 10°F lower than the overlapping thermistor tool temperature measurement at 1,025 feet obtained the previous day. That Kuster survey data is also approximately 10°F lower than the Kuster survey results that repeated the bottom three measurements in the 1,700-1,850 foot interval on October 8, 1984. It is reasonable to assume, we believe, that all of the October 7, 1984 values are 10°F lower than actual. -71- TABLE 16 TEMPERATURE SURVEY RESULTS A-l THERMAL GRADIENT HOLE, SUGARLOAF Temperature Temperature Temperature (Thermistor Survey) (Kuster Survey) (Kuster Survey) 10/6/84 10/7/84 10/8/84 DEPTH DEG C DEG F DEG C DEG F DEG C DEG F 0 0.0 32.0 75 17.9 64.2 100 24.4 75.9 125 31.7 89.1 150 34.5 94.1 175 38.0 100.4 200 39.5 103.1 225 40.7 105.3 250 48.0 118.4 275 53.7 134.1 300 58.0 136.4 325 61.0 141.8 335 98.5 209.3 350 99.3 210.7 375 99.3 210.7 400 99.3 210.7 425 99.3 210.7 450 99.3 210.7 475 99.3 210.7 500 99.3 210.7 525 99.3 210.7 550 99.3 210.7 575 99.3 210.7 600 99.3 210.7 625 99.3 210.7 650 99.3 210.7 675 LH 99.3 210.7 700 99.4 ~ 210.9 725 99.4 210.9 750 99.4 210.9 775 99.4 210.9 800 99.5 211.1 Ly 825 99.5 211.1 850 99.5 211.1 875 99.5 211.1 900 104.5 220.5 925 112.6 234.7 950 120.8 249.4 975 124.6 256.3 1000 128.2 262.8 1025 131.3 268.3 123.3 254.0 1100 124.9 256.8 (Clock Malfunction) 1200 129.9 265.9 1300 134.6 274.2 1400 134.6 274.2 1500 159.6 319.3 1600 165.6 330.1 1700 170.2 338.3 176.2 349.2 1800 174.1 345.4 180.7 357.2 TD (1865) 180.9 357.7 186.7 368.0 -78- FIGURE: 12 LITHOLOGY AND TEMPERATURE PROFILE OF TEMPERATURE GRADIENT HOLE A-1 DEPTH LITHOLOGY FRACTURES TEMPERATURE °F az Yaa LJ 7Aph yh ses Mala THERMISTOR SURVEY (10-6-84) a +ooeeeee te eoeeres beeeeoes beeeeoee to reeeee te oereeee eoeeeres Heeeeoes seeseses =] MAKUSHIN LAVAS Steceees [550 MAKUSHIN SOIL HORIZONS teereres E==3 MAKUSHIN GABBRONORITE See eer ee CSEaa UNALASKA VOLCANIC AGGLOMERATE ([2252 UNALASKA LAVAS SEER UNALASKA DIKE VOLCANIC DIKE AGI E-1721 -79- Figure 12 shows three apparent temperature gradient regimes in A-1. From the surface to a depth of 325 feet the average temperature gradient is approximately 35°F/100 ft. Between 325 feet and 335 feet the temperature reaches about 211°F and maintains the same value to a depth of 875 feet. Below 875 feet, the temperature gradient averages 15°F/100 ft. to TD (1867 ft.), where a bottom hole temperature of 368°F was recorded. These results are interpreted in the next section by comparison with the data from well ST-1 and temperature gradient hole E-1. d. Temperature Data Interpretation To interpret the temperature data in A-1, it is necessary to review the temperature data collected in 1982, 1983 and 1984 for temperature gradient hole E-1 and for well ST-1. The data for E-1 are shown on Figure 13, which shows that in 1982, approximately 5 weeks after completing the hole, the temperature gradient from 200 to 800 feet equilibrated in a fairly constant gradient of about 30°F/100 ft. As shown on Figure 13, the temperatures measured in 1983 and 1984 form a 250 feet isothermal zone above a depth of 675 feet, with a uniform temperature of 210-211°F. This isothermal zone may be interpreted as follows: at depths below 750 feet, the water in E-1 is at the equilibrated temperature; the water level in the E-1 tubing is at a depth of 675 feet, where it boils under atmospheric pressure at a temperature of 210-211°F, and the vented steam warms up approximately 250 feet of interval, above which condensation and cooling from the surrounding rocks steeply brings the temperature back to the observed original gradient. -80- -19- DEPTH (Feet) FIGURE: 13 DETAILED TEMPERATURE DISTRIBUTION IN TEMPERATURE GRADIENT HOLE E-1 (From 1982 to 1984) TEMPERATURE (°F) 200 AGI E 1720 The similarity of the E-1 temperature gradient curves to those measured in A-1, especially within the 200 feet to 1,000 feet depth interval, strongly suggests that A-1 also has an artificially induced isothermal zone formed by boiling of water, under atmospheric pressure at a temperature of approximately 211°F, at a depth of 875 feet. This depth corresponds to an elevation of 625 feet above sea level, which compares to the water table elevation of 575 feet above sea level in E-1. Moreover, calculations for ST-1 show that the apparent water level in this well would be at 600 feet above sea level, which closely corresponds to the values for E-1 and A-1. The interpreted "real" equilibrated thermal gradient in A-1 is shown in Figure 12, and it can be seen that the gradient in A-1 gradually decreases from approximately 35°F/100 ft. at shallow depths to approximately 15°F/100 ft. in the deeper part of the well. 4, Environmental Impact Mitigation and Monitoring and Regulatory Compliance As with the activities at ST-1, the drilling of Sugar loaf temperature gradient hole A-1 was also monitored by Republic's environmental personnel and the water quality specialist subcontracted to Republic's environmental subcontractor, Dames and Moore. Two site visits at A-1 were made during the 1984 field season: one in early August, soon after the spudding of the A-1 hole; and one in early September, which coincided with the rigging down, demobilization of equipment, and drill site clean-up operations. -B2- The primary purpose of these field inspections was to assure permit compliance of the drilling operations. The operations area was inspected and found to be both in compliance with the permit conditions and to be creating no more than the anticipated environmental impacts, with one significant exception described later. Waste disposal of drilling muds and cuttings at the site was conducted in the manner prescribed by the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. Four solid waste pits were dug: two filled with waste material and subsequently covered, a percolation pit for waste liquids, and an overflow pit “downstream" to catch any accidental runoff. The tundra mat removed to dig the pits was stockpiled during drilling and was replaced as practicably as possible when the operations were terminated. The exception to the project's creating no more environmental impact than anticipated was an accidental discharge of a slurry of water and cement from the drilling operations at the A-1 site. Approximately 160 gallons of material flowed from the drillsite, down a small gully, over a cliff, and into Sugarloaf Canyon Creek adjacent to the drillsite. It was estimated that no more than ten gallons of material found its way into the creek; most of the material was deposited in the gully and on the cliff face. Other than its unsightly appearance, it was and is not believed that any appreciable environmental damage took place. The cause of the spill was a significant excess of water and cement discharged into the mud pits during the normal casing cementing process. These excess returns (as they are known) resulted from an overestimation by the drilling crew of the amount of water needed to displace the cement into the annulus (the space between the casing and the wall of the hole) during the setting of casing in the hole. The pit capacity was -83- sufficient to retain all of the excess returns except the estimated 160 gallons. Additional pit capacity was provided and the casing was correctly cemented. Cleanup of the accessible portions of the spill was completed, and the material was disposed of in existing mud pits. Both Federal and State regulatory agencies were notified of the spill and were provided a status report of the subsequent clean-up operations. In anticipation of a possible well flow test from the A-1 hole, baseline water quality monitoring was initiated in Sugar loaf Canyon Creek adjacent to the drilling site. Appendix B3 presents all of the data obtained during the 1984 water quality program, including the baseline data collected for Sugar loaf Canyon Creek. During the course of operations at A-1, contact with regulatory agencies was necessary to comply with conditions of approval of various permits, to request and obtain approval of revisions to certain permits, to keep the agencies informed of the status of the project, and to discuss details of permit approval conditions as they related to specific field operations. Copies of written correspondence, reports, and applications for permit revisions for A-1 are included as Appendix C2, as follows: 1) Letter to the Alaska Office of Management and Budget regarding project modifications, including the deepening of the A-1 hole from 1,200 to 2,000 feet, dated August 17, 1984. -B4- 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) 8) 9) Letter to the Alaska Department of Natural Resources requesting changes to existing drilling permit 84-2 to deepen the A-1 hole to 2,000 feet, dated August 17, 1984. July Monthly Report of Drilling and Workover Operations, submitted to the Alaska Department of Natural Resources on August 20, 1984. Letter of Notification to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation regarding the small spill of water and cement from drilling of A-1, dated August 21, 1984. Alaska Department of Natural Resources approval of revisions to existing permit 84-2 regarding deepening of A-1 hole, dated August 23, 1984. Letter to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency requesting permission to discharge geothermal fluids from a well test of A-1, dated August 24, 1984. Letter to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation requesting a Short-Term Water Quality Variance for a flow test of A-1 hole, dated August 24, 1984. Copy of memorandum from the Alaska Department of Fish and Game to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation giving Fish and Game's approval for discharge of geothermal fluids from A-1, dated August 27, 1984. Letter to Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation withdrawing application for Short-Term Water Quality Variance at A-1, dated August 31, 1984. -85- D. STAGE IV, DEEPEN AND TEST WELL ST-1 Republic and the APA were continuously evaluating the data being obtained during the long-term testing of ST-1, and the drilling progress of A-1, in order to decide what, if any, operational changes should be made with regard to the allocation of drilling contractor time. Three factors lead to the joint final decision to not attempt to plug off, deepen and retest ST-1, but to instead allocate all of the available drilling contractor time and efforts to drill A-1 as deep as possible. First, the flow testing of ST-1 was indicating that the existing completion interval was connected to a very large reservoir of commercial size and character, and the likelihood of encountering a different higher temperature reservoir within 500 feet of the existing bottomhole depth was reasonably low. Second, the value of preserving ST-1 for future testing and demonstration purposes was viewed to have considerable practical significance to the project, in light of the highly successful test results. And third, it was concluded that by reprogramming the drilling contractor time, to stay at A-1, substantially more useful information would be obtained by drilling significantly deeper than the originally programmed depth of 1,200 feet. As a result, A-1 was successfully drilled to a total depth of 1,867 feet. -B86- STAGE V, ELECTRICAL RESISTIVITY SURVEY 2 Survey Program Design Following the successful testing of confirmation well ST-1 in 1983, a principal objective of Phase III became the delineation of the geothermal resource boundaries surrounding ST-1. Especially important is the boundary toward the Sugar loaf area where development costs would be substantially lower than at or near the ST-1 site. Republic's staff investigated the various geological, geochemical and geophysical methods potentially capable of delineating the resource and concluded that geophysical techniques could best define the resource boundaries. The specific geophysical techniques evaluated for the Makushin geophysical survey consisted of electrical resistivity, electro-magnetic, magnetotelluric and micro-earthquake. Combining field data collection logistics with the technique's ability to meet the objectives of the survey, Republic selected the E-SCAN electrical resistivity technique for the Phase III Stage V geophysical survey. E-SCAN is a semi-automated method for measuring conventional electrical resistivity in grid coverage. £-SCAN surveys utilize remote electronic switches to rapidly connect the selected two electrodes into the resistance measuring grid. This switching allows optimum coverage in rough terrain, quicker data collection, larger lateral search and resolution, and multi-directional electrical sectioris in any orientation. These positive features combined with the steep topography in the Makushin Volcano area lead to the selection of an E-SCAN survey to collect the electrical resistivity data. -87- The basic spacing between the electrodes determines the depth and degree of resolution in a E-SCAN resistivity survey. If deep features are the targets and overlying rock is electrically uniform, then large spacings can be used. If resolution of narrow or shallow structures is required, or if the near-surface geology is variable, then a short distance between electrodes is required. Generally, the minimum distance between electrodes in a full grid E-SCAN survey is 200 to 600 meters. At Makushin, a nominal 300 meter minimum grid spacing was selected to compensate for both the complex surficial geology and to define narrow structures (faults). Logistic and scheduling considerations, including weather and helicopter availability coupled with the desire to conduct the survey after snow melt, dictated that the best time frame for conducting this survey would be late in the summer, in August. This schedule provided time to construct "standby" equipment, and it allowed almost all the the equipment to be shipped by boat at a greatly reduced rate. The area to be covered by the E-SCAN survey on Makushin Volcano was determined by Republic's staff who utilized and incorporated the suggestions of Premier Geophysics. The main criteria controlling the survey boundaries were 1) known reservoir occurrence (ST-1), 2) desire to define resource boundaries in the Sugarloaf and Upper Makushin Valley areas, 3) terrain, and 4) budget. Geologic conditions indicated that the plutonic stock and the northeast thermal lineament between Fumaroles #1, #2,’ and #3 should be the E-SCAN survey's initial target. Naturally, this area coincided with the known resource area (criteria #1) in the vicinity of the confirmation well ST-1. The potential cost savings of developing a geothermal resource in the Sugarloaf or -88- Lower Makushin Valley areas, as opposed to the ST-1 area, dictated that a resource boundary definition and an estimation of the production potential in these areas be undertaken. Terrain conditions limited the survey to only those areas that could possibly undergo geothermal development. This removed the upper slopes of Makushin Volcano from the survey. The final constraint on the E-SCAN survey boundaries was the available budget. Money allocated for the survey limited the field operation period to approximately 35 days. Premier estimated that a survey grid with about 300 stations could be conducted in this time. It was then determined that this would result in a survey area of approximately 12 square miles, a size sufficient to meet all the basic objectives of the resistivity survey. The method of electrode site planning within the survey area involved overlaying the 300 meter grid onto a topographic map and then adjusting electrode locations to accessible positions nearby. When the grid was in place, a location map was constructed. In addition, two “infinite” reference electrodes are required at some considerable distance from the survey area, at distances equal to about 5 times the length of the largest pole-pole array separation planned for the survey. Their locations were planned to be at Driftwood Bay and within lower Makushin Valley. 2. Survey Recording By early July, 1984, Premier had obtained and shipped all the wire and equipment necessary to conduct the data collection phase of the E-SCAN survey. The six-man field crew arrived in Dutch Harbor in late July and during the following 37 days the Premier crew mobilized the equipment from Dutch Harbor to camp, -89- installed a 274 station grid, made over 13,000 pole-pole readings, calculated apparent resistivities, plotted the apparent resistivities, and demobilized the crew and equipment back to Dutch Harbor. A typical field day began with checking the grid wiring for continuity, which frequently showed broken wires caused by the chewing of ground squirrels. As crew members located and repaired these breaks, the remaining crew continued to expand the grid. After the repairs were complete, pole-pole data recording began and continued throughout the day. Normally over 700 measurements were made during recording days. The current portion of a pole-pole reading was a 0.25 Hz, DC, reversing square wave. The current levels ranged from 0.1 to 2.5 DC amps. A single pole-pole measurement consisted of Measuring a group of 11 transmitted waves. When the signal to noise ratio was considered insufficient, three additional groups of 11 wave forms were measured. The signals were then averaged with the mean used as the reported value if the standard deviation was acceptable. Of the 13,000 pole-pole recordings attempted, the signal to noise ratio was adequate to accept a total of 10,570 recordings. 3. Survey Results The gabbronorite reservoir rock should exhibit a range of resistivities typical of granitic intrusions, with variations dependent upon the degree of fracturing, alteration, the temperature and the entrained fluids. Fresh, unfractured gabbronorite should exhibit resistivities of 3,000 to 20,000 ohm-meters. Unaltered, fractured gabbronorite saturated with fresh water ideally will yield resistivities in the 500 ohm-meter range. Higher temperatures and the presence of -90- alteration should lower the resistance to 50 + 25 ohm-meter in the reservoir. In the survey area, non-reservoir rocks should all be greater than 100 ohm-meters. Calculated apparent resistivity maps of the survey area are provided at the four sequential depth intervals of 200-500 m, 500-1000 m, 1000-1500 m, 1500-2000 m, and the all encompassing 200-2000 m depth interval in Premiers' 1984 final report, together with 95 (vertical) pseudosections of apparent resistivity (Appendix £1). The apparent resistivity data and their accompanying figures were preliminarily interpreted by Premier in that report. Premier's recommendation at that time was for a limited amount of further study of the data using 1-, 2-, and 2-1/2 dimensional computer-assisted methods of modeling the resistivity structure of the area, where such methods appear to be useful in describing the structure to drill-siting levels of confidence. This supplementary work was approved to be undertaken, and a (second) March 10, 1985 report was prepared by Premier (Appendix £2). The final major exploration conclusions of Premier Geophysics are summarized in Figure 14. A central north-south striking fault zone divides the survey area into two different regimes. The eastern portion has relatively higher resistivities while the same rock units in the western zone exhibit resistivity signatures 2 to 10 times lower. This central fault zone may mark the eastern limit of the “large scale hydrothermal regime which has altered, and may continue to heat anomalously, the whole of the survey area to the west". The main reservoir area, which is the main low resistivity anomaly in the total survey area, occurs south of Fox Canyon and within the camp site location (Area A, Figure 14). ST-1 is situated within this anomaly. The conductive core of the -91- Reproduced from 4-colour original REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL INC wie soa raul GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION ay Ja RCN 7 PROJECT Vek. UNALASKA ISLAND, ALASK E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SURV MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA JULY, AUGUST, 1984 eer SUMMARY OF SURVEY FINDINGS, n, . PRELIMINARY INTERPRETATION ata COMPLETED. *_QBRIFTWOOD + 2 KEY TO REFERENCES IN REPORT c+ : ys 1 se WALLEY ree AEN FS RESISTIVITY CONTACT OR FAULT IMPLICATION DERIVE FROM SHALLOW (<700 METEF DATA ONLY. NO STRUCTURS INFERENCES FROM DEEPER DATA ARE SHOWN. + SURVEY ELECTRODE SITE e ODARILL HOLE SITE KILOMETERS 0.5 i : THOUSAND FEET o i 2 3 4 5 cp fd PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC VANCOUVER, CANADA Figure # 14 » WAS ‘waxusyans | ee : VALLEY), | - NT g reservoir ranges from 20 to 50 ohm-meters. The reservoir extends for at least several kilometers beyond the limits of the survey area to the south and west, but the north and east boundaries are defined by the modeled survey data. The reservoir's northern boundary is placed at the south edge of Fox Canyon, separating Area A from Area C. This boundary is described as a sloping south-dipping (fault ?) feature that passed through the production zone of ST-1 and then passes several hundred meters below the 1500 ft. (457 m) deep bottom of hole "E-1". The reservoir's eastern limit is positioned only 1,000 feet (300m) east of ST-1 and is represented by a vertical or near vertical boundary, separating Area A from Area B. Modeling (2-D) of resistivity data in the Fox Canyon area (Area C), the Sugarloaf and Hole "A-1" area (Area D), and the surveyed portions of Lower Makushin Valley (Area E) have resulted in Premier's conclusion that no electrical indications of significant geothermal activity have been observed and that no potentially commercial geothermal resources are thought to underlie these areas. -93- STAGE VI, DEMOBILIZATION i Equipment and Inventory Following the simultaneous completion of drilling operations at A-1 and the conclusion of the resistivity survey, the demobilization and removal of all equipment was begun from the operations sites at Makushin. All drilling contractor equipment, and the drilling supplies and specialized equipment owned by APA (with the exception of the installed ST-1 wellhead equipment) were airlifted to the Ounalashka Corporation warehouse facility at Dutch Harbor. A detailed inventory was prepared by Republic's drilling supervisor of all APA-owned items, and this listing (Appendix F1) was sent to APA in Anchorage. In addition, all rented drilling equipment was loaded on Sea-Land vans for return to Anchorage. All camp contractor equipment was similarly removed from the campsite, and site restorations were begun. 2. Site Restoration Topsoil which had been stockpiled during the process of excavating soil for solid waste disposal pits at the drill sites was replaced over areas that had been cleared of vegetation to aid in more natural revegetation. The stockpiled tundra mat removed to dig the pits was also replaced as part of the site restoration process. Tundra grass killed or injured (distinguished by its brown color) is expected to revegetate naturally within one to two growing seasons without corrective action. -94- Some of the permits discussed in Section 4.A.1. had conditions of approval which required notification to the agency after field work was completed. Reports filed or letters written to comply with such permit conditions are included as Appendix F2, as follows: 1) August Monthly Report of Drilling and Workover Operations, submitted to the Alaska Department of Natural Resources, dated October 9, 1984. 2) September Monthly Report of Drilling and Workover Operations, submitted to the Alaska Department of Natural Resources, dated October 9, 1984. 3) Letter to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in compliance with Special Use Permit No. AI-84-017, dated November 12, 1984. 3. Well Suspension In September 1984, the Alaska Department of Natural Resources approved the suspension of Makushin ST-1 with a stipulation that the well be monitored by the Alaska Power Authority on a monthly basis for the first three months and quarterly thereafter, and that an inspection report be filed with the agency upon completion of each trip. Steps were taken in September to leave the well ina condition that it would: (1) be mechanically safe until the start up of future operations; and (2) require minimal preliminary work prior to initiation of further operations. With these objectives in mind, the following suspension steps were accomplished: -95- 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) After the drilling equipment was removed, the 10-foot-high timber substructure was left intact so as to provide protection for the wellhead and minimize future rig-up time; As a safety measure, a second ANSI 600 master valve was installed above the primary valve; Both master valves were winterized to avoid any possibility of freezing and its consequences; A 50-foot, 2-inch diameter "kill line" was attached to the expansion spool and laid away from the well; A bleed line was installed so that excessive pressure could be relieved; Although it was not dismantled, the flow line was disconnected from the wellhead so as to minimize drag in the event that a damaging avalanche or snowslide should occur. Actual Schedule of Project Operations Figure 15 illustrates the actual schedule of 1984 field operations, including all subcontractor operations provided for in the project program. Comparison with Figure 1, the original schedule of these Phase III operations, indicates that all operations were begun and completed essentially on time, recognizing the conscious decision made by the APA for Republic to not undertake Stage IV and to instead deepen the Sugar loaf (Stage III) hole. -96- -16- FIGI : 15 ACTUAL PHASE III PROJECT OPERATIONS SCHEDULE (1984) STAGE | STAGE II STAGE III STAGE IV STAGE V STAGE VI STAGE VII ease ale —_ MOBILIZATION ; INCLUDES RIG MOVE ret ea 39 56 58 UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION PROJECT PROJECT SITE OPERATION DAYS (1984) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 REMOVE EQUIPMENT 4 | 34 DAY FLOW TEST OF ST-1 PRESSURE BUILD UP : zITTTITTIitTirt ttt tt i DRILL SUGARLOAF HOLE LAY BREF canoer nesnry sme ' CONDUCT RESISTIVITY BEF eanovernensnwy sumer | INSTALL EQUIPMENT, RUN SURVEYS MOBILIZE PICK UP, DEMOBILIZE EQuiP. } eo | EQUIPMENT, } eo | REPORTS —>— FULL FIELD CAMP SERVICE JULY 1 AUGUST 1 SEPTEMBER 1 ACTUAL DATES AGI E 1728 Project site operations began on July 1, the first survey of ST-1 was made on July 3, the flow test started on July 5 and ended on August 8, the drilling of Sugarloaf A-1 began on July 22 and ended on August 29, and the resistivity survey began on August 2 and ended on August 27. All equipment and personnel were demobilized by September 17. 5. Accounting of Project Costs Table 17 is a copy of the Phase III project costs through the end of May, 1985. All costs applicable to Stages I through VI are complete. Comparison with Table 1, the original Phase III project budget, indicates that most operations were completed below budget, again recognizing the conscious decision to reallocate funds from Stage IV to Stage III. The $34,000 cost overrun of Stage V, the resistivity survey, is attributable to the decision to have Premier Geophysics undertake a second (additional) phase of data processing and interpretation. Although the reporting costs of Stage VII are presently incomplete, it is certain that the final total costs of Phase III will not exceed the original budgeted amount of $1,033,340. -98- -66- TABLE 17 June 12, 1985 PHASE III (Includes al] RGI invoices to APA UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION PROJECT EXPENDITURES through #372 dated (CUMULATIVE THROUGH MAY, 1985) June 12, 1985) Stage I Stage II Stage III Stage IV Stage V Stage VI Stage VII Mobilization § ST-1 Long- Drill TGH Deepen & Resistivity Demobilization Interim & Term Testing Sugarloaf Test ST-1 Survey Final Report Total Republic Labor $ 16,988.32 $ 43,405.14 $ 30,225.82 $ 4,215.40 $ 10,998.28 $ 6,771.59 $ 72,504.58 $ 185,109.13 (RDC Labor) 2,454. 8,452.00 12,680.00 -0- 4,226.00 1,362.00 -0- 35,174.00 Subtotal Labor 19,442.32 51,857.14 42,905.82 4,215.40 15,224.28 14,133.59 72,504.58 220,283.13 Republic Travel 3,844.76 14,091.43 6,878.47 -0- 730.98 3,210.95 28,756.59 Dames & Moore 1,399.30 9,450.72 8,192.98 129.8) 1,820.35 5,256.85 26,250.01 Drilling 9,750.00 140,037.77 -0- 5,250.00 155,037.77 Well Testing 35,945.06 -0- 35,945.06 Helicopter 33,562.93 24,461.20 57,214.18 -0- 40,896.14 22,755.70 178,890.15 Resistivity Survey 145,876.32 145,876.32 Camp 16,957.80 14,274.50 20,452.61 -0- 9,011.90 18,436.69 79,133.50 Chemical Analysis 3,735.02 -0- -0- 3,735.02 Prof. Liab. Insurance 5,622.62 5,622.62 Communications 1,530.76 1,851.00 2,353.49 -0- 281 .00 121.32 6,137.57 Other 5,166.65 2,978.64 29,136.06 -0- 2,795.24 5,778.66 1,687.89 47,543.14 Subtotal 97,277.14 158,644.71 307,171.38 4,345.21 214,815.86 71,507.26 79,449.32 933,210.88 Corp. G&A (4.5%) 4,377.47 7,139.01 13,822.71 195.53 9,666.73 3,217.83 3,575.21 41,994.49 Total 101,654.61 165, 783.72 320,994.09 4,540.74 224,482.59 _ 74,725.09 83,024.53 975,205.37 INTEGRATED RESOURCE EVALUATION THE MAKUSHIN GEOTHERMAL SYSTEM MODEL The results of three years of geothermal exploration in the Makushin Volcano area can be integrated into a general model of the geothermal system present. Earlier models of the geothermal system reported in April 1983 and 1984 (See RGI Reports to APA, Phase IB and II) can be substantially improved by the Phase III results of long-term testing of ST-1, the drilling of A-1, and the resistivity survey of the northern part of the Makushin area. Geothermal system models are characterized by a heat source, a heat transfer mechanism, a reservoir fluid and its chemical composition, a reservoir rock, and a plumbing system. These geothermal system properties are described below: The heat source of the Makushin geothermal system is the buried, partly molten, magma body that is genetically related to the recent Makushin volcanic suite. This heat source was still molten after the last glacial period, approximately 3,000-4,000 years ago, and the 14 historic eruptions of Makushin Volcano suggest that molten or semi-molten rock is likely to still exist beneath the mountain. The mechanism for enthalpy transfer from this heat source to a Makushin geothermal system is dominantly conductive heat flow. This is indicated by the stable isotopes of the thermal waters, the isotopic composition of steam from Makushin's summit, and the carbon isotopes of fumarolic methane. The Makushin geothermal system discovered in upper Makushin Valley is a 382°F liquid-dominated resource, consisting of a simple NaCl type water of relatively low salinity having 5820 ppm of dissolved solids. Gases associated with the resource are dominated -100- by carbon dioxide (173 ppm), with the remaining noncondensable gases consisting of nitrogen, hydrogen sulfide, argon, hydrogen, methane and helium in decreasing order of abundance. The reservoir waters rise upward (convect) and boil at an elevation of about 500 feet above sea level in localized open fractures to form a steam cap that is limited in size and extent. Leakage of steam from this cap feeds the fumaroles identified in the central parts of the Makushin Geothermal Area, and mixes with ground waters to form chloride-poor thermal waters. Reservoir waters also mix on the edges of the system with ground waters before surfacing as chloride-rich hot springs in Glacier Valley and in Driftwood Bay valley. We believe that this Makushin geothermal reservoir is situated primarily within the Makushin gabbronorite stock at commercially exploitable depths. However, it is possible that beneath and to the west of Makushin Volcano's summit crater another reservoir or reservoirs may exist within the Makushin Volcanics or the Unalaska Formation rocks. An impermeable seal for the reservoir exists, comprised of clayey, altered volcanic rocks, and chemical precipitates which have "self-sealed" the gabbronorite, as seen in temperature gradient hole E-1 and Makushin ST-1. We further believe that the specific location of the discovered Makushin geothermal reservoir within the gabbronorite stock is structurally controlled by a major north striking fracture zone. Resistivity data indicate that this fault zone is located approximately 3,500 feet east of ST-1. Contemporary seismicity and recent movement along this and other fault zones in the area maintains the permeability of the fractures in the present-day geothermal reservoir. These fault zones also are responsible for localizing the majority of the surface geothermal manifestations. -101- Finally, we conclude that there are two subparallel structures that intersect the north-trending zone and which expand the area of the Makushin geothermal reservoir. These are an inconspicuous east-west striking fracture zone that expands the reservoir beneath Fumarole Fields #3, #4, #5, and #23, and a northwest-trending fracture on the south edge of Fox Canyon that may extend the reservoir towards Fumarole Field #7. This latter feature is interpreted from geophysical data to be a major south-dipping northern boundary of the geothermal system tapped by ST-1. Assuming that these three fracture systems control the extent of the resource, the commercially exploitable reservoir in the Makushin geothermal area might well cover approximately 5 square miles. -102- 6. PROJECT DEVELOPMENT In order to recommend a geothermal project development plan for Unalaska Island, it is necessary to consider numerous factors in addition to the identified resource characteristics. For example, the power conversion processes available, how each process relates to the resource characteristics to yield generating potential estimates, the load and scheduling requirements of the island, and the relative costs of each development scenario. The "optimum" development plan can then be selected and detailed cost estimates can be generated for the recommended plan. A. ESTIMATED ELECTRICAL GENERATING POTENTIAL 1 Power Conversion Processes The conversion of hydrothermal energy from a Makushin-type liquid-dominated geothermal resource into electrical power can be accomplished by any one of the following technologically proven processes: Flash Steam In the flash steam process, steam is produced from the geothermal fluid by reducing the pressure of the fluid below the saturated liquid pressure. The steam is then used to directly power a turbine, which in turn drives an electric generator. Both single and double flash systems are available. -103- Binary In the binary process, a low boiling point fluid, such as freon or isobutane, is passed through a heat exchanger where it is vaporized by proximity to the geothermal brine. The superheated vapor is then used to power a turbine, which in turn drives an electric generator. Hybrid In the hybrid process, part of the geothermal fluid is flashed into steam which is used to drive a steam turbine-generator. The residual fluid is then used to vaporize a low boiling point fluid through a heat exchanger. The superheated vapor produced is then used to power a second turbine-generator. Total Flow In the total flow process, all of the geothermal fluid is expanded through a mechanical device which converts both thermal and kinetic energy of the well fluid into shaft work (torque). This shaft work is then used to drive an electric generator. Makushin Well Power Capacity Figures 16 and 17 illustrate the relative efficiencies of the five available power conversion systems applied to Makushin well conditions. For example, assuming a 16 inch diameter well (Figure 17) at the site of ST-1 and a wellhead pressure of 75 psia, the same well flow of 1,860,000 1b/hr can be used to generate 9.0 MW by using the single flash steam process, or -104- WELLHEAD PRESSURE — PSIA FIGURE: 16 POTENTIAL NET POWER GENERATION OF A MAKUSHIN PRODUCTION WELL (With 13 3/8” diameter casing) 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 WELL FLOW (In 1000 Ibs/hr) RG! E 1684 -105- POTENTIAL NET POWER GENERATION — MW 150 140 130 120 110 100 © o 80 70 60 50 WELLHEAD PRESSURE —'PSIA 40 30 20 10 FIGURE: 17 POTENTIAL NET POWER GENERATION OF A MAKUSHIN PRODUCTION WELL (With 16” diameter casing) Cory LIZ a + + . J | I L a | “ AVE - RAGE WELL- CHART | ACTER Sy if ICs_Z1 < oc & ls Nv “3. | f | Ae lz |G FZMKK is_| ay » S7> | tS y Ss SKS 62 A PA wy és AC 1= zg > AV, RK a ix x Ss ot _| a ° Gy | a 7 7 : i | | | | 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 WELLFLOW (In 1000 !bs/hr) —106- 15 14 13 12 11 10 POTENTIAL NET POWER GENERATION — MW 11.4 MW with the double flash process, or 12.0 MW with the total flow process, or a maximum of 14.0 to 14.1 MW by using either the binary or hybrid cycle process. B. PRELIMINARY ECONOMIC ANALYSES The geothermal power conversion process data have already been incorporated into several recently completed reconnaissance studies that investigate the apparent economic effect of developing the Makushin geothermal reservoir to supply the present and future electrical needs of the communities of Dutch Harbor and Unalaska. These studies, starting with a determination of the present load requirements and the selection of several alternative projections of future demand growth, analyze the costs of using each of the various power generation technologies available to individually meet at least part if not all of the community energy requirements. The available technologies include (presently used) diesel-powered generators, hydroelectric systems, and technically-proven geothermal systems. The most recent of these preliminary studies, completed in April 1985 by the Alaska Power Authority itself, concludes that either of two geothermal power system plans, both of which would use diesel generators for only peaking and backup, appear to be more economic than the use of diesel generators alone as the source of electric power for Unalaska and Dutch Harbor. That conclusion is supported by other studies, and the report's recommendation to now undertake a detailed feasibility study is certainly justified and appropriate. -107- APPENDIX A PERMIT APPLICATIONS AND APPROVALS REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL. INC. 11823 EAST SLAUSON AVENUE, SUITE ONE SANTA FE SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 90670 TWX 910-586-1696 (213) 945-3661 June 5, 1984 Mr. Fred Zeillemaker Refuge Manager, Aleutian Islands Units U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Post Office Box 5251 NAVASTA FPO Seattle, Washington 98791 Dear Mr. Zeillemaker: Please accept this letter and the attached Exhibit A as our application for a Special Use Permit to conduct geothermal resource exploratory operations on the eastern flanks of Makushin Volcano on Unalaska Island. This Application is for a third year of operations under Republic's contract with the Alaska Power Authority (APA). During the 1984 field season Republic is proposing to: 1) drill to approximately 1,200 feet the temperature gradient hole (A-l, Sugarloaf) previously approved, but not yet drilled, under Special Use Permit AI-83-27; 2) test Makushin sT-l for approximately 40 days; 3) deepen Makushin ST-1 approximately 500 feet and then test again for about 4 days; and 4) conduct an electrical resis- tivity survey. A detailed description of the proposed operations is attached to this letter as Exhibit A. Attached as Attachments I and II to Exhibit A are letters from The Aleut Corporation and the Ounalashka Corporation giving their concurrence to the operations proposed under the APA contract. Republic is also concurrently applying for all other permits required to conduct the 1984 field operations. A list of these permits is contained in Exnibit A. To the best of our knowledge and belief, this proposed project is consistent with the Alaska Coastal Zone Management Program. REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL. INC. Mr. Fred Zeillemaker June 5, 1984 Page Two We currently plan to commence the exploratory operations on approximately July l. Should you have any questions or concerns about this application, please do not hesitate to contact us or Republic's environmental subcontractor's representative, Mr. Steve Grabacki of Dames and Moore (800 Cordova, Anchorage, Alaska 99501; (907) 279-0673). We appreciate your consideration of this request for a Special Use Permit. Sincerely, ypu = O u L LE f ¥ —_ fA AS TER, NS OY) Dwight L. Carey we Manager, Environmental Affairs DLC: acw Attachments cc: S. Grabacki, Dames and Moore J. Heesch, ACZMP Ps REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL. INC. 11823 EAST SLAUSON AVENUE SANTA FE SPRINGS. CALIFORNIA 90670 910-586-1696 (213) 945-366 June 6, 1984 Mr. Jack Heesch . Alaska Office of Management and Budget 3301 Eagle Street, Suite 307 Anchorage, AK 99503 Dear Mr. Heesch: Republic Geothermal, Inc., under a contract with the Alaska Power Authority, is preparing for the third summer of field operations for the Unalaska Geothermal Project on Makushin Volcano on Unalaska Island. During the 1984 field season, Republic is proposing to: 1) test again the existing geothermal resource well, Makushin ST-l, this time for about 40 days; 2) drill to approximately 1,200 feet the previously approved, but not yet drilled, temperature gradient hole Sugarloaf A-1; 3) drill to deepen Makushin ST-l about 500 feet and then test again for four days; and 4) conduct an electri- cal resistivity survey. As in previous years, personnel will be housed in a small, temporary field base camp, and all the operations will be supported entirely by helicopter. Unalaska Island is, in its entirety, within the Coastal Zone boundary of Alaska. Therefore, the project is subject to the new procedures for the Alaska Coastal Zone Management Program Review conducted by your office. This letter, together with all the accompanying documents, constitutes Republic's request for such a review and determination of consistency for the operations to be conducted in 1984. We understand through our telephone conversations that Republic must submit all applications for Alaska State permits subject to Coastal Zone Management Program Review to your office for distribution to the appropriate agencies. We also understand that copies of the submitted permit applications are also sent by your office to other agencies for their review and consistency determination. To facilitate this process, Republic has prepared a single, universal exhibit which has been made a part of every state and federal permit REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL. INC. Mr. Jack Heesch June 6, 1984 Page 2 application, which constitutes, together with the appropriate application form, the entire application. Thus. Republic is submitting the exact same support information to every agency. To additionally facilitate your process, with your con- currence Republic has prepared and has attached 15 identical packets of permit application information. These packets contain: 1) A copy of this cover letter and the Coastal Project Questionnaire submitted to your office; Way A copy of the letter to Mr. Fred Zeillemaker of the 3) A copy of all permit application forms for the project which are subject to Coastal Zone Program review. These are: a) Geothermal Drilling Permit from Alaska Depart- ment of Natural Resources (ADNR) [Contact: Mr. Ted Bond]; b) Geothermal Exploration Permit from ADNR {Contact: Mr. Ted Bond]; c) Three Solid Waste Permits from Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) [Contact: Mr. Carl Harmon]; and : d) Short-Term Water Quality Variance from ADEC i {Contact: Ms. Julie Howe]. (A Habitat Protection Permit may be required from the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFG). However, we understand that ADFG will make that determination based upon a review of this submitted data rather than on an application, and thus no application form for this permit is being submitted (Contact: Mr. Denby Lloyd and Mr. Kim Sundberg)]; and 4) R complete copy of Exhibit A. This same Exhibit A, complete with all seven attachments, was appended to all submitted permit application forms and, there- fore, only a single copy of the complete Exhibit A is enclosed in each packet. REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL. INC. 11823 EAST SLAUSON AVENUE, SUITE ONE SANTA FE SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 90670 TW 310-586-1696 (213) 945-3661 June 5, 1984 Mr. Fred Zeillemaker Refuge Manager, Aleutian Islands Units U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Post Office Box 5251 NAVASTA FPO Seattle, Washington 98791 Dear Mr. Zeillemaker: Please accept this letter and the attached Exhibit A as our application for a Special Use Permit to conduct geothermal resource exploratory operations on the eastern flanks of Makushin Volcano on Unalaska Island. This Application is for a thira year of operations under Republic's contract with the Alaska Power Authority (APA). During the 1984 field season Republic is proposing to: 1) Grill to approximately 1,200 feet the temperature gradient hole (A-l, Sugarloaf) previously approved, but not yet Grilled, under Special Use Permit AI-83-27; 2) test Makushin ST-1 for approximately 40 days; 3) deepen Makushin ST-1 approximately 500 feet and then test again for about 4 days; and 4) conduct an electrical resis- tivity survey. A detailed description of the proposed operations is attached to this letter as Exhibit A. Attached as Attachments I and II to Exhibit A are letters from The Aleut Corporation and the Ounalashka Corporation giving their concurrence to the operations proposed under the APA contract. Republic is also concurrently applying for all other permits required to conduct the 1984 field operations. A list of these permits is contained in Exhibit A. To the best of our knowledge and belief, this proposed project is consistent with the Alaska Coastal Zone Management Program. REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL. INC. Mr. Fred Zeillemaker June 5, 1984 Page Two We currently plan to commence the exploratory operations on approximately July Ll. Should you have any questions or concerns about this application, please do not hesitate to contact us or Republic's environmental subcontractor's representative, Mr. Steve Grabacki of Dames and Moore (800 Cordova, Anchorage, Alaska 99501; (907) 279-0673). We appreciate your consideration of this request for a Special Use Permit. Sincerely, : J Le ( ae, Tsay s le “N a ‘ eae PEA ia Dwight L. Carey v Manager, Environmental Affairs DLC: acw Attachments cc: S. Grabacki, Dames and Moore J. Heesch, ACZMP 7 REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL. INC. 11823 EAST SLAUSON AVENUE SANTA FE SPRINGS. CALIFORNIA 90670 ¥ 910-586-1696 (213) 945-366 June 6, 1984 Mr. Jack Heesch . Alaska Office of Management and Budget 3301 Eagle Street, Suite 307 Anchorage, AK 99503 Dear Mr. Heesch: Republic Geothermal, Inc., under a contract with the Alaska Power Authority, is preparing for the third summer of field operations for the Unalaska Geothermal Project on Makushin Volcano on Unalaska Island. During the 1984 field season, Republic is proposing to: 1) test again the existing geothermal resource well, Makushin ST-1, this time for about 40 days; 2) drill to approximately 1,200 feet the previously approved, but not yet drilled, temperature gradient hole Sugarloaf A-1; 3) drill to deepen Makushin ST-1 about 500 feet and then test again for four days; and 4) conduct an electri- cal resistivity survey. As in previous years, personnel will be housed in a small, temporary field base camp, and all the operations will be supported entirely by helicopter. Unalaska Island is, in its entirety, within the Coastal Zone boundary of Alaska. Therefore, the project is subject to the new procedures for the Alaska Coastal Zone Management Program Review conducted by your office. This letter, together with all the accompanying documents, constitutes We understand through our telephone conversations that Republic must submit all applications for Alaska State permits subject to Coastal Zone Management Program Review to your ' office for distribution to the appropriate agencies. We also understand that copies of the submitted permit applications are also sent by your office to other agencies for their review and consistency determination. To facilitate this process, Republic has prepared a single, universal exhibit which has been made a part of every state and federal permit REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL. INC. Mr. Jack Heesch Tune 6, 1984 age 2 application, which constitutes, together with the appropriate application form, the entire application. Thus, Republic is submitting the exact same support 4nformation to-every agency. To additionally facilitate your process, with your con- currence Republic has prepared and has attached 15 identical packets of permit application information. These packets contain: 1) A copy of this cover letter and the Coastal Project Questionnaire submitted to your office; 2 A copy of the letter to Mr. Fred Zeillemaker of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (907-592-2406) requesting approval of a Special Use Permit; 3) R copy of all permit application forms for the project which are subject to Coastal Zone Program review. These are: a) Geothermal Drilling Permit from Alaska Depart- ment of Natural Resources (ADNR) [Contact: Mr. Ted Bond]; b) Geothermal Exploration Permit from ADNR {[Contact: Mr. Ted Bond]: c) Three Solid Waste Permits from Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) (Contact: Mr. Carl Harmon]; and ’ d) Short-Term Water Quality Variance from ADEC ed {Contact: Ms. Julie Howe]. (A Habitat Protection Permit may be required from the Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFG). However, we understand that ADFG will make that determination based upon a review of this submitted data rather than on an application, and thus no application forn for this permit is being submitted (Contact: Mr. Denby Lloyd and Mr. Kim Sundberg)]; and 4) A complete copy of Exhibit A. This sane Exhibit A. complete with all seven attachments, was appended to all submitted permit application forms and, there- fore, only @ single copy of the complete Exhibit Ris enclosed in each packet. REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL, INC. Mr. Jack Heesch June 6, 1984" Page 3 To again facilitate your process, Republic has kept separate the original application(s) for each permit. These envelopes each contain the complete application as indicated {including application form(s), fee (if required), and a complete copy (or complete copies, if more than one applica- tion form is required)] of Exhibit A. Therefore, your dis- tribution need only consist of one of the identical packets, or one of the identical packets and the appropriate permit application envelope(s) if distributed to a permit-issuing agency, and any additional information which you normally add. Pinally, with your concurrence, Republic has hand- delivered the appropriate documents (one of the identical packets and the two ADNR permit application envelopes) to Mr. Ted Bond of the ADNR, since these permits require the sub- mission of fees. All other materials are being hand-delivered directly to you. : Republic greatly appreciates the assistance you have already provided in helping us through this new procedure. As we desire to commence field operations as close to July 1 as approval of the permit will allow, we would also greatly appreciate anything you could do to help meet this objective. Republic stands ready to help facilitate your process in any way we can. Please do not hesitate to call on us, or our environmental subcontractor's representative, Mr. Steve Grabacki of Dames & Moore (800 Cordova, Anchorage, Alaska 99501; 907-279-0673) if you have any questions. Sincerely, | Elagheis CA jw) Dwight L. Carey Manager, Environmental Affairs DLC:wp Attachments ce: §. Grabacki, Dames & Moore COASTAL PROJECT CUESTIONNAIRE So This fora must be completed when applying for permits for a project or activity {n the esastal zone of Alaska. Republic Geothermal, Inc. Asalicant Dwight L. Carey —_———— 11823 E. Slauson Ave., Suite One ——_— Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670 — Phone (_ 213) 945-3661 Application # No. of Permits required Oate of Submission Coordinating Agency Length of revien period eoerre-Of fice Use Caly------ Contact Person Address Brief description of project or activity Third year of geothermal resource exploration operations under contract to AIGSKa Power AUtNOLity: Fiow-tese existing well, drill observation well, deepen and test existing well, and conduct electrical resistivity survey. Please see attached Exhibit A. TEE Location of project Makushin Volcano, Unalaska Island, Aleutian Islands. Please see attache Twsp 72S. Rge LLIW meridian Seward section N/A uses Map Unalaska Exhibit A. 738. > 120W. fs the project on: private land - state tand federal land X municipal land ownership not known EEE EE I TE EE EE EE EE EE TA Yes ke Qc you currently have any state or federal approvals/persits for this project? x Pertizt/Aocreval Tyse Permit/Acoreval # Exsiretion date (All previously obtained permits have expired. Please see attached Pxnibit A Lor acditional intormation.) EADS 8 SS SS eee cca ae aE Edd EEE SSSI SnSEnan nS Will you be placing structures, or placing f{1ls fn any of the follewing: tidal waters, streams, lakes, wetlands? x Have you applied cr do you intend to apply for a U.S. Aesy Corps of Engineers permit? — x Have you acolied or do you intend ta apply for other permits from any Federal agencies permits for your projecs? x a Acency Pernit/Acorsval Tyce (Exsecses) Oate ef Acoltiession —— pe tae hel lbh SEBS yrren+) Svecial PART 8 Oeocartment of Natural Resources Yes Ko i Is the proposed project on state-owned lands or will you need to cross state lands for access? x De you plan to use any of the following state-onned resources? Sand and Cravel Yes No X {f yes, amount Source Water Yes * Ko If yes, amount = Source Tributaries to Makushi Timber Yes No & If yes, amount Valley River Other Materials Yes No _X (peat, building stone, etc.) _*Less than 1,000 gallons/day . Yes 3. Do you plan to drill a geothermal well? : 4 —_— &, WIT] you be exploring for or extracting coal? 5. Will you be harvesting timber from 10 of more acres? No x ~~ x — x 6. Wi1l you be investigating or removing historic or archeological resources on state-owned lands? IF YOU ANSWERED NO TO THESE QUESTIONS, YOU 00 NOT NEED APPROVAL FROM THE ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCS (DNR), GO TO PART C. 1F YOU ANSWERS) YES TO ANY OF THESE QUESTIONS, YOU MAY NEED A PERMIT OR APPROVAL FROM ONR, PLEASE CONTACT ONR TO ICENTIFY AND OSTAIN ANY NECESSARY APPLICATION FORMS. If you have already contacted CNR, are you now submitting application(s) for permits or approvals? x If no, indicate the reason below: —_ @ (person contacted) told me on that no ONR approvals or perni! were resuired for this project. : b. ONR regulations have no requirement for a permit or approval. c. Other EE ELLIE TELL EL EEL ELLE LLL SELES LEE ELLE EE PART C ODenartment of Fish and Came Yes Ne 1. WHIT you be working in a stream or Take (including the running water or on the ice, within the gravel floodplain, on islands, the face of the banks, or the streem tideflats down to mean low x tide)? Name of stream or lake Unnamed tributaries to Makushin Valley River If yes, will you be doing amy of the following: a) building a dam or river training structure 5) using the water ¢) diverting the stream ¢) blocking or camming the stream (temporarily or permanently) e) changing tne flow of the water or changing the bed f) pumoing mater out of the stream or lake Xx introducing silt, gravel, rock, petroleum procucts, debris, chemicais, or wastes cf any type into the water >I Ren h) using the stream as a rsad (even when frozen), or crossing the stream with tracked or Yes No wheeled vehicles, log-¢ragging or excavation equipment (backhoes, bulldozers, es.) x {) altering of stabilizing the banks x 4. mining or digging {n the beds or banks x using explosives x 1) bullding a bridge (including an ice bridge) xX m) installing a culvert of other drainage structure 4 2. Is your project located in a State Refuge or Critical Habitat? x IF YOU ANSWERED KO TO THESE CUESTIONS, YOU 00 NOT HEED A PERMIT FROM THE ALASKA OEPARTMENT OF FISH AND CAME (OFC). CO TO PART 0. : IF YOU ANSWERED YES TO ANY OF THESE QUESTIONS You MAY NEED A PERMIT FROM OFG. PLEASE CONTACT THE RECICNAL HABITAT DIVISION OFFICE TO C3TAIN NECESSARY APPLICATION FORMS. If you have already contacted DFG, are you now submitting an application for permit(s)? x If no, indicate the reason below. . a. (person contacted) told me on (date) that no OFS permits were required fc @y project. b. Other PART 0 Desarerent of Environmental Conservation . Yes Ne |* Will a di seharge of wastenater from industrial or commercial operations occur? 2. Will your project generate air emissions from the foi lowing: a) dfesel generatsr x b) other fassil fuel-fired eleceric generator, furnace, or boiler x ¢) asphalt plane x ¢) incineracor x e) industrial process * x 3. Will a drinking water supply be developed? - x &. WITT you be processing seafood? Xx S. Will food service be provided ts the public or workers? x 6. Will the project result in dredging or disposal of fill in wetlands or waterways? 4 7. ls on-clot sewage or greywater disposal involved or necessary? x 8. Will your project result fn the development of a currently unsermitzed facility for she x disposal of domestic or industrial solid naste? — 3. Will your projees require storage or transport of of] of other petroleum products in x exess of 660 gallons? — 10. WEI] your project recuire the application of oil or pesticides to the surface ef the land? —___ 2. 1F YOU ANS*ERED NO TO THESE TEN QUESTIONS, YOU 00 NOT NE=D A PERMIT OR OTHER APPROVAL FROM THE ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF © ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION (DEC). wu ANSWERED YES TO ANY OF THESE QUESTIONS YOU MAY NED A PERMIT FRCH DEC. PLEASE CONTACT THE DEC RECICNAL OFFIC TO ICENTIFY ANO C@TAIN ANY NECESSARY PERMIT APPLICATION FORMS. If you have already contacted the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, are you now submitting an applica tion for pernit(s)? Yes If no, indicate the reason below: meee ——E for my projecz. b) «= Other a) (person contactad) told me on (date) that no OFC permits were required i knowledge, the above information {s accurate and complete. f | “TAAL 2 (Ct ter June 5, 1984 Signed Timotyy "Evans Date - ~ Vice President / wewers PLEASE ATTACH YOUR PERMIT APPLICATIONS 9 *eeeee “THANK You OM 24-83 OR No. 10-159 STATE PLASYA CEPART-ENT OF NATURL RESUS FERMIT TO ORILL A GESTRESMAL VELL 11 ARC 87.030 ERKMXLS SOGAK la. Toe F Werk: DLL _X Ib. Tre of vell: Exploretory X 2. yell Neve er Nunber Fecill Prodctin Sugarloaf A-1 com ae Gradient rieig arg pool 3. Neve of Semtex Contractor: Republic Geothermat/Atnc. pocress: 11823 E. Slauson Ave., Suite One Santa Fe Springs, California 90670 4. Nene of kxxtarsnoniess=xContracting Agency: Alaska Power Authority caress: 334.W. Sth Avenue, 2nd Floor Anchorage, Alaska 99501 5. gerindstnxkteret Zosmin or kk Fomeabent xeate Name of Landowner: United States of America, managed by U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Please see attached Exhibit A) 6. Locio of vell et scface: Alaska State7. fleatio in fest (indicate referee Plate Coords: N-1,186,300; £-4,974,550_ . at to of proposed moa.cirg imeevel same poirt, i.e. kb, df, et.) 1243+ kb attaalcain: same B. Elevetion of coud in feet (relative to sez leel): 1240+ 9, Preosd adcte: July 25, 1984 : Cash ; YO. Ed infaretii - Typ=: Number: N/A Pmart: $100,000 Reserve (please see Attachment V £6 attached Exhibit A li. Qistarce ard direction from rearess OM 12 mi+ west of Dutch Harbor, Unalaska Islan 12. Distate to nesrest property or leese Lire: N/A = 33, Distarce to rearest cz completed well: N/A ; 14. If a deviated well (see LAC 67.150) = Kick-off poirt w/A; Mx. ole acle N/A 15. Articicsted pressures in psig - at surface 0 ; at1200 ft TD (TO) 500 16. Proocsed Cesirc, Lire, erd Cemetirg Proqem (11 ASC 87.120) sz CASING AND LIN SITING CTH GANTITY OF CENT role Cesirg veigt Gece Coolig Lecth M TR TW BIM 10 (ircluce stace cae) (Please see Attachment V to attached Exhibit A) V7. Describe oreosed Lig roe (Please see Attachment Vv to attached Exhibit A) 18. Qeexibe mooosed freswete aouife cootectio momer 5 1/2" surface casing cemented from 150'+ to surtace. 19. Cesctze commen to eure PESSCE cortsol end plovat preetion (Lt ARC 87.350): rage Ay ; sue a (PleaSe see Attachment Vv to attached Exhibit A) 20,1 reregy cactify ret © foecoirg is tue et comect to te test of my krodete: Sova By: pptthiicetw a slaef eee Title Vice Presicent Oe June 5, 1984 Timotny M. Evans So Sar eee Secies reuires: yes orc MC la vreuirec: yes 70 feoroel Cece Reecrige] Sray TUES yes__0__ PIN IDE _ Femit Nc ——_———— OME 24-83 OR No. 10-159 STATE ALASKA CEPFATMENT O NATURAL FESDLRCESS FERMIT TO ORILL A GECTHERMAL VELL MEAAKEKGCOMR 1) AAC 87.070 la. Tyoe of Work: Onl lb. Tyce of vell: Exploretary X 2. bell Neve ard Nuvber Fecill Pr tin Makushin ST-1 fom x Field ard Rol N/A 3. Neve of eres Contractor: Republic Geothermal, Inc. Adcress: 11823 E. Slauson Ave., Suite One Santa Fe Springs, California 90670 4, Name of keromexexiessexContracting Agency: Alaska Power Authority pdcress: 334 W. Sth Avenue, 2nd Floor > Anchorage, Alaska 99501 a 5, Seciebtox Stem Nest cack Pare Name of Landowner: United States of America, managed by U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Please see attached Exhibit A) 6. Locatio of vell at sface: Alaska State 7. Fleetic in fest (inticcte referrce at to Plate C : N-1,180,150: E-4,971,7 ate Cecngs Sak dk 9: 4, 00 ease poirt, i.e. kb, df, ete.) 1210+ kb at total doth: same ; . 8. Elevation of croud in fest (relative to sea level): 1200+ 9. Proceed odcete: August 20, 1984 10. Bord irvameticn - Cash Number: N/A rast: $100,000 T - it vee Reserve (Please see Attachment V to attached Exhibit A) li. Distarce arc direction fromrearest town 12 mi+ west of Dutch Harbor, Unalaska Islan 12. Distate to nearest property or leese lire: ya 13. Oistarce to rearest or comleted well: N/A : 14. If a deviated well (see Ll AMC 87.150) - Kick-off poire N/A; Mx. Pole argle N/A 15. Articissted pressures in psig - at surface 200 max; at 2500Ft 1D (TO) 1,000 max 16. Proposed Cesirg, Lines, ard Cemertirg Program (11 ASC 87.120) STE CASING AND LINER SITING CTH GENTITY OF CEMNT Hole Casing weigtnt Gece Goolig Lsgth M TP TW M GM W (ircliue stme cee) (Please see Attachment V to attached Exhibit A) 17, Cesctibe pramsed dt Virg ororem (Please see Attachment V to attached Exhibit A) 18. Cesctribe ereoosed freswate sauife protection progrem: 7" surface casing cemented from 162' to surface. 19. Cesoibe procan to evsure pressures conical ard blowat prevertio (11 AAC 87.100): (Pleasé see Attachment,V to attached Exhibit A) 20, 1 hereby cextify that the fcegoirg is tue ard cammect to the best of my owiehe: Si : tyme f Title_vice President Oee June 5, 1984 yee bt, Ulan Part I. Ae Be Ce. De STATE OF ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION WASTE DISPOSAL PERMIT APPLICATION FOR SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ACTIV TITIE. UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL PROJECT 1984 FIELD BASE CAMP Background Information Applicant's Name: Mailing Address: Republic Geothermal, Inc 11823 E. Slauson Ave. So ate a i iA 8 £ . Ss City/State/Zip Code: Santa Fe Springs, California 90670 Facility Location: (Use legal deseri Seward Meridian, Unalaska Island Application ts for: Type of facility: ) A New Facility ption of property) T.73S., R.120W., (Please see attached Exhibit A) ) Am Unpermitted, Exiscing Facility ¢ ¢ (X) Renewal of Existing Permit No.8321-CA001 ¢ } Demolition Debris Exemption € +) Land£illing ( ( >) Land Spreading ¢ ( ) Ofly Waste Dispesal E. Complete the following: 1. Number of people served by the facility. ) Please see Attachment VI to attached Exhibit A. Hazardous Waste Processing ) Hazardous Waste Disposal (x) Other Field Camp Garbage Pit 20 maximum 2. How much waste will be received? {xens) (cu. yds.) 2 foam? (wk) Genta (21 cu. yds. total) 3. Check the wastes received and estimate their percent of total 4. wastes teceived. Yes Domestic Refuse ¢ Commercial Refuse - ¢ Seafood Processing Wastes ¢ Industrial Wastes ¢ Construction Wastes ¢ Demolition Wastes ¢ Oily Wastes - ¢ Ash and Incinerator Residue ¢ Will the following wastes be accepted? x) y ) ) ) ) ) ) Yes Septic Tank Pumpings 6) Sewage Sludge £——) Drilling Muds ¢ ) Waste Oil and Oil Spill Cleanup Wastes ¢ ) Reracdnave Wastes ¢ ) No ¢ ¢ ¢ C x) ( x) (x) ( x) (x) D4 PS DS DS OS 23 I (xX ) (X ) (x ) «x ) (x ) Z of Total 100 ne a tt 5, What predisposal processing methods will be employed? Incineration ¢ Baling ¢ Shredding ¢ Composting ¢ : Other: Please see Attachment V7_to Exhbinin wey 6. The average annual precipicacion in the area ts 38 inches. —$<—$——— FOR LANDFILLS ONLY - N/A 7. The deposited refuse will be consolidated, compacted and covered with soil at least times per (week) (month) during the summer and at least times per (veek) (month) during the winter. 8. The maximum width of the exposed working face will be ft. The maximum vertical height of the working face will be fc. PART IT Please see Attachment VI to attached Exhibit A ——— The applicant shall submit two copies of the following information with the completed, signed application form: A. Maps of the site and surrounding area that clearly show the following: Buildings i Aicports w/in Z Miles All Surface Waters Wells w/in 1/4 Mile ( ) Geographic Location (+) Surface Contours ( ) Site Boundaries ( ) Reads and Railroads Ran” wey Be Facility plans or drawings showing: (a) the existing site conditions, (b) the proposed development steps, and (c) the proposed appearance of the completed site. The plans shall include contours of five foot intervals ot less, and shall utilize a scale no less than one inch equals forty feet unless specifically approved by the depart—- ment. These plans shall include, at a uinimm, the location and construction details of: ( ) Suréace Drainage Controls ( >) Visual Sereentag ( )} Aecess and On-site Roads ( >) Pellution Control or ( ) Dispesal Trenches or Cells Monitoring Devices ( >) Fences and Gates ( >) Significant Storage, ( +>) Buildings & Fixed Equipment Processing or Disposal C ) Soil Boring Locations Features ( ) Monitoring Well Construction Derails C. A narrative description of the propesed development and operacion procedures including those intended to prevent or control ground and surface pollution, disease vectors, wildlife access, litter, fires, odor, noise, and satety and ovisance problems. D. For all landf{lling/landspreading facilities: A soils report based on test holes dug at representative locations to @ depth at least four feec deeper than the lowest level of proposed solid waste deposition. The mininun number of holes based on facility size shall be: less than 10,000 £2 one hole 10,000 ft2 to one acre ——————— two holes larger than one acre -———~-———— two holes per acre These numbers can be greatly reduced in large sites if the results of initial borings indicate a unifor=, predictable soils/hydrology sitvation throughout the site. "The report shall include: 1. graphic representation of the soil profiles, 2. .a discussion of the site's ground water hydrolosy based on the test holes and data from any vells in the nearby area. Ze For all HAZARDOUS WASTE PROC=SSING AND pIseesaL FACILITIES: Detailed plans and specifications of the facility, the wastes to be accepted, methods and equipment for waste handling, treatnent, storage and disposal, pollution controls, safety equipment and precautions, and emergency operating plans. P. A letter from the local government certifying coupliance with . lecal ordinances, zoning requirements, and coastal zone manaze=— ment plans and regulations. Lf the applicanc is not the owner of the property, include a written statement from Che property owner detailing the arrangement giving the applicant control of _the facility for the proposed activity. Timothy M. Evans_ T, Republic Geothemm=t Tne , certify under penalty of perjury, thac all of the above inftoraacion and exnibits are true, corzect and complete. . eo 7: Ye nf Applicant's Signature ‘Mae IAL Ch tone. Date June 5, 1984 ————_— =_ : : : ; x ©« & & ee & & 8 & a nz @ © ® & #8 & © F BF RB BK ® : \ Submit two copies of all application materials to the appropriate regional office indicated on the map on page 4. PERMIT RENEVALS: A permittee that has 2 departmentally approves plan chat meets che requirements specified in this application fora cay apply fora new pernit by submitting a signed application form and a report of the changes and progress that has occurred during the preceding per=it period. Those facilities without a currently acceptable plan shall submit all che planning ¢ocuments and daca required by this application for departmental review and approval prior to receiving a new permit. a aie | ain EE ll a oN Part I. Ae Be Cc. De Ee STATE OF ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION WASTE DISPOSAL PERMIT APPLICATION FOR SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIE UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL PROJECT 1984 MAKUSHIN ST-l GEOTHERMAL WELL DRILLING Background Iaformation Applicant's Name: Republic Geothermal, Inc. Mailing Address: EB. Siauson Ave., Suite One City/State/Zip Code: Santa re Springs, Callrornia ° Facility Location: (Use legal description of property) T.73S., R.120W., Seward Meridian, Unalaska Island (Please see attacnec pxnibit A) Application is for: (X) A New Facility ( ) Am Unpermitted, Exiscing Facility ( ) Renewal of Existing Permit No. ( ) Demolition Debris Exemption Type of facility: ( +) Landfilling ( >) Hazardous Waste Processing ( ) Land Spreading ( +) Hazardous Waste Disposal ( ) Oly Waste Nisposal (X ) Other Drilling mud_sump Complete the following: 1. Number of people served by the facility. N/A Z. How much waste will be received? —xemmsck (cu. vds.) 20 MaxxkxakkxomxsH Total 3. Check the wastes received and estimate their percent of total wastes received. Yes _No_ % of Total Domestic Refuse ¢ ) (x) z Commercial Refuse ¢ ) (x) 2 Seafood Processing Wastes ¢ ) ¢ xX) " Industrial Wastes -Drilling Md( X) ¢ ) 100 Construction Wastes ¢ ) ( x) % Demolition Wastes ¢ ) (x) z Oily Wastes - ¢ ) (x) ‘ Ash and Incinerator Residue ¢ ) (x) S 4. WLL1 the following wastes be accepted? Sepeic Tank Punpiags J) (x ) Sewage Sludge « ) (x. Drilliag Muds (x) ¢( ) Waste Oil and O11 Spill Cleanup Wastes ¢ ) (x ) Hazardous Wastes ¢ ) (x) PART IT 5, What predisposal processing methods will be employed? Incineration on) Baling ¢ ) Shredding ¢ ) Composting € ) Other: Please see Attachment VI_to Fxhinis 3 6. The average annual precipitacion in the area is 38 inches. ee FOR LANDFILLS ONLY - N/A 7. The deposited refuse will be consolidated, compacted and covered with soil at least times per (week) (month) during the summer and at least times per (veek) (month) during the winter. 8. The maximm width of the exposed working face will be The maximum vertical height of the working face will be th th aod ° Please see Attachment VI to attached Exhibit A The applicant shall submit tvo copies of the following information with the completed, signed application form: Ae Be Maps of the site and surrounding area that clearly show the following: ( ) Geographic Location ( >) Butldings ( +) Surface Contours : C >) Airports w/in Z Miles ( >) Site Boundaries ( +) All Surface Waters ¢ >) Reads and Railroads ( ) Wells z/in 1/4 Mile Facility plans or drawings showing: (a) the existing site conditions, (b) the proposed development steps, and (c) the proposed appearance of the completed site. The plans shall include contours of five foot intervals or less, and shall utilize a scale no less than one inch equals forty feet unless specifically approved by the depart- ment. These plans shall inelude, at a minimm, the lecation and construction details of: ( ) Suréace Drainage Controls ( ) Visual Sereening ( ) Access and On-site Roads ( >) Pollution Control or ( +) Dispesal Trenches or Cells Monitoring Devices ( >) Fences and Gates ( ) Significant Storage, ( ) Buildings & Fixed Equipment Processing or Disposal C ) Soil Boring Locations Features ( ) Monisoring Well Construction Details A narcative description of the proposed development and operation ptocedures including those intended to prevent ot control ground and surface pollution, disease vectors, wildlife access, Lister, fires, odor, noise, and safety and nuisance problems. ete en | enema : La a D. For all landfilling/landspreading facilities: A soils report based on test holes dug at representative locations to a depth at least four feet deeper than the lowest level of proposed solid waste deposition. The mininum number of holes based on facility size shall be: less than 10,000 £t? - one hole 10,000 ft2 to one acre ——————— two holes larger than one acre — two holes per acre These numbers can be greatly reduced in large sites if the results of initial borings indicate a uniform, predictable soils/hydrology situation throughout the site. “The report shall include: l. graphic representation of the soil profiles, 2. a discussion of the site's ground water hydrology based on the test holes and data from any wells in the nearby area. Z. For all HAZARDOUS WASTE PROCESSING AND DISPOSAL FACILITIES: Detailed plans and specifications of the facility, the wastes to be accepted, methods and equipment for waste handling, treatment, storage and disposal, pollution controls, safety equipment and precautions, and emergency operating plans. vy. A letter from the local goverament certifying compliance with local ordinances, zoning requirements, and coastal zone manage- ment plans and regulations. If the applicant is not the owner of the property, include a written statement from the property owner detailing the arrangement giving the applicant control of _ the facility for the proposed activity. Timothy M. Evans T, Republic Geothermal, Inc , certify under penalty of perjury, that all of the above information and exnibits are true, correct and complete. ae ee he eR ee RR RS Submit two copies of all applicattor materials to the appropriate regional office indicaced on the map on page 4. PERMIT RENEWALS: A permittee that has a departmentally approved plan that meets the requirements specified in this applicacion form may apply fora new permit by submitting a signed application form and a repors of the changes and progress that has occurred during the praceding pernit period. Those facilities without a currently acceptable plan shall submit ali the planning documents and daca required by this application for departmental teview and approval prior to receiving a new permit. STATE OF ALASXA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION WASTE DISPOSAL PERMIT APPLICATION FOR SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL PROJECT 1984 ; SUGARLOAF A-l1 TEMPERATURE OBSERVATION HOLE Part I. Background Information A. Applicant's Nane: Republic Geothermal, Inc. Mailing Address: 11823 5. Slauson Ave., Suite One City/State/Zip Code: Santa Fe Sporines, California 90670 B. Facility Location: (Use legal description of property) T.72S., R.1L1OW., Seward Meridian, Unalaska Island (Please see attached Exhibit A) C. Applicatioa is for: (CX) A New Facility ( +) Am Unpermitted, Existing Facility ( ) Renewal of Existing Pernit No. ( >) Demolition Debris Exenpcion D. Type of facility: Please see Attachment VI to attached Exhibit A. ( >) ULandfilling ( +) Hazardous Waste Processing ( ) Land Spreading ( +) Hazardous Waste Disposal ( ) Otly Waste Disposal (X ) Other Drilling mud sump E. Complete the following: 1. Number of people served by the facility. N/A 2. How much waste will be received? fram (eu. ves.) I ARSRKAMMRKNSRRHN Total 3. Check the wastes received and estimate their percent ef total wastes received. 4 Yes No ef Total | Domestic Refuse ¢ Commercial Refuse ¢ Seafood Processing Wastes ¢ Industrial Wastes Cx ¢ ¢ ¢ ¢ wee vyeuVyvuY | | Construction Wastes Demolition Wastes Oily Wastes - Ash and Incinerator Residue | | rere RaARARRAS MMM OS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) 4. WLLL the following wastes be accepted? Yes No Septic Tank Puspings _¢ Sewage Sludge ¢ Drilling Muds ¢ Waste Oil and O11 Spill Cleanuno Nasces ¢ Hazardous Wastes ¢ wun ann OS Vwuev X vu na oO Vu 5. What predisposal processing methods will be exployed? Ineineration (a) Baling ¢ ) Shredding (oa) Composting ¢ ) Please see Attachment VI_ta Evhnini~ 3 Other: 6. The average annual prectpit tion in the area is 58 inches. —— ee FOR LANDFILLS ONLY - N/A 7. The deposited refuse will be consolidated, compacted aad covered with soil at least times per (week) (month) during the summer and at least times per (week) (month) dusing the winter. 8. The maximum width of the exposed working face will be fc. The maximum vertical height of the working face will be ft. PART IIT Please see Attachment VI to attached Exhibit A The applicant shall submit tvo copies of the following inforzation with the. completed, signed application form: A. Maps of the site and surrounding area that clearly show the following: Geographic Location ¢ Buildings Surface Contours ¢ ¢ ¢ Aicports w/ia 2 Miles All Surface Waters Wells w/in 1/4 Mile Site Boundaries Roads and Railroads RARMS™ wyvvy www B. Pactlity plans or drawings showing: (a) the existing site condisions, lee the proposed development steps, and (c) the proposed appearance dete | of the complerced site. The plans shall inelude contours of five = intervals ot less, and shall utilize a seale no less than one pot > nch equals forty feet unless specifically approved by the depart- Aecessery BERT + These plans shall include, at a minimum, the location and construction details of: ( >) Surface Drainage Controls ( ) Visual Screentag ( ) Access and On-site Roads ( ) Poellusion Control or ( ) Dispesal Trenches or Cells Monitoring Devices ( ) Fenees and Gates ( ) Significant Storage, ( ) Buildings & Fixed Equipment Processing or Disposal ( ) Soil Boring Locations Features ( ) Monitoring Well Construction Details C. A narrative description of the proposed develooment and operacicn procedures including those iatended to prevent ot control ground fours gad surface pollution, disease vectors, wildlize access, litter, oul fires, odor, noise, and sazety and nuisance problems. nso SUH gts D. For all landfilling/landspreadcing facilities: A soils teport based on test holes dug at representative locations to 2 depen at least four feec deeper than the lowest level of proposed solid waste deposition. The minisun number of holes based on facility size shall be: less than 10,000 fe2 - one hole 10,000 fe2 to one acre ——————— two holes larger than one acre -———~———— two holes per acre These numbers can be greatly reduced in large sites i£ the results of initial borings indicate a uniform, predictable soils/hydrsology situation throughout the site. The report shall include: 1. graphic representation of the soil profiles, 2. .a discussion of the site's ground water hydrolosy based on the test holes and data from any wells in the nearby area. Ze For all HAZARDOUS WASTE PROCESSING AND pDIseesaAL FACILITIES: Detailed plans and specifications of the facility, the wastes to be accepted, aethods and equipment for waste handling, treatrent, storage and disposal, pollucton controls, safety equipment and precautions, and emergency operating plans. P. A letter from the local government certifying coupliance with local ordinances, zoning requirements, and coastal zone manaze=- ment plans and regulations. If the applicanc ts not the owner of the property, include a written statement from the property owner detailing the arrangement giving the applicants control of the facility for the proposed activity. Timothy M. Evans qT, Republic Geothermm=t Tne , certify under penalty of perjury, that all of tne above intor=acion and exhibits are true, correct and complete. / f i= . /~ Sf anf Applicant's Signature na thoe (A Cone Date June 5, 1984 — = i toe eR RR RR RR RT RTF i Submit two copies of all application materials to the appropriate regional office indicated on the map on page 4. PERMIT RENEWALS: A permittee that has 4 departmentally approves plan chat meets the requirements specified in this application fora =ay7 apply fora new permit by submitting a signed application form and a report of the changes and progress that has oceurred during the preceding peratt period. Those facilities without a currently acceptable plan shall subnit all the planaing cocuments and data required by this aoplication fier departmental review and approval prior to receiving a new pemnit. Ae Be Cc. D. E. STATE OF ALASKA : DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION WASTE DISPOSAL PERMIT APPLICATION FOR SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL PROJECT 1984 . ; SUGARLOAF A-1 TEMPERATURE OBSERVATION HOLE Background Inforsation Applicant's Name: Republic Geothermal, Inc. Mailing Address: 11823 E. Slauson Ave., Suite One ae ES US OD ONS City/State/Zip Code: Santa Fre Sprincs, California 90670 eS SS Se o_O Facility Location: (Use legal description of property) T.72S., R.119W., Seward Meridian, Unalaska Island (Please see attached Exhibit A) Applicatioa is for: (X) A New Facility ( ) Am Unpermitted, Existing Facility ( +) Renewal of Existing Pernit No. ( ) Demolition Debris Exexpcion Tyre of facility: Please see Attachment VI to attached Exhibit A. (€ ) Landfilling ( >) Hazardous Waste Processing ( >) Land Spreading ( +) Hazardous Waste Disposal { ) OfLly Waste Nisposal (xX) Other pDrilline mud sump Complete the following: 1. Number of people served by the facility. N/B 2. How much waste will be received? ¥en (cz. ves.) 1 ARRRKMMRKARERHN Total 3. Check the wastes received and estimate their percent of total wastes received. Yes. No. | Zof Total Domestic Refuse >) € x) 5 Commercial Refuse ¢ ) (x) 2 Seafood Processing Wastes C_) € x) * Industrial Wastes (x) ¢ ) 199% Construction Wastes ¢ ) (x) 2 Demolition Wastes | a) (x) 3 Oily Wastes - ¢ ) (x) “ Ash and Incinerator Residue ¢ ) (x) x 4. WLLL the following wastes be accepted? es te Sepeic Tank Puxpings ¢ ) (x ) Sewage Sludge ¢ ) (x ) Drilling Muds (x) ¢ ) Waste Oil and O11 SpLil Cleanup “astes ¢ ) Hazardous Wastes Cy) nn ~ ve 5, What predisposal processing merhods will be employed? Incineration on) Baling ( ) Shredding ¢ ) Composting ¢ ) Other: Please see Attachment VIF Eehihie 2 6. The average annual precipitation in the area is 38 inches. FOR LANDFILLS ONLY - N/A 7. The deposited refuse will be consolidated, compacted and coverec with soil at least times per (week) (month) during the summer and at least times per (veek) (month) during the winter. 8. The waximum width of the exposed working face will be ft. The maximum vertical height of the working face will be ic. PART IIT Please see Attachment VI to attached Exhibit A The applicant shall submit two copies of the following iafercation with the completed, signed application form: A. Maps of the site and surrounding area that clearly show the followi=g: ( >) Geographic Location ( +) Buildings (+) Surface Contours ( ) Airports w/in 2 Miles ( +) Site Boundaries ( ) All Surface Waters ( ) Roads and Railroads ( >) Wells w/in 1/4 Mile Be Facility plans or drawings showing: (a) the existing site conditioss, (b) the proposed development steps, and (¢) the proposed appearance of the completed site. The plans shall include contours of five foot intervals et less, and shall utilize a scale no less than one inch equals forty feet unless specifically approved by the depart- ment. These plans shall include, at a minimm, the location and construction details of: ( +) Surface Drainage Controls ( ) Visual Screening ( ) Access and On-site Roads ( ) Pollution Control or ( +) Disposal Trenches or Cells Monitoring Devices ( +) Fenees and Gates ( ) Significant Storage, ( ) Buildings & Fixed Ecuipment Processing or Disposal ( ) Soil Bering Locations Features ( ) Monitoring Well Construction Details C. A narrative descripcion of the proposed development and operatioa procedures inclucing those intended to prevent oF control ground and surface pollution, disease vectors, wildlife access, litter, fires, odor, noise, and safety and nuisance problecs. De. For all landfilling/landspreading facilities: A soils report based on test holes dug at representative locations to 2 depth at least four feet deeper than the lowest level of proposed solid waste deposition. The atninun number of holes based on facility size shall be: less than 10,000 fr2 -———--——._ one _ hole 10,000 ft2 to one acre —————— two holes larger than one acre -——~—————~ two holes per acre These numbers can be greatly reduced in large sites if the tTesuits of initial borings indicate a uniform, predictable soils/hydrolszy situation throughout the site. : “The report shall include: l. graphic representation of the soil profiles, 2. a discussion of the site’s ground water hydrology based on the test holes and data from any wells in the nearby area. Z. For all HAZARDOUS WASTE PROCESSING AND DIS?PCSAL FACILITIES: Detailed plans and specifications of che facility, the wastes t35 be accepted, methods and equipment for waste handling, treatress, storage and disposal, pollution controls, safety equipment and precautions, and emergency operating placs. F. aA letter from the local government certifying coupliance with local ordinances, zoning requirements, and coastal zone manage— ment plans and regulations. If the applicant is not the owner of the property, include a written statement from Che property owner detailing the arrangement giving the applicant control of _the facility for the proposed activity. Timothy M. Evans T, Revublic Geothermmat.. Tne , certify under penalty of periury, that all of che above-tnsorzation and exnibits are true, correct and cexplete. —_—$_$_$—$————————— Applicant's Signature baa Toe fo. Date June 5, 1984 : i x © « © & & B * xo aa_ie eke & ® & © Be Re x x : . , Submit two copies of all application materials to the appropriace regicaal office indicated on the tap on page 4. PEPMIT RENEWALS: A permittee that has a departnentally approved plan chat meets the requirements specified in this application form may apply fora new permit by submitting 2 signed application form and a report of the changes and progress that has oceurred during the preceding permit perisc. Those facilities without a currently acceptable plan shall submit all che planaing documents and data required by this applicacion for departmental review and approval prior to receiving a new peruit. A. STATS OF ALASKA ARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION APPLICATION FOR WASTEWATER DISPOSAL PERMIT OR CERTIFICATION OF REASONABLE ASSURANCE In accordance with Alaska Statutes, Title 46, “Water ir, and Eaviron- Ser, =; mental Conservation", Chapter 03, Section 46.03.100, and rules anc regun lations promuigated thereunder, or in accordance with 33 U.S.C. 4665 ec. seq., sec. 401, we: Republic Geothermal, Inc. (name oz applicant) : 11823 E. Slauson Avenue, Suite One, Santa Fe Springs, cA 90670 (acaress Of applicant) herewith apply for a Short Term Water Quality Variance (X) Waste Discharge Permit ( ) Certification of Reasonable Assurance. ( for the following proposed activity: Dredging ( ) Construction ( ) Construction with Dischazge ( ) Discharge Only ( x) "i TYPE OF INDUSTRY: Geothermal Exploration Weil Flow Test ee Geothermal Expiore 6 FF LOCATION OF WASTE DISCHARGING FACILITY: [.73S., R.120W., Seward Meridian, - = ——_ - mato e oe? Unalaska Island, (Please see attached Exhibit A.) PHONE: N/A LOCATION OF WASTE DISCEARGING POINT(s):_7-7?5-" R.120W., Seward Meridian, Unalaska Island. (Please see attached Exhibit A.) WASTE DISCHARGE VOLUME: INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES COOLING WATER Maximum (gallons/day): 150,000 N/A Daily Average (gallons/day) : 150,000 : N/A RAW WATER SUPPLY: Source: N/A Volume N/A gallons/da Unnamed tributary to NAME OF RECEIVING WATER (or sewerage system) : mMaknshin Valley River HAPRACTERISTICS OF WASTE FLOW: Describe in detail the chemical anc physi Gal properties of the sifiuent to be discharged to State waters (ineludi but not limited so temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, color, total dis- solved solids, suspended sclids, BODS, COD, oils, phencl, heavy metals, chlorinated hnyérocarbons, and other biocides, acidity, alkalinity, etic.) Also include a deseziption of sampling and analytic methods used =o ce- rive this information. Submit this infozrmaction with your application 2s Exhibit 1. Please see Attachment Iv to attached Exhibit A. ole ‘go RAW MATERIAL AND CEEMIC. HEMICALS USED IN PROCESSES: Brand Name Cnamical, Sciencitic oF Actual Name A N ' Quantity Used per day* Average Maximum = PLANT OPERATION: Numbe £ Employees per Snitt Days per Year Dav Swine iche Averace N/A ~ Total For 4 N/A N/A N/A Duaration of —_——— Permit N/A N/A N/A PRODUCTION: Quantity Produceé per Day* Average Maximum Item N/A SS —— a —_ ——————— ————— EEE —— —— — ee —— SANITARY WASTES: Treatment N/A Discharged to Explain any seasonal variation in waste Gischarge volumes, plant opera- tions, raw materials, and chemicals used in processes, and/or Pr oductior Please see Attachment IV to attached Exhibit } NN ii I NN — a i i090 * Please specify units. For example: Tons per Gav, pounds ber cay, barrels per day, etc. . w Give a detailed descripticn of she sources oF all industrial wastes within your industry. Describe in detail the treatment given to each of these wastes. Include in this descristicn the disposal metnods used for these wastes and also for any sludge collected by your waste treatment system. Include a schematic flow diagram showing the sources of all wastes and their flow pattern. Submit this information with your application as Exhibit 2. N/A Briefly describe any additional treatment or changes in waste disposal methods you are planning or have under construction. Submit this inftozr- mation as Exhibit 3. Include all information for previous questions, where additional space is necessary as part of Exhibit 3. Also include any additional information or comments you feel are necessary to clarify this application with Exhibit 3. w/a If the activity does not involve a discharce to waters of the State (such as construction of facilities in the waterway, dredging, land fill etc.), completely describe the proposed activity including: maps show- ing the location of the facility or activity and the waterway involved; a description of the character of each structure; the quantity and type of dredge or £i11 material involved; the proposed method of instrumen- sation which will be used to measure the volume of any solids deposites and to determine its effect upon the waterway, rates ané periods of deposition; duration of the =e Submit shis inZormation with your application as Exhibit 4. N/A : . : sae The information given on this application is complete anc accurate to the best of my knowledge. \ / 4 os ye A fran Lo~ " Cp ete te Signature ~ Timothy M. Evans: Printed Name Republic Geothermal, Inc. Vice President Title June 5, 1984 STATE OF ALASKA / ““™o* OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR CENTRAL OFFICE POUCH AW OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET JUNEAU, ALASKA 99811 PHONE: (907) 465-3562 DIVISION OF GOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION SOUTHEAST REGIONAL OFFICE SOUTHCENTRAL REGIONAL OFFICE NORTHERN REGIONAL OFFICE ourch Street 3301 Eagle Street Seventh Avenue Pouch AW, Room 306 Suite 307 Station H Juneau, AK 99811 Anchorage, AK 99503 Fairbanks, AK 99701 Phone: (907) 465-3562 Phone: (907) 272-3504 Phone: (907) 456-3084 June 8, 1984 Mr. Dwight L. Carey Republic Geothermal, Inc. 11823 E. Slauson Ave., Ste. 1 Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670 Dear Mr. Carey : SUBJECT: UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION STATE ID NO. AK84060817A The Division of Governmental Coordination (DGC) has received the coastal project questionnaire, applications, and supporting information you submitted for our project consistency review. Included in that packet was your consistency certification submitted for our concurrence under Section 307(c)(3)(A) of the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act as per 15 CFR 930, Subpart D. The enclosed project information sheet includes a State I.D. Number AK84060617A. . Please refer to this number in any future reference to the project. Appropriate materials have been distributed to participants in the Alaska Coastal Management Program for their review and comments. Reviewer milestones and the associated permits are also indicated on the enclosed sheet. By a copy of this letter we are informing the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service that the State's review has begun. Thank you for your cooperation in this review process. Jack Heesch Regional Coordinator Enclosure cc: Fred Zeillemaker U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service DISTRIBUTION LIST dune 6, 1984 te Mr. Jay Bergstrand, Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, Anchorage Mr. Greg Brelsford, Anchorage bey Mr. Joe Cladouhos , Dear trent of Environmental Conservation, Juneau Mr. John Clark, Department of Fish and Game, Juneau 613] Mr. Ty Dilliplane, Deoartrent of Natural Resources, Anchorage 1224] Mr. James Eason, Department of Natural Resources, Anchorage 534] The Honorable William Fisher, Unalaska pe Ms. Meg Hayes, Department of Natural Resources, Anchorage 589] Mr. Agafon Krukof, Anchorage 1028] Mr. Carlton Laird, Desarsrent of Comerce and Economic Develoorent, Juneau 321] Mr. Tom Lawson, Department of Natural Resources, Juneau 200] Mr. Wayne Longaere, Department of Comunity and Regional Affairs, Juneau mae Ms. Lisa McCraken, Department of Law, Anchorage . Jan Mills, Office of Management and Budget, Juneau (371] Mr. Lance Trasky, Department of Fish and Game, Anchorage ae: S| PIGS Cc iL /A\ BILL SHEFFIELD, GOVERNOR \ eh il j= | Mir (a iE S ‘ ©) Uird us LIF ‘LE A - CENTRAL OFFICE OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR it Tere JUNEAU, ALASKA 99811 PHONE: (297) 465-5568 OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET DIVISION OF GOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION SOUTHEAST REGIONAL OFFICE SOUTHCENTRAL REGIONAL OFFICE NORTHERN RECIONAL OFFICE 211 Fourtn Street, noom 306 T3501 Eagle Street, suite 307 eventn Avenue Pouch AW Anchorage, AK 99503 Station H Juneau, AK 99811 Phone: (907) 272-3504 = Fairbanks, AK 99701 Phone: (907) 465-3562 Phone: (907) 456-3084 2 PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET : / appLicant: AEPYSL oO Hee ZAC. PROJECT TITLE: 2 £2 KOSCS? STATE I.D. NUMBER/REVIEWING OFFICE: AK84 26 08-J7A / SSS PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Se C47 FILLED PROJECT LOCATION: a it ASL RP YE SLALO DS ELECTION DISTRICT: Ct TAL DISTRICT: © AO, E- APPROVED PLAN YES NO ° PENDING ACTIVITY TYPE: Enertey erage FORMAT: £0 OLEL FEDERAL APPROVALS/I.D. NUMBERS 3 &. S : Zirh esvcedenvre e-Secrn Se /Een STATE APPROVALS/I.D. NUMBERS: ADUL- CecometmeclSe mur a) DEC - ahree Aunty eEC- nd Wace (3) TOES WHC: Tre Je Ty REVIEWER MILESTONES (Day 1 J uE& GK) REVIEW SCHEDULE: 0-Day 50-Day REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BY: ) UNELS te ZOMMENTS DUE BY: ; ] UIE 257 GEV PF ECT STATUS NOTIFICATION BY: YE LF, YES 2ROJECT COORDINATOR: IC PIECE TC Rev: 3-20-84 RECEIVEDSUL 2 1 iggy United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE tne Rabess wasaa ao: ALEUTIAN ISLANDS UNIT ALASKA MARITIME NATIONSL WILDLIFE REFUGE PF. 0. BOX S25i NAVAL ATR STATION FPO SEATTLE, WA 998791 June 15, 1984 Mr. Dwight L. Carey Republic Gecthermal, Inc. 11823 East Siau uson Avenue Suite i Sante Fe Springs, CA 90670 Dear Dwight: The Special Use Permit (SUP) you requested is attached. When you receive ciesrance from the State of Alaska, please sign the rmit and return the complete package with 2 capy of the state to us for signature. We will then return the ignec originals ta your office te complete the process. anu oO 0 ty he a A 0 oD i. a) wt 2 i enjeyed speaking with you the other day (12 June>. Sincerely, <r C. FRED ZEILLEMAKER Refuge Manager CFZ/ks attachments Permit number Sta. Ne. to be credited UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR] AI-84-017 74502 Fish and Wildlife Service — a MP ase ms _— “Sis Aj} Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge Date June 15, 1984 SPECIAL USE PERMIT Permittee (Name and address) Timothy M. Evans, Vice President Republic Geothermal, Inc. 11823 E. Slauson Ave., Suite l Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670 ee ejfy im detail mested, or units of mets invelved) LO DErmit continuation of Republic Geo Fagen. Sr HImse & Sore, "aha/or therr sabcontracto: exbloration for geothermal resource potential on the eastern flanks of Makushin Volcano on Unalaska Island in the Aleutian. Islands (Exhibit A, Fig. 1&2). This permit is for the 4th stage of operations, specifi- cally testing existing wells for 40 days, the drilling of one 1200' temperature gradient hole & the extension of existing well Makushin ST-1L.:. ..2 by 500' (Exhibit A). A radio Deseription (Specify unit numbers; metes and bounds; or other recognisable designations) Drill one 8.5 inch (Maximum diameter) temperature gradient hole to about 1200' deep, extend previous well by 500° 4 test existing wells, including establishment of a portable base camp consisting of proximately four to six 12x20 foot sleeper tents, one 12x30 foot cook tent, one 15x30 ot shower (laundry feat end. one outhouse (Exhibit A). A letter of non-objection has ee: ubmitte ExhAi + B , Ameeat of fee $_ NONE _ if mot a fixed fee payment, specify rate and unit of charge: Peried of use (inclusive) Frm July 1 19 84 Te September 30 19 84 C3 Full peymeat Oo Partial peyment- Balance of payments to be mode as fellows: TUGGUMLSeMeM STATEMENT OF COMPATIBILITY: Operations planned in Exhibit A and authorized by this permit are considered to be compatible with the objectives and management of the Aleutian Islands Unit of the Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge. Special Conditions All general conditions on the reverse side of this permit and special conditions on the attached sheet apply. ‘ his permit is lesmed by the US. Fish and Wildlife Service and accepted by the undersigned, subject te the terms, covenants, ~aligations, and reservations, expressed er implied bereia, and to the conditions and requirements appearing om the reverse side. — Permittee (Signatare) il Iecuing Officer (Signature and title) lyn be ™ brr4— TIMOTHY M. EVANS] ce President C. FRED ZEILLEMAKER, Refuge Manager GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. Payments. All payments shall be made on or before the due date to the local representative of the U.S. Pish and Wildlife Service by « postal money order or check made payable to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2. Use limitations. The permittee's use of the described premises is limited to the purposes herein specified; does not mleas provided for in this permit allow him/her to restrict other autho- rized encry on to his/her area; and permits the Service to carry on whatever activities are neces- sary for (1) protection aod maintenance of the premises and adjacent lands administered by the Service and (2) the management of wildlife and fish using the premises and other Service lands. 3. Damages. The United States shall not be Tesponsible for any loss or damage to property including but not limited to growing crope, ani- mals, and mechinery; or injury to the permittee, or hbis/ber relatives, or to the officers, agents, employees, or any others who are on the premises frap instructions or by the sufferance of the permittee or his/her associates; or for damages or interference caused by wildlife or employees or Tepresentatives of the Goverment carrying out their official responsibilities. The permittee agrees to save the United States or any of its agencies bamless from any and all claims for damages or losses that may arise or be incident to the flooding of the premises resulting from any asecciated Goverment river and harbor, flood con- trol, reclamation, or Tennessee Valley Authority activity. 4. Operating Rules and Laws. The permittee shall keep the premises ina neat ami orderly condition at all times, ami shall comply with all municipal, comty, and State laws applicable to the operations wmder the permit as well as all Federal laws, rules, and regulations governing National Wildlife Refuges and the area described in this permit. The permittee sball comply with all ins- tructions applicable to this permit issued by the refuge officer in charge. The permittee shall take all reasonable precextions to prevent the escape of fires and to suppress fires and shall render all Feasonable assistance in the suppression ‘af refuge fires. 3S. Responsibility cf Permittee. The pemit- tee, by operating on the premises, shall be con- sidered to heave accepted theee premises with all the facilities, fixtures, or improvements in their existing condition as of the date of this permit. At the end of the period specified or upon earlier termination, the permittee shall give up the pre- mises in as good order and condition as when received except for reasonable wear, tear or damage occurring without fault or negligence. The permittee will fully repay the Service for any and all damage directly or indirectly resulting from negligence or failure on his/her part, or the part of anyone of his/her associates, to use reasonable care. 6. Revocation Policy. This permit may be revoked by the Regional Director of the Service without notice for noncompliance with the terms hereof or for violation of general and/or specific laws or regulations governing National Wildlife Refuges or for nomse. Tet ie at all times subjecc to diecretionary revocation by the Director of the e-—1 ne Se nn a ee kent through any authorized representative, may take possession of the said premises for its own and sole use, or may enter and possess the premises as the agent of the permittee and for his/her account. 7. Compliance. Yailure cof the Service to insist upon a strict compliance with ary of this permit's terms, conditions, ani requirements shall mot constitute a waiver or be considered as a giving up of the Service's right to thereafter enforce any of the permit's tarms, conditions, or Tequirements. 8. Termination Policy. At the termination of this permit, the permittee shall immediately give up possession to the Service representative, Teserving, however, the rights specified in para- gtzph 9. If he/she fails to do so, he/she will pay the Goverment, as liquidated damages, an amount double the rate specified in this permit for the entire time possession is withheld. Upon yielding possession, the permittee will scill be allowed to reenter as needed to remove his/her property as etated in paragraph 9. The acceptance of any fee for liquidated damages or any other act of adminis- tration relating to the contimed tenancy is not to be considered as an affirmance of the permittees action nor shall it operate as a waiver of the Goverment's right to terminate or cancel the permit for the breach of any specified condition or - Tequirement. 9. Removal of Permittee's Property. Upon the expiration or termination of this permit, if all rental charges and/or damage claims due to the Government have been paid, the permittee my, within a reasonable period as stated in the permit or as determined by the refuge officer in charge but noc to exceed 60 days, remove all structures, machinery, and/or other equipment, etc., from the premises for which he/she is responsibile. Within this period the permittee must also remove any other of his/her property including his/her acknow- ledged share of products or crops grown, ct, barvested, stored, or stacked on the premises. Upon failure to remowe acy cf the above items within the aforesaid period, they shall become the property of the United States. 10. Transfer of Privileges. This permit is not transferable, ami no privileges herein mc tioned may be sublet or made s«vailable to any person or interest not mentioned in this permit. Wo interest hereunder may accrue through lien or be transferred to a third party without the epproval of the Regional Director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the permit shall not be used for speculative purposes. ll. Conditions of Permit not Pulfilled. If the permittee fails to fulfill any of the con- ditions and requirements set forth herein, all money paid under this permit shall be retained by the Goverment to be veed to satisfy as much of the pernittee's obligations as possible. . 12. Officials Barred from Participating. No Member of Congress or Resident Commissioner shall participate in any part of this contract or to any benafir that may arise from it, but this provision shall not pertain to this contract if made with a corporation for its general benefit. 13, Nendiscrimination in Employment. The peraittee agrees to be bound by the equal oppor- timitw elauae of Executive Order 11246. as amended. S = - T ef wo USE -SESMIT CONDITIONS Fermit No.: Al- ~84-017 Station No.: Date: June 15, 1764 wm tate wildlife Laws and regul w All aeproeariate Federal and ticns will be abided by. Helicopter cperations will be by most expeditious route to and from well sites, base camp and Unalaska/Dutch Harber to avoid wildlife disturbance or harrassment. any diecoveries of nesting birds or fox dens (including location. dats and number) will be reportec t2 the issuing officer es convenient. but no iater than Septemper S. f& copy ef this permit and a copy of the Aleut Corperation letter of non-ebjection will be available on Unala Island during the period of use. a7 steric2l er archaeological sites, including buriel caves berabaras or World War II facility or equipment remains. will mot be disturbec. Searching for, digging up, tampering with, disturping., handling or detinating World War If ordinance or military dsoris ise prohibited. fli litter and/or garbage and/or human waste will be removed er disposed of at authorized disposal sites or following erocedures described in Exnibit 4. The U. &. Fish and Wildlife Service assumes no resoonsibili- ties fer accidents or injuries sustained during activities performed under this permit. any ebservations of unusual wildlife, including Aleutian Ceaneds ceese, will be reported to the issuing officer as convenient, but no later than September To. Camplete lists of ell personnel, including estimsted pericds e+ camo cccupancy and employer. * performing under this permit ll be kept current and oravided to the iesuing ortficer ier to duly 1, and as scon as possible when revised. 11 be notified by tei moleted anc all materi by this permit. ESIAL USE -FPERNIT CONDITIONS Fermit No.: Al-84-017 Station Ho.: 7asgol Date: June 15, !784 l appreariate Federal and State wildiife laws and regula- ons will be abided by. slicopter cperations will be by most expeditious route to a from well sites, base camp and Unalaska/Dutch Harber to void wildlife disturbance or harrassment. Any discoveries of nesting birds or fox dens (including location, date and number) will be reported t2 the issuing officer es cenvenient. but no iater than Septemper s. A copy ef this permit and a cery of the Aleut Corperation letter of non-ebjection will be available on Unalaska Isiand during the period of use. Historical er archeeclogical sites, including buriel caves, berabaras or World Wer II facility er equipment remains. will not be disturbed. Searching for. digsine up, tampering with, isturoping. handiing or detinatine Werld War II ordinance or military d¢snris is prohibited. #11 Litter and/or gertbage and/or human wes will be ramaved er disposed of at authorized disposal sites or following erocedures described in Exnibit A. The U. &. Fieh and Wildlife Service assumes no resoonsidilii- ties <er accidents or injuries sustained during activities performed under this permit. Any cbservations of unusual wildlife, including Aleutian Ceneds ceess, will be reported to the issuing officer as convenient, but ne later than September <0. Camplete lists of all parses including estimsted periads e+ camo cccupancy and employer. * performing under this permit will be kent current and provided to the issuing orticer prier to July 1. and a= scon as possible when revised. Tee issuing officer will be notified by teiennone or letter field wort is complated and all material is remeved all sites covered by this permit. RED ZEILLEMARER ce Maneger ing officer 22 AI-84-017 do.s 7450 June 15, 1784 wm w cr 0 = = - Oo ron oh 0 we z in » 2 o t 0 2 c l arepronriate Federal and cons will be abided oy. licopter eperations will be by most expeditious route to d from weil sites, base camp and Unalaska/Dutch Harber to void wildlife disturbance or harrassment. . x. Any discoveries of nesting birds or fox dens (including location. dates and number) will be reported ta the issuing officer es cenvenient., but no iater than Septemper Te. e f - & seny ef this permit and a cepy of the Aleut Corporation letter of non-ebjection will be available on Unaleska Isiand during the period of use. = 5S. Histeric2l er archasological sites, including buriel caves, bearabaras or World War II facility or equipment remains, will mot be disturbed. &. Searching for. digging up. tampering with, cistursing, handling or detinating Werld War II ordinance ar military daoris is prohibited. 7. S11 Litter and/or garbage and/or human waste er disposed of at authorized disposal sites erocedures described in Exnibit A. S. The U. S&S. Fieh and Wildlife Service assumes no resoonsi ties ¢er accidents or injuries sustained du performed under this permit. 3S, Any cbservations of unusual wildlife, including Aleutian Ceneds ceese, will be reported to the issuing officer as convenient, but no later than September To. 16. Camolete lists of all oe including estimsted pericds e+ cama cccupancy and employer. performing under this permit will be keot current and srovided to the issuing officer ‘ler to July 1, and as econ as possible when revised. ti. Tre issuing officer will be notified by telepnone or letter field wort is completed and all material is removed all srtes covered by this permit. C. FRED ZEILLEMSAMER Fefuce Manéger Tesuing 2 car Date: u) ba m o. (fh TAL USE -SESMIT CONDITIONS Permit No.: Al-84-017 Station Ho.: 74502 Date: June 15, 1784 arpreoriate Federal and State wildlife laws and regule- All ticns will be abided by. woe Helicopter cperations will be by most expeditious route to and from well sites, base camp and Unalaska/Dutch Harber to avoid wildlife disturbance or harrassment. Any discoveries of nesting birds or fox dens (including -lecation. date and number) will be reported ta the issuing officer es convenient. but mo iater than Septemper Fu. A copy of thie permit and a copy of the Aleut Corseration letter of non-cbjection will be available on Unélaska Isiend during the period of use. Histeric2l er archesological sites, including burial caves, barabaras or World War tt facility or equipment remains, will not be disturbed. Searching for. digging up. tampering with, cistursing, handling or detinating Werld War II ordinance or military d¢soris i= prohibited. fll litter and/or garbage and/cr humen waste will be removed er disposed of at authorized disposal sites or following procedures cescribed in Exnibit A. The U. &. Fiech and Wildlife Service assumes no resoonsidili- ties <er accidents or injuries sustained during activities performed under this permit. Sny cbservations of unusual wildlife, including Aleutian Ceneds ceese, will be reported to the issuing ofticer as convenient, but no later than September To. Complete lists of all personnel, including estimeted periads e+ cama cccupancy and employer. serforming under this permit will &e kept current and provided to the issuing orticer prier toe duly 1. and as secon as possible when revised. e- will be natified by teiernone or letter is completed and all material is remeaved vered by this permit. bye C. FRED ZEILLEMARER FRefuce Manager Issuing Jfficear Date: FR. Homer w 7 m mo a AL USE -SESMIT CONDITIONS Fermit No.: AI-84-017 Station No.: 74502 Date: June 15, 1784 All aepreariate Federal and State wildlife laws and regula- ticns will be abided by. c slicopter cperations will be by most expeditious route to and from well sites, base camp and Unalaska/Dutch Harber to avoid wildlife disturbance or harrassment. any discoveries of nesting birds or fox dens. ccation, date and number) will be reported officer es cenvenient. but no iater than Sept A cosy ef this permit and a cary of the Aleut letter of non-cbjection will be available on during the period of use. Historical er archaeological sites, including burial caves, barebaras or World Wer II facility er equipment remains, will not be disturbed. Searching for, digging up, tampering with, cistursing, hendling or detinating Werld War II ordinance ar military dsnris is prohibited. fll litter and/or garbage and/or human waste will be remove er dienoeed of at authorized disposal sites or failcwing erocsdures described in Exnibit A. The U. S&S. Fish and Wildlife Service assumes no ressonsidili- ties <er accidents or injuries sustained during activities performed under this permit. Any cbservations of unusual wildlife, including Aleutian Ceneds esess, will be reported to the issuing efticer as Convenient, but no later than September 70. Comolete lists of all personnel, including estimated pericds e+ camo cccupancy and employer. performing under this permit will be kent current and provided to a issuing officer ‘ier to July 1. and e= secon as poszibl when revised. Tee iesuing officer will be notified by teiepnone or letter wren eld wort is completed and all material is removed ll sites covered by this permit. C. FRED ZEILLEMARER FRefuce Manager lesuing Officer Date: Larry Calver, USFWS. Ancncrage Jenn Mertin, AMNWR, Homer Vincent Tutiakeoff, Guneliaska Corp. REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL. INC. 11823 EAST SLAUSON AVENUE, SUITE ONE SANTA FE SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 90670 TWX 910-586-1696 (213) 945-3661 June 22, 1984 Mr. Roger Mochnick Region X Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Sixth Avenue Seattle, Washington 98101 Dear Mr. Mochnick: This letter is a formal request to your agency for an amend- ment to Republic's Short Form C Application (AK-003956-0) and to requirements 2 (a4ischarge rate) ana 6 (date) of your letter of June 30, 1983 (see Attachment 1 for copies of poth) which allowed discharges of geothermal fluids by Republic Geothermal, Inc. without formal issuance of an NPDES permit. Republic wishes to amend this letter to allow controlled discharges of fluids as part of the 1984 geothermal exploration project on Unalaska Island. Following is a brief description of Republic's proposed explor- atory program for 1984, and our reasons for requesting an amendment to the 1983 EPA letter. Republic, under a contract with the Alaska Power Authority, is continuing an exploratory geothermal program on the eastern flanks of Makushin Volcano on Unalaska Island (see Attachment 2). Last summer, Republic confirmed the existence of a geothermal resource by drilling and testing the Makushin ST-l1 exploration well. The well was flow tested for four days, and the geothermal fluids from this test were discharged into tributaries of the Makushin Valley river under Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) Short Term Water Quality Varaiance 8321-CA001, and the previously mentioned letter from your agency of June 30, 1983. During the 1984 field season, Republic proposes two additional discharge operations: 1) flow test Makushin ST-l1 for approxi- mately 40 days; deepening the well approximately 500 feet; and 2) flow test ST-l again for about four days after. The 40-day flow test will occur from early July to mid-August, while the four-day flow test should occur in early September. Geothermal fluids from these tests are again proposed to be discharged into tributaries of tne Makusnin Valley river. Maximum liquid discharge rete will not exceed 0.23 cudic feet per second (CFS), oF about 50,000 pounds per hour. An application for another Short Term Water Quality Variance wes sent to the ADEC on June 5, 1984 (Attachment 3) and is awaiting approval. REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL, INC. Mr. Roger Mochnick June 22, 1984 Page Two As mentioned, Republic anticipates the commencement of the 40-day flow test during the first week of July. It is our understanding from telephone conversations with Diane Soderlund of the EPA in Anchorage that the EPA approval process should be completed by that time. Republic appreciates your attention to this request. Should you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me or Dwight Carey of Republic. Thank you. ye Chris Josepn Environfental Affairs Specialist CAJ:acw Attachments cc: Diane Soderlund (with attachments) ATTACHMENT 1 Form Acproved OMB Na. 1542-20096 NATIONAL POLLUTANT OISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM TRPPLICATION Minmen APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO OISCHARGE - SHORT FORM C FOR — 7 -—" Ta be filed only by cersons engaged in manufacturing and rining Oe not atze=se to coiete this form before reading accocsanying instructions - _,_ Please print or type NOTE: Please see attachment for complete project description. Tl. Rase, address, location, and taleshone auzher of facility arocucing discharge A, Mame Saall-dimeter csothernal well near Makushin Volcano on Unalaska Island 8, Mailing address Of Applicant: Republic Geothermal, Inc. 1. Street address _11823 E. Slauson Avenue, Suite One 2. City Santa Fe Sorings 2. State California - oS . — eee 4. County Loe Angele S. ZIP 90670 ees _—_——————_______ C. location: 1, Streee 3.738... R.120W. | Seward Meridian 2 City N/A 3. Couney (Un2laska Island) LSS 4. Stace i ataske O. Telephone No, WU2TR 945-2641 _ of Applicant. There will not be a telephone ive at the géothermal wellsite. 2 se TOT (Leave blank) i. Busser of exployees _2>8toximatelv 3-5 on-sice during well testing operations. —SREroR a tetv 3-5 on-sit t 4. [f you meet the condition stated above, check here and suogly the information asked for below, After Completing these items, please complete the dace, title, aed signature blocks below and retum this form to the proper reviewing office without cormleting the remainder of the form, : A, Mame of organization responsible for receiving waste = 8, Facility receiving waste: : Te Mame . 2, Strese address ee 3. City ee 4, Couney S. State &, ZIP _ TL 5. Principal product, Craw saterial (Check one) EL2shed geothermal fluid ‘8. Principal process _ Fluid will be flashed arid allowed t0 cool prior to discharee. 7. Maximam accunt of principal procucz precuced or raw material consumed per (Check one) fasis 1-99 loseis$ | zZDd-19¢ | sog-3s9 1e00~ s000- 10 ,200- 53,200 . s999 sse9 33399 or sore : (1) (2) (3) (4) (S) (8) (7) (8) A. Day | | | | | | | | 8. Montn | | | | | | | | C. Year | “| ox | | | | - | | ss EPA Ferm TSO (Rew. 3274) (PREVICUS EDITION Mar we UIES UNTIL suMeLyY eo @. Maxisese amount of arincisal sroduce orcduced or rw macarial consumed, resorted in ites 7, abeve, is seasured in (Cheez one): A.S pounds 8.St Cg sarrets O.c Susheis £.S square feet F 3S gallons G.c pieces or units Higother, ssecity S$. (a) Check here if discharge occurs all year GC, or (b) Check the sentn(s) discharge occurs: Note: Only 3 to 6 comsecutive days once in September 1.5 January -S Fesruary ioMarch 4.c April S.cMay 6.c June- 7.5 duly 8.5 Aucust 9.3 Seoterser 10.5 Occsser 11.c Moverser IZ.c Cecemter (¢) Check how many days per weet: = 1.0} 2.5243 3B ts 4.06-7 See Note above. IQ. Types of waste water discharged to surface wacers only (check as acolicadle} a ne ee anamemmmend Yolume treated berore | Flow. gallons ger czerating cay 7 | discarging (sercent) Oisctarce ser cperating cay 0.12399 | Iccd—-999 | soco-ssss {| 10,00T- SO,0CO- | Mone} Q.1- | 20- | 63- $< ; 49,399 ar sore 29.3 | 64.9 | $8.9] 100 (1) (2) (3) . (4) (5) (8) | (7) | (8) | (Ss) | 9) A. Sanitary, caily | | | | averece §. Cooling wacer, ecc. | | | | cily averace | | | NT | | CQ, Process wacer, daily averace * | =x = en OD nn cay Sai tEISStIESStIESSSSIE nan . Maxisua ser coerate img cay for tatal | | | | me et dtscenarce (ail _tvoes) Tl. If any of the chree typ]s of wastes idenct tied in item 10, either treated or untrastad, are discharged to places other Shan surface waters, cnect below as asplicapie. Average flow, gallons ser ccerating day e pesserrenigi a, 1-999 teoo—se23 soog-ss29 | -10,000-49,295 | £0,000 or more (7) (2) 2 (4) (3) A, Municigal sewer syste | | | | | 8. Uncerground «ell | | | | | C. Sestic tank \- | | \ 0. Evaceratien lacoon or pond | | | E. Other, ssecity | | | | TZ. Muster of secarate discharge points: = ALR! 8.0243 C.c4-5 "0.56 or mre 13. Mame of recsiving water or waters Unnamed trtbutartes to river in Makushin Vallev, Unalaska ; Isle 14, Does your disctarce contain or fs {it pessible for your discnarce to coitain oan are or core of che following substances 2dded_ 2s a result of your oceraticns, activities, or processes: ammonia, cyanice, alucinus, deryilius, cacsiua, >. Dt eae Groesium, csocer, lead, sercury, nicel, seleniua, zinc, phenols, oi] and NOTE: Please see ete grease, and Gilorine (residual). A. Zyes 8.on9 project desczistic I certify that [ am familiar with tie information contained in the acolicacion and thae to the dest of sy inowiedge and belief sucn infermacion iste, comlete, and accurate. ; Tinothy M. Evans Vice President _s- 7A Frintee Name af Person Signing - “Title ee i ips am i983 crite | By! ‘byte DoT tae Oate Appiication Signed Signature of Acai feane { eee \ \. 13 U.LA.G Secaon 997 sedan at: fi i Whoewer, in any matter within te judadcton of any decarmrent ar agemcr of Se (mut lates krowengiy and willuily fais flex, oncads, of vers uo by any (nace, scheme or dawcea Metensi lect, or maces any (aise, Gescous, or [rasauent statements or regresatisuene ar mrasees or uses arp [aise wating of comment cnowing same Wo catan any [aise Ecotioua of femeculem( stacement or entry, sball be Ened ast more Gam 310,000 of impasoned mel more RECEIVEUYYe = US. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY TE S74y, REGION X ° Ba “sy 1200 SIXTH AVENUE 3 V7 s SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101 5 WZ < %, ¢ ATIN OF M/S 521 JUN 3.0 1983 Timothy M. Evans, Vice President Republic Geothermal, Inc. 11823 East Slauson Avenue Santa Fe Springs, California 90670 Re: NPDES Application No.: AK-003956-0 Dear Mr. Evans: We have received your National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit application identified by the above referenced number, and have determined that, for administrative reasons, we will not issue an NPDES permit for your discharge at this time. However, during your geothermal explorations at Makuskin Valley on Unalaska Island, your facility is expected to comply with the following requirements: 1, The State of Alaska Water Quality Standards shall be met except for total dissolved solids and temperature at the point of discharge. 2. The maximum flow rate shall not exceed 0.18 cubic feet per second. 3. There shall be no discharge of drilling muds or cuttings to the receiving water. 4. Discharge outfalls shall be placed to minimize sediment and temperature impacts to the receiving water. 5. Notification of the EPA, Alaska Department of Fish and Game and other involved agencies if suspended solids are significantly different from predicted levels. 6. There shall be no discharge of pollutants after September 30, 1983. If you have any questions, please contact our office at (206) 442-1272. Sincerely, Bhaera P A Harold E. Geren, Chief Water Permits and Compliance Branch cc: Tawna Nicholas, Republic Geothermal Steve Grabacki, D & M Kim Sundberg, ADFG Robert Flint, ADEC . Dianne Soderlund, A00 7 : Al LACNioivs ~ STATE OF ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONM sav om APPLICATION FOR WASTEWA OR CERTIFICATION OF REA In accoréance with Alaska Statutes, Title 46, “Water, Ric, and Environ- menct2l Conservation", Chapts= 03, Section 46.03.100, and rules anc regen lations promulgated shereunder, or in accorcance with 33 U.S.C. 466 et. seq., sec. 401, we: a, _Republic Geothermal, Inc. (name oz applicant) Slauson Avenue, Suite One, Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670 (acazess Of applicant) 11823 E. herewith apply for a Short Term Water Quality Variance (X) c. Waste Discharge Permit ( ) Certification of Re2zsonable Assurance. ( for the following proposed activity: g ( ) Construction ( ) Construction with Discharge ( ) Discharge Only (Xx) TYDE . Geothermal Exploration Well Flow Test OF INDUSTRY: LOCATION OF WASTE DISCEARGING FACILITY 7.73S., R.120W., Seward Meridian LOCATION OF WASTE DISCEARGING ee ess Fxhibi ) PHONE: N/A T.73S., R.120W., Seward Meridian eens enone Inal2s Tslang (Ple att G. LOCATION OF WASTE DISCEARGING POINT(S): Unalaska Island. (Please ses attached Exhibit A.) &. WASTE DISCEARGE VOLUME: INDUSTRIAL PROCESSES COOLING WATER Maximum (gallons/déay) : 150,000 N/A Daily Average (gallons/dGay) : 150,000 . N/A I. RAW WATER SUPPLY: Source: N/A Volume N/A ¢gallons/é a a Unnamed tributary to 3. NAME OF RECEIVING WATER (or sewereace system) > Makushin Valley River K. CHARACTERISTICS OF WASTE FLOW: Deseribe in detail the chemical and phys Gal propercies OF tne ezziuen= to be Gischarsed to State waters (ineluc but not limited to temperature, pH, dissolvec oxygen, coler, total dis- solved solids, suspended scliés, BODS, COD, oils, phenol, heavy metals, chicrinated hyérocaer5bons, ana other biocides, acidity, alkalinity, ets Also include a description of sampling and analytic methods used co ce rive this information. Submit this infozmmaction with your application Exhibic Ll. Please see Attachment Iv to attached Exhibit A. . . Zz ‘Wd SEMICALS USED IN PROCESSES: Chemical, or Quantity Used per Day* Actual Name Average Maxinun N/A ee ee es SREE SEER ees See = ee —— eee ee eee a ————$—$$— PLANT OPERATION: Number of Employees ver Snitt Days ver Year Dav Swing Nicht Averace N/A - Total For 44 N/A N/A N/A Duaration of : Permit N/A N/A N/A PRODUCTION: Quantity Produced per Day* ‘Average Maximum Item N/A Ee RERARSEDE Anas! Ee ————— SANITARY WASTES: Treatment N/A Discharseé to Explain any seasonal variation in waste discharge volumes, plant oper2- tions, raw materials, and chemicals used in processes, and/or sroductic Please see Attachment IV to attached Exhibit A. Sn nn Senn a nnn ea * Please svecify units. For example: Tons ber éav, peunds ser av; barrels per day, etc. 7 wW led ic of the sources of all industrial wastes inéustry. Describe in detail the treatment given to each stes. Include in this descristica the disposal methods ese wastes ané also for any sludge collected by your waste t system. Include a schematic flow éiagram showing the sources of all wastes and their flow pattern. Submit this information with your asplication as Exhibit 2. N/A Briefly describe any adéitional treatment or changes in waste éisposal methods vou are planning or have under construction. Submit this inicr mation as Exhibit 3. Include all information for previous questions, where additional space is necessary as part of Exhibit 3. Also include any adéitional information or comments you feel are necessary <0 clazi= it this application with Exhibit 3. w/a If the activity does not involve a discharge to waters of the State (such as construction of facilities in the waterway, éredging, land fil etc.), completely describe the proposed activity including: maps show- ing the location of the facility or activity anc the waterway involved; a description of the character of each structure; the quantity and tyne of éredge or fill material involved; the proposed method of instrumen- tation wnich will be used to measure the volume of any solids deposits ané to determine its effect upon the waterway, rates anc periods of deposition; duration of the activity. Submit this information with you application as Exhibit 4. N/A : er esl | ; information given on this application is complete and accurate to est of my knowledge. \ / ty @ uP SNe A ! . ce) v Leaps L ry ll | fin) 1 Signature cain) ; Timothy M. Evans’ Printed Name Republic Geothermal, Inc. Vice President Title June 5, 1984 —$—$—$—$————————— ara Date oP) REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL. INC. 11823 EAST SLAUSON AVENUE, SUITE ONE SANTA FE SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 90670 TWX 910-586-1696 (213) 945-36€ June 26, 1984 Mr. Fred 2Zeillemaker Refuge Manager Aluetian Islands Unit Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge DP. O. Box 5251, Naval Air Station FPO Seattle, Washington 98791 Dear Mr. Zeillemaker: Enclosed please find signed originals of Republic Geothermal, Inc's. Special Use Permit (No. AI-84-017) and its attached Special Use Conditions. A minor correction was made to reflect actual operations under the "purpose" section of the permit. Republic will be extending the existing Makushin ST-1 well by 500 feet rather than extending a temperature gradient hole. Republic expects to receive consistency certification from the Alaska Office of Management and Budget by June 28. As such, a copy of the certification is not enclosed in this package, Sut will instead be forwarded to you by the OMB. Republic will also verbally contact you once the certification review process is satisfactorily completed. Finally, in accordance with Special Use Permit Condition No. 10, attached please find a list of personnel working uncer this Special Use Permit, including their estimated period of stay ana@ their employer. Thank vou for your prompt attention to the processing of this permit. Sincezely, o- . — ( Le awe Chris A. Joseph Environmental Affairs Specialist CAT /v1ls RLtacnaments 0 AL USE SSRMIT CONSITIONS Fermit No.: AI-84-017 Statian No.2: 74502 Date: June 15, 19284 411 appropriate Federal and ate wildlife laws and regula- tions will be abided By. Helicopter operations will be by mest expeditious route to and from well sites, base camp and Unaleska/Dutch Harber to avoid wildlife disturbance or harrassment. Bny discoveries of nesting birds or fox cens (including location, date and number) will be reportec ta the issuing officer as convenient, but no later than September 30. A copy of this permit and a cany ef the Aleut Corporaticn letter of non-objection will be available on Unaleska Island during the period of use. Histerical or archasclogi barabareas or World War II will not be disturbed. i s, including burial caves, lity er equipment remains, Searching for, digging up, tampering with, disturbing, handling er detinating Werld War If ordinance or military debris is prohibited. be removed All litter and/or gertage and/or human waste will 2 r following er disposed af at authoriz zed disposal sites 0 procedures described in Exhibit A. Tne U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service 2esumes no resoonsibili- ties for accidents or injuries sustained during activities performed under this permit. Any ebservations-of unusual wildlife, including Aleutian Canada geese, will be reported to the issuing officer 2 convenient, but no later than September 30. wn Complete lists cf all personnel, including estimated periads of camp occupancy and employer, performing under this permit will be kest current and provided to the issuing cefficer prier ts July 1, and es soon as possible when revised. ified by ts “rs C. FRED ZETLLEMAKER Refuse Manager esuing Officer ate: Larry Caélver. Joann Mertin. LIST OF PERSONNEL WORKING UNDER Technical Assistant Danny Sanders (RGI)* vs Ee. Yarter (R2GT) R >. P. Parmentier (RGT) Larry Peterson (Dames & Moore) Steve Grasacki (Dames & Moore) Chris Josepa (RGI) vave Denig-Chakroff (APA) PERMIT NO. AI-84-017 July 1-6 & 21-25, August 5-15, August 238- September 6 July 1-6, Auguste 6-10 July 1-6 & 21-25, August 6-9 & 13-15, August 28-Sestember 6 July 23-31, August 28- September 4 August 12-18 ~~. July 1-6 August 7-12, August 28- September 2, September li 4 iy Z y Yr | it < tO} ‘yy it iy t ‘ U0 oO ~ 4] iy ” July 24-28, August 28- September 4 Intermittent visits List of Personnel Working Under Special Use Permit No. AI-84-017 Page Two CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTORS D. Pierce (PST) S. Richards (PSI) Technical Assistants (3 people) HELICOPTER CONTRACTOR Gordon Henson (=RA) One helicopter mechanic (ERA) GEOPHYSICAL CREW Greg Shore (Premier Geoohysics) 5 Technical Assistants (Premiezr Geophysics) COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT Technical Crew (2 people) DRILLING CONTRACTORS Arctic Resources Drilling Company Supervisor (ARD) Drilling Crew (7 people) (ARD) TENTATIVE FIELD DATES July l0-August 15 August 15-September 8 July 10-19, September 5-10 TENTATIVE FIELD DATES July 1-September 13 July 1-September 13 (housed in Dutch Harbor) July 25-Septemper 3 July 25-September 3 TENTATIVE FIELD DATES July 16-18, September 6-8 TENTATIVE FIELD DATES July 18-September 13 July 18-September 13 - REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL. INC. 11823 EAST SLAUSON AVENUE SANTA FE SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 90670 910-586-1696 oe he rs elt (213) 948-3661 “Dear Mr. Wright - and one small-diameter stratigraphic. test hole (Makushin. ST-1) "under this Temporary Water’Use permit:-:To complete the work: “which was planned for the 1983 field. season, Republic currently . proposes to drill one additional 1,200-foot temperature gradient =: “June 26, 1984. ; Mr. Bill Wri ght” oe Division of Land and Water Management. : Alaska Department of Natural Resources . Pouch 7-0005 : we 323 East Fourth Avenue . & ABGHASSe, AK 99510 io Pursuant to ‘your ‘Shone’ conversation with Dwight Carey- Republic Geothermal, this ‘letter is Republic's formal request to extend our Temporary Water Use Permit 82-12 (see attached) : Republic has previously drilled three temperature gradient holes’. -- hole, to deepen the existing Makushin ST-1 well approximately..-..°- 500 feet, and support the operations from a field base .camp..A.:. - detailed description of the proposed opeseyacns. is. attached aso oS Exhibit A of this request. rolcs ot : 2 : Republic currently plans ‘to commence water eee soon after July 20. Approximately 500 gallons of water per day). -~ .will be needed for drilling fluid make-up water during the esti-. mated 30 days required to drill both holes. In addition, the. .-- 8 x. field base camp will consume approximately 1,000 gallons per day ~~ =° for about 45 days. Republic proposes to obtain water from snow- melt, rivulets, or streams in close proximity to the existing. well and temperature gradient hole locations and the camp. . Water will be transported by hose to the site via a small pump and/or gravity flow system. Thus, a total of approximately - 60,000 gallons (0.18 acre-feet) from two or three different® ::. water sources would be used during the entire 1984 operations. © This project is being reviewed as a part of the Alaska Coastal Management Program (State I.D. Number AK84060817A). However, this specific permit extension request is a categorical approval not subject to program review. - CAJ:wp co REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL, INC. Mr. Bill Wright June 26, 1984 Page 2 ia Thank you for your consideration of this request. . Should you have any questions please feel free to contract either Dwight Carey or myself. : Sincerely, Chris Joseph .- ” oy Envir ental Affairs Specialist — Attachments RECEIVED Ma’ 27 1982 STATE OF ALASER [uss sme DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES poUcH 7-005 MANA 323 EAST FOURTH AVENUE en LAND AND WATER Me eMENT ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99510 Phone: (907) 276-2653 TEMPORARY WATER USE PERMIT TWP 82-12 Temporary Water Use Permit TWP 82-12 is hereby issued to Republic Geo- thermal, Incorporated, P.0. Box 3388, Sante Fe Springs, California 90670 to develop a temporary appropriation of 30,000 gallons per day from unnamed creeks for temperature gradient hole drilling operations located on Unalaska Island within Townships 72 & 73 South, Range 119 & 120 West, Seward Meridian, for the summer field seasons of 1982 and 1983 CONDITIONS OF TWP 82-12: 1. Per AS 16.05.870: Each water intake structure shall be centered and enclosed in a 1.5 foot square screened box to prevent fish entrapment, entrainment, or injury. The effective screen opening may not exceed 0.04 inch. . . Per AS 16.05.870: The stream bank shall not be disturbed. ro Operation: State, federal, or local. You are encouraged to contact the Anchorage Permit Information and Referral Center, 338 Denali Street, Room 1206, Telephone 279-0254, if you are in doubt as to the need for obtaining other permits. The Division of Land and Water Management may suspend operations effected under this permit whenever such suspension shall in its judgement be necessary to protect the public or that of a prior appropriator. This permit shall expire: September 30 » 1983 Date Issued: nw Clie 77 » 1982 Approved: A. Lue Hee. Acting Anchorage Area Manager Division of Land and Water Department of Natural Resources RECEIVED+.- 2 1234 MEMORANDUM State of Alaska TO: FROM: BY: project... The Gepartment will not require —_—_— Jack Eeesch oate. June 27, 1984 Regional Coordinator Div. of Governmental Coordination Ffrsno: 0684-IV-150 Office of Management & Budget TELEPHONENO: 267-2346 Dennis D. Kelso SUNECT: Republic Geothermal- Deputy Commissioner Discharge of Fluids Department of Fish and Game SID AK840608-17A Denby S. LR Habitat Biologist Region IV Habitat Division Department of Fish and Game The Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) has reviewed the proposed disposal of geothermal fluids as a fine mist to the Makushin Valley River drainage on Unalaska Island, by Republic Geothermal, Inc. Based upon_a similar disposal of fluids ‘conducted last_vear, and information submitted by Republic indicating that State Watér Quality Standards will be achieved. when the discharge reaches the mainstem of the Mekushin Vallev ‘River,. we -hayve.no objection to the~proposed z a Titite 16 Habitat Protection Permit for this proposed operation, since the discharge will occur upstream of the known distribution of anadromous fish in the Makushin Valley River. Pursuant to the Alaska Coastal Management Program, the department recommends that the project be found consistent if the following condition is incorporated in project approvals: \ i. Water quality shall be monitored in the Makushin Valley River during the 4-day flow test to be conducted in September. If constituents in the discharge approach tate Water Quality Standards at sample point MVB in the Makushin Valley River, then the discharge flow rate shall be reduced to assure compliance. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. co: ;B Carey, Republic B. Martin, DEC T. Bond, DNR te fe (213) 945-3661 TWX 910-586-1696 THY, mM. EVANS “}VICE PRESIDENT | nae hee Env ironmental ‘on: Anchorage ," “Alaska : gut magi hereby withdraws its I tions for’ “Solid “Waste. Management Activities, wich were, “sen Mr." Jack” ‘Heesch of, the Alaska” Of fic ‘Management & Budget.’ The are dated. ‘5. dune, 84 3 ‘and relate to" pee” note eae eothermal “exploratory” dril laska see tons fares: » pcre Rr o 4 We understand the thes permit applicati ‘time. However, *Republic’ ‘will! be, “submitting a letter for ‘approval fi h rary storage of waste from ‘bot! amp and drilling operatio ‘Pursuant to "today" Ss ( L that the withdrawal - of these CAI/STG/sle y ee Mr. Jack Heesch, OMB. Mr. Carl Harmon, ADEC ; Mr. Steve Grabacki, rr & Moore REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL, INC. 11823 EAST SLAUSON AVENUE, SUITE ONE SANTA FE SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 90670 MOTHY M. EVANS (213) 945-3661 WX 910-586-1696 MEE PRESIDENT 29 June 1984 T Ms. Julie Howe : Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 437 — Street : Anchorage, AK 99501 Dear Ms. Howe: In our conversation at your office yesterday, we discussed Republic's application for a Short-Term Water Quality Variance related to our proposed discharge of geothermal fluid during the test of our exploratory well on Unalaska Island. The following elements and constituents are those which (based on data collected in the 1983 monitoring effort) may exceed water quality standards in Plateau Creek, because the creek's discharge is so small: temperature lead turbidity manganese total suspended solids (TSS) mercury r total dissolved solids (TDS) selenium arsenic . sodium boron ‘ zine cadmium ‘ chloride In our program of monitoring the well test, we will attempt to measure these and other parameters at sampling stations MVB and MV. If station MVB is temporarily inaccessible due to safety constraints, we will calculate the concentrations of the constituents at MVB, based on the formula: : Flow at MVB Concentration at MVB = Concentration at MV X (Figwat my) During the fieldwork, we will monitor the rise in conductivity and chloride concentration, in order to determine when the geothermal fluid has Teached a sampling station. This will allow us to appropriately schedule the taking of samples for later laboratory analysis (eg - TDS, metals, etc.). Finally, our camp contractor (Production Services, Inc.) will install a grease trap on the camp's gray water leach line, as requested by ADEC. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL, INC. CZ, Chris A. eph Environmeftal Affairs Specialist CAI:STG:dlg pe: Diane Soderlund, Environmental Protection Agency Steve Grabacki, Dames & Moore 800 Cordova, Suite 101 Dames & Moore | Anchorage, Alaska 99501 =~ | (907) 279-0673 = | Telex: 090-25227 Cable address: DAMEMORE July 2, 1984 ‘Ms. Julie Howe Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 437 E Street Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Dear Ms. Howe:. As requested in last week's telephone conversations among yourself, Mr. Chris Joseph of Republic Geothermal, Inc., and myself, this letter is to confirm that the measurement of pH will indeed be part of RGI/D&M's water quality monitoring program, during the flow test of RGI's exploratory geothermal well on Unalaska Island. Also, this letter is to advise ADHC that the equation supplied in RGI/D&M's letter of 29 June 1984 is not correct. The equation is intended to describe how we will calculate the concentration of water- borne constituents at sampling station MVB, based on their concentration of station MV, if MVB is temporarily inaccessible. The correct equation should read: Concentration at MVB = Concentration at MV x = at MV Flow at uve As we explained in our telephone conversations, we cannot use the con- centrations of constituents at station MVA to calculate those at MVB, because both stations are equally (in-)accessible. We realize that this formula is a conservatively-based calculation: it will be used only in the very unlikely event of station MVB being temporarily inaccessible. Thank you, again, for your assistance. If you have any further questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact us. Sincerely, -g fj 7 . Stéphen TY Grabacki Project Manager STG/en . ec: Dwight -Carey;-RGI Diane Soderlund, USEPA STATE OF ALAS / “"™ OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR CENTRAL OFFICE POUCH AW OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET JUNEAU, ALASKA 99811 PHONE: (907) 465-3562 DIVISION OF GOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION SOUTHEAST REGIONAL OFFICE SOUTHCENTRAL REGIONAL OFFICE NORTHERN REGIONAL OFFICE ourth Street 3301 Eagle Street Seventh Avenue Pouch AW, Room 306 Suite 307 Station H Juneau, AK 99811 Anchorage, AK 99503 Fairbanks, AK 99701 Phone: (907) 465-3562 Phone: (907) 272-3504 Phone: (907) 456-3084 Registered Mail July 5, 1984 Return Receipt Requested Mr. Dwight L. Carey Republic Geothermal, Inc. 11823 E. Slauson Ave., Ste. 1 Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670 Dear Mr. Carey: SUBJECT: UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION STATE I.D. NUMBER AK840608-17A The Division of Governmental Coordination (DGC) has completed the consistency review of your project in which you propose to conduct the third summer of field operations for the Unalaska Geothermal Project on Makushin Volcano on Unalaska Island. During the 1984 field season, Republic is proposing to: 1) test again the existing geothermal resource well, Makushin ST-1, this time for about 40 days; 2) drill to approximately 1,200 feet the previously approved, but not yet drilled, temperature gradient hole Sugarloaf A-1; 3) drill to deepen Makushin ST-1 about 500 feet and then test again for four days; and 4) conduct an electrical resistivity survey. As in previous years, personnel will be housed in a small, temporary field base camp, and all the operations will be supported entirely by helicopter. Based on our review, the Division concurs with your consistency certification that the project is consistent with the Alaska Coastal Management Program. This conclusive consistency determination applies to the following State and federal authorizations as per 6 AAC 50: ie U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Special Use Permit. 2. Alaska Department of Natural Resources (DNR) Geothermal [ Permit (2). 3. Alaska Department Of Environmental Conservation (DEC) Water Quality Variance. Mr. Dwight L. Carey -2- July 5, 1984 Unalaska Geothermal Exploration If changes to the original proposal are made during its implemen- tation, you are required to contact this office to determine if a review of the revision is necessary. By a copy of this letter we are informing the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service of our finding. , You will required to obtain the necessary solid waste disposal approvals for your project from the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation prior to conducting that portion of your project. This consistency review applies to those approvals also, provided you meet the statutory requirements of the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. Thank you for your cooperation with the Alaska Coastal Management Program. Sincerely, Robert L. Grogan Associate Director; Tack R. Heesch Regional Coordinator ce: Fred Zeillemaker U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Greg Brelsford, Anchorage Judy Bittner Department of Natural Resources Lance Trasky Department of Fish and Game James Eason Department of Natural Resources Meg Hayes Department of Natural Resources Bob Flint Department of Environmental Conservation col/238A/7-5-84 - = tes ro fs i SUATE UF ALES / "se sn OFFICE OF TME GOVERNOR roe JUNEAU, ALASKA 99811 PHONE: (997) 465-3568 OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET DIVISION OF GOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION SOUTHEAST RECIONAL OFFICE SOUTHCENTRAL REGIONAL OFFICE NORTHERN REGIONAL OFFICE 211 Fourtn Street, Room 306 3301 eagle Street, Suite 307 6 eventh Avenue Pouch AW. Anchorage, AK 99503 Station H Juneau, AK 99811 Phone: (907) 272-3504 Fairbanks, AK 99701 Phone: (907) 465-3562 Phone: (907) 456-3084 PROJECT INFORMATION SHEET APPLICANT: KEPYBLIC (aoltiee mac ZAC. PROJECT TITLE: OpArteses Crem Ar. CxxKoCA TDA) STATE I.D. NUMBER/REVIEWING OFFICE: aAKk840¢ og - Fun DAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Sez LPTTPICLA ED PROJECT LOCATION: Co ptAstrZ SZ A/D ELECTION DISTRICT: -ASTAL DISTRICT: AOA IE APPROVED PLAN YES —T‘fo PENDINI ACTIVITY TYPE: Energy FORMAT: £0 FOLEL FEDERAL APPROVALS/I.D. NUMBERS: S S Zier bd isuce eruree Sacra Ts STATE APPROVALS/I.D. NUMBERS: ADUL- Adi le-Ceornetmaclsenr(2) Pog. tdree Duntod el: Snrotdacze 3) PRE we Tice Me (?) REVIEWER MILESTONES (Day 1 ,] we& Z, [fb PL) REVIEW SCHEDULE: 30-day 50-Day REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BY: Jemectd fi COMMENTS DUE BY: 4 ] UME 2S 9E3 IES "ROJECT STATUS NOTIFICATION BY: JUME lt, iE PROJECT COORDINATOR: \ J BOI Hk z - kyl Rev: 3-20-84 CLOSE-OUT DATE: Yih S Lee ACTUAL # OF DAYS IN REVIEW: ae TYPE OF CLOSE-OUT: A ACTION CODE:~* REVIEWER PARTICIPATION: DNR “YES __NO DFG _ YES _ NO DEC Es /___NO DCRA _ YES ___NO DOTPF _ YES __No DCED ___YES ___NO LOCAL __ YES _ NO LAW _ YES __NO COASTAL DISTRICTS YES NO EXTENSION REQUESTED BY: __DNR DFG DEC COASTAL DISTRICT APPLICANT DGC PUBLIC HEARING: REQUESTED YES Ko HELD YES NO a FORMAL INFORMATION REQUEST MADE: YES NO IF YES, CLOCK STOPPED FOR DAYS ae REVIEW COMPLETED AT: REGIONAL LEVEL DIRECTOR LEVEL COMMISSIONER LEVEL POLICY RENDERED BY COMMISSIONERS: YES NO INITORING REQUIRED: YES NO 13 PROJ/pi/PERM STATE 0 F hh L [i S K [\ BILL SHEFFIELD, GOVERNOR DEPT. OF ENVIRGNMENTAL CONSERVATION Telephone: (907) Address: 274-2533 SOUTHCENTRAL REGIONAL OFFICE 437 E STREET/SUITE 200 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501 July 5, 1984 Mr. Timothy Evans Republic Geothermal 11823 E. Slauson Avenue, Suite 1 Sante Fe Springs, CA 90670 Dear Mr. Evans: RE: Water Quality Variance - 8421-CA001 The Department of Environmental Conservation has reviewed your request for a short term water quality variance for the non-point discharge of water as- sociated with geothermal exploration in the Makushin Valley on Unalaska Island. A water quality variance is granted for the test described in your June 6, 1984, application for the following parameters: 1) Temperature 8) Lead 2) Total Dissolved Solids 9) Manganese 3) Total Suspended Solids 10) Mercury 4) Turbidity 11) Selemium 5) Arsenic 12) Sodium 6) Boron 13) Zine 7) Cadimium 14) Chloride This variance is granted for the section of Plateau Creek between the 1983 sample sites PCD and MVB (as referenced in the application). This shall become effective upon this date of signature and will expire on September 3, 1984. Department of Environmental Conservation regulations provide that any person who disagrees with any portion of this decision, may request an adjudicatory hearing in accordance with 18 AAC 15.200-310. The request should be mailed to the Commissioner of the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, Pouch 0, Juneau, Alaska 99811, or delivered to his office at 3220 Hospital Drive, Juneau. Failure to submit a hearing request within thirty days of receipt of this letter shall constitute a waiver of that person's right to judicial review of this decision. Page LO Bet x jestanyZ #rBob Martin Deputy Director JH/jfr cc: Julie Howe A/wW DO United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE IN REPLY REFER TO: ALEUTIAN ISLANDS UNIT ALASKA MARITIME NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE P. O. BOX 5251 NAVAL AIR STATION FPO SEATTLE, WA 98791 July 9, 1984 Chris A. Joseph (Republic Geothermal, Inc.) c/o Steve Grabacki Dames & Moore 800 Cordova Street Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Dear Mr. Grabacki: Enclosed is the signed copy of Republic Geothermal's SUP for you to forward to Chris Joseph as we discussed over the telephone. Sincerely, FREDRIC G. DEINES Acting Refuge Manager FGD/ks Permit number Sta. Ne. te be credited UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR} AI-84-017 74502 ree Fish and Wildlife Service Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge Date June 15, 1984 SPECIAL USE PERMIT Permittee (Name and address) Peried of use (inclusive) Timothy M. Evans, Vice President From July 1 19 84 Republic Geothermal, Inc. 11823 E. Slauson Ave., Suite l Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670 PH: 945-366 Te September 30 19 84 ermit continuation of Republic Geo: Purpose fy in detail, privilege units of ts imvelved) lO : roma ere Admes Moor , "Mayo “titel Sebcontraccs exploration for geothermal resource sotential on the eastern flanks of Makushin Volcano on Unalaska Island in the Aleutian. [slands (Exhibit A, Fig. 1&2). This permit is for the 4th stegs of operations, specifi- sally testing existing wells for 40 days, the drilling of one 1200' temperature gradient role § the extension of existing well Makushin. ST-1 by 500' (Exhibit A). “A radio Deseription (Specify umit numbers; motes and bounds; or other recognisable designations) Drill one 8.5 inch (Maximum jiameter) temperature gradient hole to about 1200' deep, extend previous well by 500' and test existing wells, including establishment of a portable base camp consisting of approximately four to six 12x20 foot sleeper tents, one 12x30 foot cook tent, one 15x30 Lone shower (Laue _tent_and one outhouse (Exhibit A). A letter of non-objection has 2¢ submitte xn 5 ; >» 1 of fee $ NONE ___ if mot a fixed fee payment, specify rate and unit of charge: | Full payment 0 Partial payment- Balance of payments to be made as fellows: FMMIOUSLEMEEM STATEMENT OF COMPATIBILITY: Operations planned in Exhibit A and authorized by this permit are considered to be compatible with the objectives and management of the Aleutian Islands Unit of the Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge. Special Conditions All general conditions on the reverse side of this permit and special conditions on the attached sheet apply. This permit is issued by the US. Fish and Wildlife Service and accepted by the undersigned, subject te the terms, covenants, obligations, and reservations, expressed or implied herein, and to the conditions and requirements appearing om the reverse side. > Permustee ( Iseuing Officer (Signature and ti! i : ~ ele tie \D 2.u20 TIMO t C. FRED ZEILLEMAKER, Refuge Manager FORM 3-1383 \ v (REV./11/82) te GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. Payments. All payments shall be made on or before the due date to the local representative of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by a postal money order or check made payable to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 2. Use limications. The permittee's use of the described premises is limited to the purposes herein specified; does not umless provided for in this permit allow him/her to restrict other autho- Fised entry onto his/her area; and permits the Service to carry on whatever activities are neces- sary for (1) protection and maintenance of the premises and adjacent.lands administered by the Service and (2) the management of wildlife and fish using the premises and other Service lands. 3. Damages. Tesponsible for any loss or damage to property .ineluding but not lLlismtited to growing” crops, ani- mals, and machinery; or injury to the permittee, or his/her relatives, orto the officers, agents, euployees, or any others who are on the premises from instructions or by the sufferance of the permittee or his/her associates; or for damages or interference caused by wildlife or employees or representatives of the Goverment carrying out their official responsibilities, The permittee agrees to save the United States or any of its agencies harmless from any and all claims for damages or losses that may arise or be incident to the flooding of the premises. resulting from any associated Goverment river and harbor, flood con~ trol, reclamation, or Tennessee Valley Authority activity. 4. Operating Rules and Laws. The permittee shall keep che premises ina neat and orderly condition at all times, and shall comply with all municipal, county, and State laws applicable to the operations under the permit as well as all Federal laws, rules, and regulations governing National Wildlife Refuges and the area described in this permit. The permittee shall comply with all ins- tructions applicable to this permit issued by the Pefuge officer in charge. The permittee shall take all reasonable precautions to prevent the escape of fires and to suppress fires and shall render all Teasonable assistance in the suppression ‘of refuge fires. 5. Responsibility of Permittee. The pemit- tee, by operating on the premises, shall be con- sidered to have accepted these premises with all the facilities, fixtures, or improvements in their existing condition as of the date of this permit. At the end of the period specified or upon earlier termination, the permittee shall give up the pre- mises in as good order and condition as when Teceived except for reasonable wear, tear, or damage occurring without fault or negligence. The permittee will fully repay the Service for any and all damage directly or indirectly resulting from negligence or failure on his/her part, or the part of anyone of his/her eseociates, to use reasonable care. 6. Revocation Policy. This permit Tevoked by the Regional Director of the Service without notice for noncompliance with the terns hereof or for violation of general and/or specific laws or regulations governing National Wildlife Refuges or for nomse. It is at atl times subject to diserecionary revocation. by the Director of the Service. Upon such revocation the Service, by and may be The United States shall not be | through any authorized representative, may take possession of the said premises for its ow and sole use, or may enter and possess the premises as the agent of the permittee and for his/her account. 7.. -Compliance. Failure of the Service to dnsist upon a strict compliance with any of this permit's terms, conditions, and requirements shall not constitute «a waiver or be considered as a giving up of the Service's right to thereafter enforce any of the permit's terms, conditions, or requirements. 8. Termination Policy. at the termination of this permit, the permittee shall immediately give up possession to the Service representative, Teserving, however, the rights specified in para- graph 9. If he/she fails to do so, he/she will pay the Goverment, as liquidated damages, an amount double the rate specified in this permit for the entire time possession is withheld. Upon yielding possession, the permittee will still be allowed to Teenter as needed to remove his/her property as *tated in paragraph 9. The acceptance of any fee for liquidated damages or any other act of adminis- tration relating to the.contimied tenancy is not to. be considered as an affirmance of the permittees action nor shall it operate as a waiver of the Government's right to terminate or cancel the permit for the breach of any specified condition or requirement. 9. Removal of Permittee's Property. Upon the expiration or termination of this permit, if all rental charges and/or damage claims due to the Government have been peid, the permittee may, within « reasonable period as stated in the permit or as determined by the refuge officer in charge but not to exceed 60 days, remove all structures, machinery, and/or other equipment, etc., from the premises for which he/she is responsibile. Within this period the permittee must also” remove any other of his/her property including his/her acknow- ledged share of products or crops grow, cut, harvested, stored, or stacked’ on the premises. Upon failure to remove any of the above items within the aforesaid period, they shall become the property of the United States. 10. Transfer of Privileges. This permit is mot transferable, and no privileges herein men- tioned may be sublet or made available to auy person or interest not mentioned in this permit. No interest hereunder may accrue through lien or be transferred to a third party without the approval of the Regional Director of the U.S. Pish and Wildlife Service and the permit shall not be used for speculative purposes. 11. Conditions of Permit not Pulfilled. If the permittee fails to fulfill any of the con- ditions and requirements set forth herein, all money paid under this permit shall be retained by the Government to be used to satisfy as much of the peruittee's obligations as possible. 12. Officials Barred from Participating. No Member of Congress or Resident Commissioner shall participate in any part of this contract or to any benafit that may arise from it, but this provision shall not pertain to this contract if made with a corporation for its general benefit. * : 13, Nondiscrimination 12 Employment. The permaittee agrees to be bound by the equal oppor- tunity clause of Executive Order 11246, as amended. u | ut. Q ' a ” uw nt U. 4 , ol} Ch at wt > ea a] i wt 4 mw iM] ca ot Ww a 4 yo. Ech Cb vet G ul 4, Ur tn wa mow mM cet el al at a m a a yoo uc Socet Ul vt ot ch ed 4. nib of z Gq » 484. Q Ow ea wou a a u 1. & g Lor Wg AD et Q wou oO oO lt CG LL vet ot Ww Ard 4d 4. ni Wt: > og ow O a Te a cu i a rte A Me Go. og cow wv aoe ot un ce oA Ok Chet z a C ooh uc c 44 TD et £ a a4 ued a Covet ‘4 Ut Weouc Oe al C. coe a 4 uc wun o oa a : ot tor wo Dont wot wed ort uw Uh vee Uh cet uit ou ety Od F a4. oo 3 Oni Mot € um cc 4m ew C au Zon au com 4ont MO at wt ni uo uw ut at stot he UE te Sh U na & & C Cc wc ao Jueao 1G « wt vow 4! wt ke "cmt MU ort ~ o eat C ot s ont wom ut tl tn & a Ur & Us O mM Wet ort z i ni 4. " Qe an qs “eo Cob ato Wont & Eu kL a io» ‘ “oe uo ort 4 ot Ol a oo Di] . mM G4. 4) Gat Lt ad a7 O00 oUt & w a 1, 4 LD ai AE ved 4. > uss Oo ” a AO OL a ‘, mi a o£ o teh Chet pt 4. ae MW ort eM a a + C. Wet Ss TU et au AU Mok ea cog um a tt J) DT an a uo u o if tac ca > C ord in ooo c ral Cl UWowt whooe 440 ceOoc uct a u u u my woe Ok oe Loo oa.a ody a 4. tC: et w Ww . u NOX Det WO 4 Mea OL UO i 4t oO ni rag a wu vet et ea Lal thom & 23 oo. 4 a w Mo L iy ‘ AG Qo C tne uy. wk wea a aew rhet 2) u 2" mF og oa aooom a aoc Dew Ju Wl amo om et CL C a) won O01 « OW et ho th oy LD LS et et a a mom rs EU q MM i a 4 44 bl wt com cu ce A. 4! tk. ao aU x cg - hou Co. Deg ee Oe et ort v3Iu sO Oe om ou uk " uh now 43 nt & uo i Unt kent ot ‘4 uu cg 4. u ut wou at hw te Ut 4. uw trod at Uwe Goa O ™ ai ou > 3 Ul ort AY AD owt non oot Wet aot hot oot Cp 4 et & Me Dh h ‘ fy Tora TH “i a cl Ct ous UD et Ooms, no UW vee Ou « oat ko ul > CD vet ai cl ut 4! oe u wo. ciw C wer w woe mora. Bont “a Uy Ul ou at 0 a mod ou oo eat OF or ol 4, W co Wa Ur hoe OO oO. * vf 4. mi Wt 0 a oy i a wt UG: 4) Ot WD at et ra) ooo 46 aa U bows Me et LE OL u o wl ont i i mom a >We oer Umer ot Uo «a hee aio tn w wot ‘ u Loc O at of ae Chon wt oat Cl tent Oot. Oho a o ocet mM 0 = wens, 4, 0 4 toc il Oe mt ort 4) 0 M44 eoort OF os hon Covet UN ct ET sek om © En U0 usu oo ce: UWietort ett OF = n Qua rt 4, a Miwa TE pd vet oak uu Wh 4. a > Ch Wea O a Ue at wooo et a sa e et ort 2 Cc Oo tt ci ‘ toa a r4 boob. can Te et a, i Tre fl os 70 3 ou 1 0 Ct TOY Ohag 2 « . . ‘ . . ‘ . ’ . vt Cl a V wt i i. uu ih mo REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL, INC. 11823 EAST SLAUSON AVENUE, SUITE ONE SANTA FE SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 30670 TWX 910-586-1696 (213) 945-3661 July 10, 1984 Mr. Bruce Erikson Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 437 "E" Street, Suite 200 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Dear Mr. Erikson: This letter is a formal request from Republic Geothermal, Inc. to extend our Food Service Permit for a temporary base camp near Makushin Volcano on Unalaska Island. This extension request is for the permit approved by DEC in 1982 (Eating and Drinking Establishment Permit No. 82-900-80; copy attached) and extended in 1983. The operations proposed for this year differ from the previous two only in the amount of people served and the length of time the camp will exist. Specifically, the food service operations will be conducted by the same subcontractor, Production Services, Inc. of Anchorage. The operation will be temporary (approximately two months rather than three in 1983), and will serve 20 people (rather than 12 in 1983). The base camp is to be located at the same remote location as the previous two years, above the 1,000 foot elevation on the flanks of Makushin Volcano of Unalaska Island. The purpose of the camp is to support geothermal exploration operations. Republic is continuing to work under contract with the Alaska Power Authority to conduct the exploration. Republic currently anticipates commencing the start-up of camp by July 20. Please do not hesitate to contact either Dwight Carey of Republic or myself if you have any questions or concerns. Thank you for your timely review of this extension application. Sincerely, CL ) oe Chris é Joseph Environmental Affairs Specialist CAJ: acw Attachment STATE OFS <, OF eS DEPARTMENT OF “ENSERONIMENITAL ” ae wey EATING: AND DRINKING ESIAGUSHMENT PE PERMIT he te, “this ts ete diyy tnet~ Explorati on Caxp seas easiS Volcano 11823 ©. Slauson Ave., cel Santa Fe Springs, CA rer is guthorized to operate an ecting and drinking establishment in the Stcte of Aloske pursucnt to 18 AAC 31. This permit is the property of the Stcte of Alesko" ‘chi ‘moy de suspenced or reveked for failure to comply with 18 AAC 1 o other ecoclicable sictutes or reguictions, or because, ot,ct Tenge. ct ownership, location, or type of business. This pe - tim ust.be- prominently displayed “SVAIS Ur ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF EINVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION Fue Code: 437 = Street P.O. 30x 1601 Pouch 0 Suiza 290 Fairbanks, AK 99707 Juneau, AK 3981} Anchorage, Ak 99501 0 APPLICATION FOR PERMIT F Oo R FOOD SERVICE OPERATION (si22se tye or srint) Name of Estabiishment Phone Number ! BUSINESS TYPE = . . | Commercial Unnamed Exploration Camo an Makushin Voicane School eation of Eszstsnmeant Tavern —— Street Address City State Zp Nursing Home = +____— - Acoroximately 10 miles west of Dutch Harder, Alaska, es shown Day Care ——— in the et hed Ficure. _ . | Cin ———. ailing Address of Zsvzbiishment Institution ———. Street or P.O. Box Cry State Zp Other —__ c/o Republic Geothermal, Inc. 11823 £. Sleauson Ave. Suite 1 Santa -Fe Sorincs, CA 90670 | Sesting Cpa oO eeeeeoeoaoaoaoaoeoooooemeeeeeaaaeQ@aeeeeeeeeeS—“s“wawanmw»“waw—»«>s>soa Name of Owner(s) [ If partnership, list all sanners,. If corporation, list officers, offices held and address.] Name Title AdGress Sonnhliic Gaqthermna! Tne (The camo subcontractor is Production Services. inec.. 4113 Inara Street. Anchorace, Alaska 99503) i If rehicie: List year, make. modei, color and license. TYPE OF APPLICATIC Original Z i} ERATION IS TEMPORARY: eee Dates of srupesed cperation: une 1. 198 to_sept. 1. 1982 _ - -- . . . | OPERATION Type of food to be served: __Genens} Camo Meale:> ineate/esy echanent Temporary: x oe In compliance with 7 AAC 25.075, | (we) heredy apoly for a food service permit to oserate 2 food service establishment in the Stave of Alaska. | (we) understand hat this permit may not be solid or transferred and that ater issuance it may be suspended or revoked for failure <2 comply with the Eating and Orinking Establishment regulations of the Alaska Adminisvative Coce, 7 AAC 25.003- 7 AAC 25.087. | (we) have read and understand the basic requiremens of thesa regulations. Steshen T. Srebecki APPLICANT (piease print) . TURE = sens wate SICNA REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL, INC. 11923 ZAST SLAUSON AVENUE SANTA FE SPRINGS. CALIFORNIA 30679 TWX $10-536-1 6596 (213) $45-25¢ May 3, 1983 Mr. Bruce Erickson Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 437 E Street, Suite 200 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Dear Mr. Erickson: Please fine encleseé an Application for a Food Service Permit fort a temporary base camp at Makushin Volcano on Unalaska Island. The operations proposed this year co not @iffer from operations approved last year under Eating and Drinking Establishment Permit No. 82-3900- -80. Specifically, the food service operations will be conducted by the same subcontractor, Production Services, inc. of Ancherage. The operation will agein be temporary (approximately three months) and will serve approximately twelve people. The base camp is to be located at the same remote location as last year, above the 1,000-foot elevation on the flanks of Mekushin Volcano of Unalaska Island. The purpose of the camp is to support geothermal exploration operations. Republic Geothermal is working under contract with the Alaska Power Authority to conduct the geothermal exploration. = Republic currently anticipates commencing the set-up of the camp by May 19. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at the above address anc shone number, or our subcontzractor's representative: Mr. Steve Grabacki Dames anc Moore 800 Cordova, Suite Ll Anchorage, Alaska 99501 (907) 279-0673 = o fu wD ‘J nm o a b o ct your review of this application. v = Tawna J. Nichel2s Senior Eavironmental Planner ee eee + on es eee STATE OF ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION APPLICATION FOR FOOD SERVICE PERMIT lame of Sstaqiuanment Name ot Firm Imnamed Expleration Camp on Makushia Volcano Republic Geothermal, Inc. ocatnoen ipproximately 10 miles west of Dutch Harbor, Alaska, as shown in the attached Figure. Amiing Acscress :/o Republic Geothezmal, Inc., 11823 E. Slauson Ave., Suite 1, Sama Fe Springs, CA 90670 doerator ‘troduction Services, Inc., 4113 Ingra St., Anchorage, Alaska 99503 istactisnement Teeonone | Type of Estasiisament Seating Cacecity one (Temporary camp to support geothermal exploration approx. 12 Operacious Attach to this application a drawing or plans of the proposed operation and identify equipment and location of wash basins, sinks, ranges, refrigerators, work tables, etc. include a narrative descristion of planned operations. | certify that | am familiar with 18 AAC 31, Food Service Reguiations of the Department of Environmental pservayion, and that the above described establishment wiil be operated and maintained in accordance with said chapter. Cate Mav 3, Timethy M. Evans, Vice President 1983 ieseree a | ~~ YeRne OF ALASIKA Bees © BILL SHEFFIELD, GOVERNOR STATE Mawes 6 DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES SOAR NE POUCH 7-034 DIVISION OF OIL AND GAS Se eee te anu ce: July 12, 1984 cu DEC ao ia 4i5 CAS i CEL Dwight L. Carey Au Manager, Environmental Affairs == Republic Geothermal, Inc. 6 /14/e? 11823 E. Slauson Avenue reo pmcul Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670 Subject: Geothermal Orilling Permit 84-1 Makushin ST-1 Geothermal Drilling Permit 84-2 Sugarloaf A-1 Dear Dwight, The Division of Oil and Gas has reviewed the subject drilling permit applications dated June 5, 1984. The proposed operations include the flow testing and deepening of Makushin ST-1, drilling of the Sugarloaf A-1 temperature gradient hole, and an area electrical resistivity survey. These operations are approved as submitted and are subject to the terms of the original approval letter dated June 14, 1983. We request that Republic Geothermal, Inc. provide this office with a periodic update concerning these scheduled operations. Sincerely, lina Bond Petroleum Engineer (907) 265-4250 ce: Pat Cyr, ADEC Phil Brna, ADF&G Mike Budbill, DLWM Jack Heesch, OMB Dave Denig-Chakroff, APA TIB/rh#01181 STATE OF ALASKA /=~== DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES MINERALS AND ENERGY MANAGEMENT “Pouch 7-034 Anchorage, Alaska 99510 June 14, 1983 Republic Geothermal, Irc. 11823 E. Slauson Avenue Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670 Subject: Permit to Drill on Unalaska Island for Geothermal Resources Geothermal Permits 83-1 and 83-2 Gentlemen: I have reviewed your May 27, 1983 applications for permits to drill geothermal wells on Unalaska Island. Although these applications contain certain provisions that are not identical to those set out in the geothermal drilling regulations, I find that the drilling programs as proposed by Republic Geothermal, Inc. do safeguard the natural envirorment and the public welfare, and I therefore hereby approve the referenced Permits to Drill as submitted. Title 11, Chapter 87 of the Alaska Administrative Code allows for departures from the drilling program specifications set out in the regulations if the Commissioner of the Department of Natural Resources finds that -such departures are necessary because of special or unusual conditions. The Casing and » Cementing, and Blowout Prevention Programs proposed for-these permits differ from the specifications set out for those programs in 11 AAC 87.120 and 11 AAC 87.130 in several instances (see attached list). Considering the past experience of Republic Geothermal, Inc. in drilling exploratory geothermal wells in the area, the geology in the area, and the use of the Longyear 44 diamond core rig with a correspondingly smaller well bore size than that used for most geothermal exploration wells, I believe that the Casing and Cementing, and Blowout Prevention programs as proposed by Republic Geothemal, Inc. are appropriate. Therefore, as the Commissioner's delegated representative, I acceot and approve the referenced Permits to Orill with the noted exceptions to the Casing and Cementing and Blowout prevention programs oon) on the attached list, as provided for in 11 AAC 87.120(j) and 11 AAC 87.130(a). All other provisions and requirements of Title 11, Chapter 87 of the Alaska Administrative Code (Geothermal Drilling and Conservation Regulations) must be observed. Application must be made to the Division of Minerals & Energy Management if a well is to be temporarily suspended instead of being abandoned or produced. A well suspension must be conducted in accordance with good engineering practices and must be approved by the Division of Minerals & Energy Management. Page 2 The letter of June 13, 1983 from the Alaska Power Authority and designation of a cash reserve will be accepted in lieu of the standard drilling bond as prescribed by 11 AAC 87.080. The hold on the account referenced in the letter of June 13, 1983 will be released after final abandonment has been accomplished in accordance with 11 AAC 87.160 - 11 AAC 87. 190 and an inspection has been conducted. Sincerely, Kay/Brown, Director Attachments: Delegation of Authority Exceotions to 11 AAC 87.120 and 11 AAC 87.150 a ’ Exceotions to 11 AAC 87.120 and 11 AAC 87.130 Approved for Republic Geothermal, Inc. Geothermal Permits 82-1 and 83-2 11 AAC 87.120(4) Pressure testing of casing strings, and liners to 1000 psig rather than to 1500 psig allowed. 1l AAC 87.130(a)(4) Provision requiring hydraulic actuating system and accumulator eliminated. 11 AAC 87.150(a) (5) Provision requiring dual control stations eliminated. 11 AAC 87.1350(b) (1) Provision requiring remotely controlled annular preventer and flow diverter system eliminated. IT AAC 87.130(b) (2) (A) Provision requiring blowout prevention system to have an expansion-type preventer and accumulator eliminated. —— ll AAC 87.130(b) (2) (B) Provision requiring blowout prevention system to - have a remote-controlled hydraulically-operated . , double ram blowout preventer eliminated. 11 AAC 87.130(b) (2) (F) Provision requiring a blowdown line with at least two valves anchored at all bends and at the ends eliminated. . 11 AAC 87.150(F) Provision requiring a kelly-.cock installed between the kelly and the swivel eliminated. I hereby authorize the above exceptions to 11 AAC 87.120 and 11 AAC 87.130 for Republic Geothermal, Incorporated's Geothermal Permits 83-1 and 83-2. Pea Pron ~~ 6 -/S-- 83 y Wn, Director vate —~—sts—St obvi of Minerals & Energy Management DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF MINERALS AND ENERGY MANAGEMENT MEMORANDUM | State of Alaska . To: Esther C. Wunnicke, Commissioner . ¥ age May 17, 1983 ie FILE NO: | ° le ~sseLépHone no: 276-2653. . & rpomekay Brown, Direétar oo - + gupject: GEOTHERMAL DRILLING “eed. Peer * PERMITS -- DELEGATION A) - OF AUTHORITY =a ~ . Authority to issue geothermal. drilling~permits under AS 41.06.0400 has not been delegated by the Commissioner. I propose that this authority be : delegated to the Director, DMEM.. Prevention of waste, conservation of + 7 - ‘natural resources and drilling safety are addressed in the drilling permit J I believe that DMEM is proper division within DNR to issue these permits. Any geothermal operation occuring on state lands would also require a plan of operations approval which would undergo the DNR/DEC/ADF&G interagency review. - oe . Recommended action: Authorities vested in AS 41.06.040. are delegated by the Commissioner to the Director, DMEM. . . ~ I concur with the recommended action, eal, Dm sther C. Wunnicke Commissioner ©2-001A (Rev. 10/73) REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL. INC. Mr. Carl Harmon July 12, 1984 Page Two Grey waste water will be Gisposed of in a leach line dug by the camp construction crew. The leach line will lead away from the slope down to the river and will be buried at the completion of operations. Black solid waste and waste water will be left in the pit dug below the portable outhouse. The waste will be periodically treated with lime. This pit will be buried with stockpiled soil and topped with the stockpiled tundra mat upon completion of operations. Tf you have any questions or concerns regarding the above, please do not hesitate to contact either Dwight Carey of Republic or myself. Thank you for your assistance in the processing of this request. aaa Chris A. Joseph Environmental Affairs Specialist CAJ:acw cc: Dwight Carey Steve Grabacki, Dames & Moore STATE OF ALASKA / sees come DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION Telephone: (907) SOUTHCENTRAL REGIONAL OFFICE Address: 437 "E" STREET, SUITE 200 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501 274-2533 July 17, 1984 Mr. Chris A. Joseph Republic Geothermal, Inc. 11823 E. Slauson Avenue, Suite One Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670 Dear Mr. Joseph: Subject: Food Permit Your food permit is good until revoked therefore, you need not reapply. Sincerely, ames C. Allen Anchorage/Western District Supervisor JCA/msm cc: Production Services Inc. REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL, INC. 11823 EAST SLAUSON AVENUE, SUITE ONE SANTA FE SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 90670 TWX 910-586-1696 (213) 945-3661 WELL FILE Pi oo eee \ July 17, 1984 Mr. Carl Harmon Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 437 "E" Street, Suite 200 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Dear Mr. Harmon: This letter is a formal request to your agency to allow Republic Geothermal, Inc., to dispose of the small quantity of solid wastes generated by the drilling of a temperature gradient hole at Sugarloaf Cone near Makushin Volcano on Unalaska Island. Republic, under contract with the Alaska Power Authority, is continuing to explore the eastern flanks of the volcano for geothermal resources. Republic's operations in 1982 and 1983 were conducted under a non-formal Solid Waste Disposal Permit No. 8221-BA002, which was issued for two years to cover solid waste generated from the operation of a temporary base camp and the minor amounts of waste drilling mud generated from the drilling. A complete description of Republic's proposed 1984 operations was sent to you previously via Jack Heesch of the Alaska Office of Management and Budget. Following are the specific details of the solid waste disposal portion of the drilling operation at Sugarloaf. The drilling of Sugarloaf temperature gradient hole (TGH) to approximately 1,200 feet will take approximately 20 days, from approximately late July to mid-August. The TGH will be located on the Sugarloaf Plateau on the Makushin Valley side of the ridge. A layout of the drilling operation site is attached as Figure l. The hole will be drilled with a Longyear 44 continuous wireline coring rig. A steel tank will be used to collect the rock cuttings and to store the drilling fluid before it is recirculated. The drilling fluid will either be a bentonite clay-based drilling mud or freshwater. The drilling fluid will contain no toxic additives. REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL, INC. “Mr. Carl Harmon July 17, 1984 Page Two Waste drilling fluid is generated as the drilling fluid picks up cuttings and other materials while circulating through the hole. Waste drilling fluid will be discharged into a small unlined pit dug on the drill site. The pit will be constructed (see Figure 2) such that it will have sufficient capacity to store the anticipated waste drilling mud (less than 200 gallons or 27 cubic feet) and to allow for mixing of the waste with native soil at approximately a 1:1 ratio. The dimensions of the pit will be approximately 4 1/2 feet by 4 1/2 feet, with a depth of 3 feet below the tundra mat. Finally, a berm will be constructed out of excavated soil to prevent runoff from entering the pit. The waste drilling mud in the pit will be flocculated by the addition of calcium chloride, and the resulting fluid allowed to drain off via an overflow into a small leach pit (see Figure 3). When the drilling is complete, the cuttings and waste drilling mud left in the pit will be mixed with native soil and buried. The tandra mat removed to dig the pit will be stockpiled during drilling, and will be replaced as practically as possible once the pit is buried. We understand from our previous conversations that this waste disposal operation can be approved without a formal Solid Waste Disposal Permit. If you have any questions or concerns regarding the above, please do not hesitate to contact either Dwight Carey of Republic or myself. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, CA 4Ag- Chris &. Joseph Environmental Affairs Specialist CAJ: acw Attachments ce: Steve Grabacki, Dames & Moore FIGURE 1 SITE PLAN FOR SUGARLOAF TEMPERATURE GRADIENT HOLE DRILLING OPERATIONS (LAYOUT BASED ON AN AREA OF APPROXIMATELY 30°X50") DRILLING RIG 300 GALLON EQUIPMENT TENT 10°X 15" WATER TANK 12’X20° Yn a _ =; ca tx o uw a 9° oO HELICOPTER | ANNING Ane” tannts rr on FIGURE 2 DESIGN OF MUD PIT AT SUGARLOAF SITE ZA as" —_ faa ee = TOT yy YY UY y, YYRAI AAAI ANS TET imiauaean SIMEW=| th i= in | i NATIVE SOIL Mil 3-0 il =) EXCAVATED SOIL il I) RO TUNDRA MAT (ll : fi Pe Te eee NOTES: 1. STOCKPILE REMOVED TUNDRA MAT FOR EVENTUAL REPLACEMENT. 2. BERM EXCAVATED SOIL AROUND PIT TO PREVENT RUNOFF FROM ENTERING PIT. 3. SLOPE OF PIT WALLS SHOULD NOT EXCEED 1:1. PGI D1T2 FIGURE 3 FLOCCULATION AND DEWATERING OF MUD PIT ADD CaCl TO FLOCCULATE AND SETTLE OUT SOLIDS (CLAYS) SIPHON OUT Oe \ Eg ae = TUN Lee Na | a 5 EDs, xy? i SSE W 5 MUD PIT PERCOLATION OF LIQUIDS GI OLS U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ~ ot? St, REGION X 2 LOY % 1200 SIXTH AVENUE =z 5 WV w SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101 S WS 3 > %, ¢ << Ae pact? REPLY TO ann or: Mail Stop 521 JUL 31 1984 Chris A. Joseph Environmental Affairs Specialist Republic Geothermal Inc. 11823 East Slawson Avenue, Suite One Santa Fe Springs, California 90670 Re: NPDES Application No.: AK-003956-0 Dear Mr. Joseph: We have received your updated National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit application for the discharge of geothermal test fluids on Unalaska Island. Based on our review of the updated application, the planned activities for 1984 will not affect EPA's determination on the permitting status of the project. As such, Republic Geothermal will not be issued an NPDES permit for the wastewater discharge at this time. © , However, during the discharge of test fluids into unnamed tributaries in the Makushin Valley, you are expected to comply with the July 5, 1984, Water Quality Variance issued to Republic Geothermal by the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. In addition, any other provisions placed on the discharge by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game or any other involved agency should be adhered to. If these or similar discharges are anticipated for the 1985 season please contact our office at least 180 days prior to the projected start up date. Failure to do so could result in unavoidable delays to the project due to mandated permitting time schedules. Sincerely, Rw hnick, “Be. aréld —. Geren, Chief Water Permits & Compliance Section cc: Soderlund, EPA Anchorage Kreizenbeck, EPA Juneau Howe, ADEC Anchorage REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL. INC. 11823 EAST SLAUSON AVENUE, SUITE ONE SANTA FE SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 90670 910-586-1696 (213) 945-3661 August 2, 1984 Mr. Carl Harmon Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 437 "E" Street, Suite 200 Ancnorage, Alaska 99501 Dear Mr. Harmon: Pursuant to our telephone conversation on July 30, this letter is a formal request to your agency to allow Republic Geothermal, Inc. to dispose of the small quantity of waste drilling fluid generated by drilling the existing Makushin st-1 geothermal well approximately 500 feet deeper. Republic, under contract with the Alaska Power Authority, is continuing to explore for geothermal resources on the eastern flanks of Makushin Volcano on Unalaska Island. Republic has previously Suomitted to you requests for approval to dispose of solid wastes for tne 1984 Field camp and the drilling of the Sugarloat tem- perature gradient hole, as well as a complete description of our proposed 1984 operations. Following are the details of the solid waste disposal portion of the drilling operation at Makusain ST-1 (a layout of the drilling operation site is attacnea as Figure.1). Tne driliing of Makushin ST-l approximately 500 feet deeper will take approximately 10 days, from mid- to late-August. The hole will be drilled with a Longyear continuous wireline coring rig. As with the drilling of tne Sugarloaf hole described under a separate letter, a steel tank will be useGg to collect the rock cuttings and to store the drilling fluid before it is recir- culated. Pather than the bentonite clay-based mud previously cescrized, tne drilling fluid will be a non-toxic clearmuc. Clearmud is a generic term for a fluid mace from water ana LCOS percent of a brand name viscosifier, such as "Clearmua" or "EgZ-Mud". These products are liquid mixtures of 1/3 poly- acrylamide-acrylate copolymer, 1/3 mineral oil, and 1/3 water (attached you will find ea product description of Clearmuc, anc an MSDS and proauct information on EZ-Nud). Tae polymer component of the mud is an FDA-aporoved product commonly used as a nicxener in foods. It is also used as a flocculant to aid in larifying potable water. Tne mineral oil portion is a food taL cla REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL. INC. Mr. Carl Harmon Page 2 August 2, 1984 grade oil used as a dispersant and is also approved py tne FDA for use in direct food contact. The mineral oil leaves no rain- bow snecn on water, and will not cause the mud to exceec the allowable limit for on-site aisposal of drilling muds ccentaining 4 percent oil or grease. Despite the use..of clearmud instead of a bentonite clay-basec mud, Republic still estimates that no more than 100 barrels (20 cubic yards) of waste drilling fluid will be generated. The total will likely be much less. Waste drilling fluid wiil be discharged into a small, unlinea pit dug on site, approximately 5 feet py 5 feet, with 3 feet of deptn. The solids in the fluid will be settled out. in the pit (approximately 5 cubic feet of cuttings will be generated), and tne resulting liquids siphoned into a small percolation pit (see Figure 2). When driliing is complete, the solias left in the mud pit will be mixed witha native soil and buried. Tne tundra mat will be stockpiled during drilling and will be replaced as practically as possinle once tne pit is ouried. Once infiltration is complete, the percolation pit will also be filled and covered in a similar way. Overflow from both pits will be prevented in two wavs. First, perms will be constructed out of excavated soil to prevent runoff. Secondly, the inherent nature of the drilling cperation will cause the waste fluias to be generated throughout cne 10-day Grilling program, ané constant percolation of tne material saouls prevent any overflow of the liquids. If any overflow aces occur, the Liquids will be pumped into 55-gallon containers anc removed by helicopter to the Unalaska landfill. . We understand from our previous conversations that tais waste disposal operation can be approved without a formal Solis Waste Disposal Permit. If you have any questions regarding the aoove, please ago not hesitate to contact eitner Dwight Carey c= Repudlic or myself. As always, tnank you for your assistance. Sincerely, CPN ed Chris A. JoBegena Environmental) Affairs Specialis: CAT 3005 cc: S. Grabacki, Dames and Moore FIGURE 1 SITE PLAN FOR MAKUSHIN ST-1 GEOTHERMAL WELL DRILLING OPERATIONS (LAYOUT BASED ON AN AREA OF APPROXIMATELY 30’X50') DRILLING RIG 300 GALLON EQUIPMENT TENT 10'X15° WATER TANK 12'X20° MUD PIT 5'X5’ PERCOLA- TION PIT 5'X5" “ Ww _ a. =v <x Y~ w a oO oO , HELICOPTER LANDING AREA (100') FIGURE 2 SETTLING AND DEWATERING OF MUD PIT SIPHON OUT WN PERCOLATION PIT MUD PIT INFILTRATION OF LIQUIDS . FGI DLS NATIVE SOIL CUTTINGS Mining Products/Services Division CHRISTENSEN DIAMIN TOOLS. INC. 4446 WEST 1730 SOUTH / P.O. BOX 30777/ SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84130 U.S.A. / PHONE: (801) 974-5544 / TELEX: 388-321 pone company July 18, 1983 yo Ms. Pat Learry California Regional Quality Control Board Central Valley Region 3210 S Se. Sacramento, CA 95816 Dear Ms. Learry, In response to your concerns regarding the toxicity of Fluidril's Clearmd, I will give you a breakdown of the product and describe each of its components. The product is made “up of 1/3 polyacrylamide - acrylate copolymer, 1/3 mineral oil, and 1/3 water. In the water phase of this emulsion is also 52% sodium chloride for freezing poinc depression and 6% alcohol ether sulfonate sucfactant for rapid yielding in water. Polyacrylamide - acrylate copolymer is FDA approved for use as a thickener in foods, such as mayonnaise. Refer to Dangerous Properties of Industrial “ucerials, 5th edition, edited by Irving Sax, published by Van Nostrand 7Reinhold. Ie is of such high molecular weight (15, 000,000 - 18,000,000 g/mole) thac it is not abserbed through the skin or gastro-intestinal tract .[ This polym:r is widely used as a flocculant to aid in clarifying potable water and is EPA approve: for inclusion in crop dusting fluids for drift control. The mineral oil portion, also known as liquid paraffin, white oil, or white mineral oil, is a mixture of middle aliphatic hydrocarbons, which are primarily paraffinic. Ic is characterized by a relatively low aromatic content and is colorless, odorless, and tasteless. In addirion, ic is a highly refined, food grade (FDA Regulation 172.884 - Approved for use in direct food contact associate applications), non-fluorescent, high flash poince (greater than 400°F) produce and leaves no rainbow sheen on water. The 5% sodium chloride portion amounts to 2.2 lbs. salt in a 5 gallon (44 lb. net) can. Cac our recommended usage concentration of 2 quarts Clearmud per 500 gallons water (0.1% by volume) / this amounts to 0.22 lbs. sodium chloride per 500 gallons mixed mud, 0.005%; or 50 ppm. Keep in mind that when the drillers use bentonite with Clearmud, they commonly use 1/2 the recommended concentration. The 6% alcohol ether sulfonace surfactant portion is a food grade produce used in breads for moisture retention. It is this portion that imparts the high 20D (45,000 ppm) to Clearmud. This product is rapidly biodegradable, however, at our recommended usage concentration, the BOD is 45 ppm for the mixed mud and 1/2 of this if bentonite is used in che mud. In order for Clearmd to be EPA approved for water well drilling, all of irs ~omponencs cust be food grade, which they are. . a Wee Cirininc fuid cpRocuct EZ-MUD™ For Low Solids Drilling Fluids EZ-MUD"™ is a white, liquid, anionic polymer emulsion which is readily soluble in fresh or brackish water. EZ-MUD may be used to prepare a solids-free drilling fluid with exceptional hole stabilizing properties, or to improve the properties of low-solids QUIK-GEL® fluids and air/foam injection fluids. EZ-MUD drilling fluids are applicable to all types of drilling operations, including: Water Wells Diamond Coring Minerals Exploration Seismograph Shot Holes Recommended Uses EZ-MUD™ can be used in plain water, in QUIK- GEL®/bentonite muds and in air/foam injection to: Stabilize water-sensitive formations that swell, cave or disintegrate in ordinary drilliny fluids. Prevent mud rings, bit balling and buooting-off in clay formations. Reduce drill pipe torque and pumping pressure. % Eliminate rod chatter in diamond core drilling. Improve properties of drilling fluids. Major Advantages Easy to mix. EZ-MUD™ yields rapidly and com- pletely with minimum shear. & Settles cuttings rapidly in pits. Prevents recircula- tion of drilled cuttings. Lubricity. Reduces drillpipe torque and circulating pressure. Clay-shale stability. Prevents swelling and disinte- gration of formation and gouge zone clays and shales. Compatible with bentonite. Improves properties of QUIK-GEL®/bentonite mud. *LZ-MUD wp a trademark of NL industries. lw Blast Holes Monitor/Observation Holes Soils and Foundation Investigations Disposal/Injection Wells # Viscosifier. Rapid and efficient thickener to im- prove hole cleaning, control rod chatter in diamond core drilling, and stability in fractured sections of hole. # Non-toxic. Proven suitable for use in drilling potable water wells. Non-fermenting. Not susceptible to loss of proper- ties due to microorganic degradation. Biocides not required. Filtration control. Effectively lowers water loss in QUIK-GEL®/bentonite and other drilling mud sys- tems. Cost effective. Small amounts produce desired results. Liquid form insures complete utilization of all EZ-MUD added. Stable. EZ-MUD does not deteriorate in storage and is not subject to shear break-down characteristic of other polymers. KCI salt addition. 3°. by weight KCl can be added to enhance shale stabilization. Non-damaging to producing formations. EZ- MUD is water-soluble. # Breaks down to water with HTH (calcium hypo- chlorite) treatment during well sterilization. DMI) S0 eal 7M IT Viewed mM CSA NL Baroid/NL Industries, Inc. Recommended Treatment Added to Fresh Water To formulate a solids-free drilling fluid © to stabilize water sensitive formations * to stop rod vibration, reduce torque and pressure, | increase hole stability Added to QUIK-GEL“/Bentonite Drilling Mud To improve properties & performance: e better hole cleaning. thinner filter cake, increased hole stability Added to Injection Liquid in Air/foam Drilling To improve foam performance and hole conditions Added to 3% KCI Drilling Fluids To improve performance and quality Method of Addition For best results: © Mix through jet or mechanical hopper, no faster than 2 minutes per gallon. © Mix with fresh water. Pretreat calcium with soda ash. Adjust pH to 7.0 or above. ¢ EZ-MUD"™ can be broken down with HTH (calcium hypochlorite). Use % pound HTH per 100 gallons of EZ-MUD drilling fluid. Environmental Information ‘%) EZ-MUD" is safe to use in any drilling operation, including potable water wells, when added in recom- mended concentrations. X EZ-MUD has been found non-toxic when fed to animals in laboratory tests. No mortality was observed when fed to rats at levels of more than five thousand milligrams/kilogram of body weight. Quarts Pints Liters Per 100 gal Per bbl Per m?> 1 1 2.5 1.5 1.25 3.75 0.5 05 1.25 0.5-1 0.S-1 1.25-2.5 2 1.75 5 EZ-MUD, in water solution, is odorless, coluriess and tasteless. EZ-MUD does not ferment to produce objectionable odors, flavors or other undesirable results. Packaging EZ-MUD™ is packaged in a five-gallon (U.S.) (18.9 liter) clased-top, high impact plastic container with a screw-on cap and carrying handle. Availability —EZ-MUD™ may be purchased through any NL Baroid Service Center, or from QUIK-GEL® Retailers. NL BAROID ENVIRONMENTAL, SAFETY AND TRANSPORTATION DATA SHEET © BEST Sheet 1507 | PRODUCT IDENTIFICATION SUPPLIER NL BAROID/NL INDUSTRIES, INC. AOORESS P.O. BOX 1675 HOUSTON, TEXAS 77251 TRADE NAME Ee MUD GENERIC DESCRIPTION POLYACRYLAMIDE/POLYACRYLATE ll HAZARDOUS INGREDIENTS MATERIAL OR COMPONENT NONE lil PHYSICAL DATA BOILING POINT (°F) i >200 SPECIFIC GRAVITY (H,0 = y 03 VAPOR DENSITY (AIR = 1) % VOLATILES BY VOL. 65 APPEARANCE AND OOOR AM COLORED LIQUID, SLIGHT HYDROCARBON ODOR pH 8.4 4A = Not Applicable N/O = Not Determined All intormation recommencations anc suggestions acpearing nerein concerning our DrOuct are Cased UOON tests anc cata Deleved to De renacie. Nowever. itis tne users FeSCONSIONIty (0 Cetermine tne safety. toxicity, anc suitadiity for Mis Own use Of tne Droguct descrivec nerein. Since tne actua! use by OtNers 1s Deyond Our control. no guarantee. exoressec of imoied. 1s mace Dy NL Sarcid/NL incustries. inc. as to tne effects Of SuCN use. Ine resuits [0 be Odtained. or the safety anc toxicity of tne proguct GENERAL INFORMATION REGULAR TELEPHONE NO. EMERGENCY TELEPHONE NO. 743/597.4447 HAZARD DATA MELTING POINT FREEZING POINT VAPOR PRESSURE (mm Hg) SOLUBILITY IN H.0, % 8Y WT. 70 EVAPORATION RATE (BUTYL ACETATE = 1) SLOW Density @ 20°C: 8.6 LBS/GAL nor coes NU Baroid/NL Industries. Inc. assume any Hadiiity arising out of use. dy others. of tne oroguct reterred to Nereim Nor is the information nerein to De Consirued as aosolutely complete since additionai intormation may De necessary or cesiracie wren particuiar oF excectional conditions of circumstances exist or Decause of aoplicacie laws or government reguiations. QUVZVH H11W3H 0 rr ALMIEVAWV14 (y261) ..spersayeyy snopsezezy Aypeuonedns99 ALIAILOVSH | 0 | ‘EST Sheet IV FIRE AND EXPLOSION DATA FLASH POINT: >200°F EXTINGUISHING MEDIA: DRY-CHEMICAL, FOAM, CO, V HEALTH HAZARD INFORMATION ACUTE ORAL LDso MA AQUATIC TOXICITY (L >5,000 mg/kg ACUTE DERMAL LDso (LCs0) 1000 mg/! ROUTES OF EXPOSURE AND EFFECTS | EYE: MAY CAUSE IRRITATION. SKIN: MAY CAUSE IRRITATION. EMERGENCY AND FIRST AiO PROCEDURES EYES: FLUSH WITH PLENTY OF WATER FOR AT LEAST 15 MINUTES. CALL A PHYSICIAN. SKIN: WASH WITH SOAP AND WATER AFTER USE. INGESTION: INOUCE VOMITING. GIVE WATER. CALL A PHYSICIAN. BEST Sheet ) | VI REACTIVITY DATA : ©” CONDITIONS CONTRIBUTING TO INSTABILITY ; NONE INCOMPATIBILITY NONE HAZARDOUS DECOMPOSITION PRODUCTS EZ MUD IS NON FERMENTING. NO HAZARDOUS DECOMPOSITION PRODUCTS ARE FORMED. CONDITIONS CONTRIBUTING TO HAZARDOUS POLYMERIZATION NONE Vil SPILL OR LEAK PROCEDURES STEPS TO SE TAKEN IF MATERIAL IS RELEASED OR SPILLED CONTAIN SPILL WITH ABSORBENT MATERIAL. PLACE IN CONTAINER FOR DISPOSAL. FINAL CLEAN- UP WITH DETERGENT AND WATER UNTIL SLIPPERY CONDITION IS ELIMINATED. NEUTRALIZING CHEMICALS ) NON ARE REQUIRED WASTE DISPOSAL METHOD DISPOSE OF WASTE IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE AND LOCAL REGULATIONS. THE INCLUSION OF EZ MUD IN A DRILLING MUD WILL NOT CAUSE THE DRILLING MUD TO BE CLASSIFIED AS A HAZARDOUS WASTE. Vill INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE CONTROL MEASURES . VENTILATION REQUIREMENTS NONE SPECIFIC PERSONAL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT RESPIRATORY NONE REQUIRED. EYE GOGGLES. GLOVES RUBBER OTHER CLOTHING ANO EQUIPMENT NONE 3EST Sheet IX SPECIAL PRECAUTIONS Pv ““AUTIONARY STATEMENTS DO NOT TAKE INTERNALLY. AVOID SKIN AND EYE CONTACT. IF SPILLED MAY CAUSE SLIPPERY FLOOR CONDITIONS. a OTHER HANOLING AND STORAGE REQUIREMENTS . DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION INFORMATION PROPER SHIPPING NAME: NONE Hazarp cass; NOT HAZARDOUS HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE: NONE Dnt PREPARED BY NL Baroid DATE MARKETING TECHNOLOGY AUGUST 18, 1982 STATE OF ALASKA / “eee DEPT. @F ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION Vrocongel (907) SOUTHCENTRAL REGIONAL OFFICE sire 437 E STREET, SUITE 200 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501 274-2533 CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED August 15, 1984. Mr. Chris A. Joseph Environmental Affairs Specialist Republic Geothermal Inc. 11823 East Slauson Avenue, Suite One Santa Fe Springs, California 90670 Dear Mr. Joseph: RE: Solid Waste Permit No. 8421-BA024 Permit Renews 8221-BA002 The Department of Environmental Conservation has received and reviewed Republic Geothermal Inc. request of July 18, 1984, to renew their Solid Waste Permit No. 8221-BA002, to operate a temporary camp for the 1984 and 1985 seasons. The renewal of this informal permit 8421-BA024 is hereby granted. The permittee shall comply with all parts of their April 14, 1982 and July 18, 1984, Solid Waste Management Permit applica- tions, State and Federal Laws and Regulations, regarding site development and operations of this facility, except as specified herewithin this authorization letter. This authorization expires December 30, 1985. 1. The refuse disposal pit(s) shall be located no closer than two hundred (200) feet from any surface water. a The bottom of the refuse disposal pit shall be four (4) feet above subsurface water and four (4) feet above solid unweathered bedrock. 3 Locate the refuse disposal pit in a well drained area. This will help prevent the pit from filling with water and becoming scoured out by run off. 4. Burnable waste products may be burned. It may be of an advantage to dig two (2) pits, one smaller and shallower than the other. The smaller disposal pit can be used to burn all burnables in, and would require covering only occasionally. This can only be accomplished if the burnables are separated from the wet refuse. Page 2 of 2 | Solid Waste Permit Renewal No. 8221-BA002 a. All burnables separated from wet refuse must be burned each time they are accumulated and deposited. This will prevent them from becoming wind-blown. 6. Covering of wet refuse and non-burnables within a minimum of six (6) inches of earth naterial, shall be performed each day that a deposit is made. 7. When the refuse disposal pit uses are terminated, or a por- tion thereof, the site shall be covered with at least two (2) feet of compacted earth material , and finished to allow sur- face water to run off without erosion. Upon completion of covering, all disturbed soils must be revegetated and/or seeded with native materials. If the Department can be of further assistance, please call on us at 437 E Street, Suite 200, Anchorage, Alaska 99501, or telephone (907) 274-2533. Sincerely, CnQK Hiroe Carl H. Harmon . Environmental Engineer ij CHH/pkk cc: Jim Allen, A/WDO Valerie Hendrickson, SCRO STAVE OF ALASKA /- suserme conse DEPT. OF ENVIRONMEN 274-2533 SOUTHCENTRAL REGIONAL OFFICE +L CONSERVATION 437 E STREET, SUITE 200 ANCHORAGE, ALASKA CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIVED sc =e RETURN RECEIPT cor 1S 199% REQUESTED : August 29, 1984 Mr. Chris A. Joseph Environmental Affairs Specialist Republic Geothermal, Inc. 11823 East Slauson Avenue Suite One Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670 Dear Mr. Joseph: RE: Application Drill Mud and Cuttings Permit Permit No. 8421-BA023 We have received your application for Makushin ST-1 Geothermal well drill permit for the diposal of Geothermal waste drilling fluids within 1KM South 3.1/2 KM West, in the northeast corner of T73S, R120 West, Seward Meridian, Unalaska, Alaska, and have determined it to be complete. We will be sending your application through our review and public notice process. During the approximately 60-days that this process requires, you may be contacted by Department staff to clarify points in your application. At the end of this time, a decision on your application will be made by the Department. In the interim, should you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact Robert Flint, at the above address, or at 274-2533. Please note that the number assigned to identify this project is 8421-BAN23, and should be used for identification in all future correspondence. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. ert C. Flint Regional Program Coordinator RCF/jfr ce: A/W District Office ~ APPENDIX..B- ST-1: LONG-TERM PRODUCTION TESTING APPENDIX B-1l ST-1: DOWNWELL PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE DATA ASSESSMENT APPENDIX B1 QUALITY ASSESSMENT OF DOWNWELL PRESSURE AND TEMPERATURE DATA MAKUSHIN WELL ST-1 (MEASUREMENTS OF 1984) In 1984, static and flowing pressure surveys of ST-1 were made by a bubble tube assembly. In operation, helium gas is forced from the surface through a small-bore steel tubing inserted into the wellbore through a lubricator. The lower end of the tubing is connected to a small chamber, open at the bottom. A sensitive quartz pressure cell in the surface part of the assembly senses the pressure at the surface. The surface pressure differs from the pressure in the chamber at the bottom end of the tubing only by the weight of helium plus the head equivalent of liquid which may rise inside the chamber, and the frictional and dynamic factors associated with the surging of helium within the assembly. Depth of the chamber in the wellbore is tracked by a measuring wheel connected to the tubing at the surface. The depth datum of all measurements was 4 feet above ground level. Pressure profiles were determined five times in 1984, once while the well was static and twice at each of two different flow rates. These multiple measurements provide several opportunities to quantify the internal consistency of the data, especially in regard to factors that are indeterminate in regard to individual profiles. Temperature profiles were obtained as counterparts to four of the pressure surveys. The major objective of this section is to determine the true precision of the pressure measurements, especially in regard to the bottomhole pressures which are used to quantify reservoir capacities. The observed differences in pressures between runs were very small, near the limits of observation. The procedures described here quantify the measurement uncertainties and establish a statistical basis for the uncertainties about reservoir properties. Precision in the use of pressure data 1s improved by using the least squares estimates for bottomhole pressures which are more certain than direct measurements. Also, the accuracy of the bubble tube assembly can be assessed by selective comparisons between measured pressure gradients and the gradient based on handbook values of water density. An additional objective concerns the temperature measurements made in the same wellbore. In the sense of the pressure-temperature relationship for two-phase water substance, the measured pressures and temperatures are sometimes not quite in agreement. Establishing the errors on the pressure measurements helps to reconcile the disagreements. There are two senses of such reconciliations; (1) establishing the error limits on the pressure Measures results also in establishing the minimum errors for the temperature Measures, and (2) the pressure data can be used with other factors to estimate temperature. Where the vapor/liquid context applies, the pressure measurements are straightforward estimates of vapor pressure when the effects of salt and gas content can be independently evaluated. In the one-phase liquid zone, the pressure gradient is a measure of liquid density that is partly determined by temperature. The temperature can be resolved if other factors affecting the pressure gradient can be evaluated, which is possible for the data at hand. Fluid friction in the wellbore is one factor deduced enroute to uncovering the pure water pressure gradient. Such estimates of friction based on data are scarce and the result is useful in wellbore modeling studies. PROCEDURES Initially, as the pressure measurement tubing assembly was lowered into the well, additional helium was fed into the tubing. With time, the pressure surge damped out due to escape of excess helium from the open end of the chamber and upon the helium's reaching a static condition after the pressure surges. Later the cell was lowered to the bottom of the well, given final pressurization while there, and then raised to acquire data at intermediate points. This latter method has an advantage of giving data that has less noise. The pressure cell at the surface is capable of responding to pressure increments of much less than one psi. Readings are made to the nearest 0.1 psi. It is useful to determine empirically the precision of actual Measurements throughout the profile. Pressure data from the zone of the wellbore which contains single phase liquid is highly linear with depth because the liquid density varies only slightly through the zone. Especially in the surveys of flowing wells, the temperature is essentially isothermal and the measured pressure profiles in the one-phase zone differ from linear only by small amounts due to compressibility of the water, effects of helium in the bubble tube, wellbore inclination, and, in the case of flowing surveys, fluid friction. The data are fitted to linear least squares (LLS) lines. The root-mean-square (RMS) deviations of the data from the lines are used to assess the quality of fit. The non-linear effect of helium is removed by adding to the data a pressure equivalent of the helium column's weight above the point of pressure measurement. That pressure equivalent can be determined from first principles. Adding the helium effect to the measured pressures yields the true pressures at the measurement points and is appropriate for purposes of reservoir evaluation. The true pressure gradient is not exactly linear, even in a static isothermal case, because of the effect of liquid compressibility. Comparing the measured gradients with handbook densities of liquid requires subtracting a pressure equivalent of the non-linear effect of compressibility from each pressure measurement. The results in these cases are not improved estimates of the true pressures. The procedure is appropriate for quality assessment, but, the results are not appropriate for purposes of reservoir evaluation. The effects of salt (liquid composition) on the liquid densities are based on tabular data for NaCl solutions modified for non-sodium and non-chloride components. The modifications are relatively small because sodium and chloride are the dominant dissolved substances at ST-1. The effect of the mixed-salt composition is expressed in terms of weight percent of NaCl that has an equal effect on density or on thermodynamic factors. For a single mixed-salt composition the NaCl equivalents for density and thermodynamic factors are not numerically the same. Carbon dioxide affects the vapor pressure of the liquid and must be considered in regard to the vapor pressure/temperature relationship. It 1s irrelevant in the one-phase liquid below the zone (in a static well) that conforms to the two-phase pressure-temperature profile. The content of carbon dioxide has been measured separately and found to be relatively small. Its effect on vapor pressure is about 8 psi, additive to the H,0 vapor pressure determined by computation. The effect of carbon dioxide on the density of liquid water is not known, but is presumed to be negligible. Its content of about 200 ppm by weight in the unflashed liquid is less than 3 percent of the weight of dissolved salts, and smaller in size than the uncertainty of the true salt contents. DATA A pressure profile of the static well was measured on July 4. Profiles of the flowing well were measured on July 6 and July 19 when the flow rate was 33,000 pounds per hour. Profiles were also measured on July 21 and August 7 when the flow rate was 65,000 pounds per hour. The static profile was determined by logging down the wellbore, the flowing profiles were determined while logging up. The unmodified data are listed in Table 1 along with some of the coefficients for the linear least squares fits to the data. The listed pressures in Table 1 are less than the true pressures because the effect of helium in the bubble tube has not yet been considered. TABLE 1 MEASURED VALUES AND LEAST SQUARES FITS ST-1 PRESSURE PROFILES - 1984 PSIG Depth duly 4 July 6 duly 19 July 21 Aug 7 1150 189.1 1200 208.1 1250 231.5 1300 245.3 243.8 244.8 1350 270.1 1450 303.8 302.5 1500 321.2 320.7 320.9 1650 377.3 1700 397.1 398.0 397.5 396.9 1850 457.5 1950 493.7 492.5 493.5 492.8 492.5 Gradient -37494 -37912 38206 - 38312 . 38101 Intercept -240.10 -247.06 -251.57 -254.07 -250.60 r (1) 9379 .9570 .9578 .9577 .9589 RMS + psi (2) 2.35 0.30 0.22 0.23 0.15 Pi9s0 (3) 490.94 492.22 493.45 493.01 492.37 unc. + psi (4) 89 2 wn nnn -------------- 0.13------------------- (1) r = goodness of fit index, unity is a perfect fit, .9°79 Means .99979 (2) root mean square of differences between measured and least squares pressures (psi units) (3) least squares determination of pressure at 1950 feet (4) uncertainty of pressures indicated by least squares fit, including Pigso (psi units) The results from these unrefined data are only partly useful. For example, the static survey of July 4 is clearly less precise than the others. Its RMS = 2.35 psi (essentially the one-sigma uncertainty for single measurements of pressure) is large compared to RMS values of 0.15 to 0.30 psi for the flowing surveys. The cause is presumably due to the different logging direction which entails different uncertainties in true depths of the tool as well as complications with charging helium to the assembly and achieving its stabilization. Also, the least squares pressure at 1950 feet (actually 1946 feet when referenced to 0 ground level) appears to be less for the static survey than for the flowing surveys, an unreasonable result. That outcome is reversed when the data are adjusted for the helium effect, which is described next. CORRECTION OF PRESSURE DATA The weight of the column of helium in the bubble tube above any point of pressure measurement is given by the product of the column length above the point and the PVT density of helium. The effect of non-uniform temperatures in the columns is small, so it is adequate to use a single mid-range value for temperature when establishing the helium density. The value 340°F was used to establish the factor 3.02x10-° which, when multiplied by depth and measured pressure, yields the pressure increment due to helium. Results are tabulated in Table 2 and are applicable to all the surveys when seeking the true pressures at the points of measurement. In the one-phase liquid zone where pressures are higher than the saturation pressures of liquid water, the over-pressure causes a slight compression of the liquid which is manifest as an increment of pressure gradient. Since it is convenient to use “steam table" values for liquid densities (hence pressure gradients) the over-pressure effect requires an adjustment to the measured gradients. The increment, AP, of measured pressure, P, due to the compressibility of liquid above the point of measurement, Z, is given by equation (1) wherein: AP = [(AV/V)/p16(Z-Z, | )°/2: where (1) [(AV/V)/p] is a relative volume compressibility per unit of pressure; ZL is the depth of first flashing for a flowing well or the depth in a static column where the pressure diverges from the vapor pressure/temperature relationship; and G is the average pressure gradient between Z and ZL 1 6|- TABLE 2 COMPRESSIBILITY CORRECTIONS (AP) AND HELIUM LOADINGS ST-1 PRESSURE SURVEYS - 1984 PSI Helium Compressibility Corrections Loadings JULY AUG 4 6 19 21 7 ZLL 1134 1212 1145 1170 1170 Gradient -37950 -37912 - 38206 - 38312 -38101 Depth (Z) 1150 0.71 -00 1200 0.81 .00 1250 0.93 -01 1300 1.02 .02 -02 .02 1350 1.16 -05 1450 1.39 .10 .06 1500 1.52 -13 1 11 1650 1.95 .27 : 1700 2.11 -24 31 -28 .28 1850 2.64 51 1950 2.99 -67 ~54 -65 -61 -61 (1) ZpL- depths are based on counterpart temperature profiles, except for Aug 7. (2) Helium loading = (Z - Zi,)(Pz + 14.5)xD (3) D = 3.02x10-6, for nominal mid-range column temperature of 340°F (4) Compressibility corrections, AP = [AV/V)/p]G(Z-Z,,)2/2 [(AV/V)/p] = 5.27x10-6/psig, for one-phase zones nominally 380°F "TRUE" PRESSURES True pressures at the measurement points are given by making the helium adjustment alone. The results shown in Table 3 are obtained by adding the “Helium Loading" values in Table 2 to the data shown in Table 1. The Pagsp-Va lues in Table 3 are based on the least squares fit. Compared to the measured data, note that the Pigso for the static survey of July 4 now numerically exceeds all others, as is expected. The statistical uncertainties of these values are described in a following section. TABLE 3 TRUE PRESSURES AND LEAST SQUARES FITS MAKUSHIN ST-1 SURVEYS OF 1984 PSIG Depth July 4 July 6 July 19 duly 21 Aug 7 1150 189.81 1200 208.91 1250 232.43 1300 246.32 244.82 245.82 1350 271.26 1450 305.19 303.89 1500 322.72 322.22 322.42 1650 379.25 1700 399.21 400.11 399.61 399.01 1850 460.14 . 1950 496.69 495.49 496.49 495.79 495.49 Gradient 0.38054 0.38202 0.38510 0.38615 0.38404 Intercept -245.42 -249.81 -254.56 -257.06 -253.59 r 9379 9552 9569 9588 9580 RMS + (psi) 2.35 0.38 0.27 0.16 0.22 P1950 496.62 495.13 496.38 495.94 495.30 unc. + (psi) 0.89 = ------------------- 0.16------------------- PRESSURES FOR RESERVOIR ASSESSMENTS Because the bottomhole pressure differences were only slightly different for the several states of flow for ST-1, it is useful to apply some statistical concepts to the measured pressures in order to refine their precision and estimate their uncertainties. In addition to the pressure profiles described in Table 3 and the text, Many individual measurements were made of bottomhole pressures. These are statistically independent from the profile data, either due to a substantial time difference between measurements with the tool being left in place, or because a new purging with helium set up an independent event. These independent measurements can be combined with the linear least squares estimates to provide the best available estimate of pressure, with quantified uncertainties. The data and statistical correlates are given in Table 4 for the five time points of interest for reservoir engineering. Results on rows labeled "combined" are the best values to use for reservoir assessment. TABLE 4 STATISTICAL COMBINING OF BOTTOMHOLE PRESSURES (PSIG) MAKUSHIN ST-1 - 1984 Best Estimate Condition ate Data for P-1950 (1) Uncertainty (n) A. Static 4 July LLS 496.62 +.89 7 Static 4,5 July 496.7 498.5 497.59 1.27 2 Combined Static 496.84 0.89 9 B. Initial Low Rate 6 July LLS 495.13 -16 4 6,7 July 498.5 495.5 497.5 497.5 497.5 497.29 1.10 5 Combined Initial, Low Rate 496.33 .718 9 C. Late Low Rate 19 July LLS 496.38 -16 4 18,19 July 496.0 496.0 496.5 496.2 496.5 496.23 -25 5 Combined Late, Low Rate 496.30 -20 9 OD. Initial High Rate 21 July LLS 495.94 -16 4 21,22 July 495. 495. 495. 495. 496. —-woO+AOow 495.85 -15 5 Combined Initial High Rate 495.89 14 9 E. Late High Rate Aug LLS 495.30 -16 4 7 Aug 495.5 495.5 495.75 (2) 495.65 (2) 495.75 (2) 495.45 (2) 495.65 (2) 495.60 -13 7 7 6, Combined Late High Rate 495.49 .13 am) (1) Includes adjustment of +2.99 psi for weight of helium column. (2) Includes adjustment of +3.86 psi for tool's position at 1940 ft. PRESSURE GRADIENTS The pressure gradients indicated by the data and by the true pressures tend to increase with depth due to the compressibility of the liquid. An additional assessment of data quality and insight into the wellbore processes can be gained by mathematically removing the compression effect and comparing the result with handbook densities of liquid. The resulting pressures should be the most precisely linear of all, at least in the isothermal zones for the flowing surveys. The compression effect is expressed in the data as a non-linear excess of pressure, the values of which are listed in Table 2. Both helium and compression adjustments are to be made to the data of Table 1; the algebraic signs of the helium and compression correction are opposite. Results are -10- shown in Table 5. These adjustments are being aimed at a following section wherein the temperature of the liquid column can be deduced from residual pressure gradient. Table 5 values are not appropriate for reservoir engineering purposes that require true pressures. TABLE 5 LEAST SQUARES FITS TO COMPRESSION ADJUSTED PRESSURE DATA BEST LINEARIZATION OF GRADIENTS MAKUSHIN ST-1 - 1984 July 4 July 6 July 19 July 21 Aug 7 Gradient 0.37952 0.38125 0.38418 0.38524 0.38313 Intercept -244.18 -248.82 -253.33 -255.83 -252.37 r .9379 -9568 .9578 .9579 -9580 RMS 2.35 0.31 0.22 0.22 0.16 unc. 0.89 --------------------- 0.14--------------------- UNCERTAINTIES The uncertainties of single measurements of pressures in the wellbore are given by the RMS values. These are analogous to the standard deviation for an average value wherein all measurements are equally valid estimates of the same quantity. The surveys of July 6 through August 7 do not differ significantly in their RMS values, so they may be combined into a value (RMS = 0.23 psi) that can be applied uniformly. The July 4 value of RMS = 2.35 is significantly different from the rest and must be treated separately. The uncertainty of the position of points on the least squares line is analogous to the uncertainty of a mean value and ts given by RMS/(n-1) '/2, for the case of the static profile of July 4, n-1 = 6, RMS = 2.35, and the pressure from Table 3 at 1950 feet (or any other location) can be expressed as 496.62 +0.89 psig. This is a substantial improvement over the helium adjustment "measured" value of 496.69 +2.35 psig. Counterpart expressions for the uncertainties of point values in the other surveys are analogous. ile DERIVATION OF RESOURCE TEMPERATURES FROM THE PRESSURE GRADIENTS The change of water density with temperature has an equivalent in the wellbore gradient of about 0.00029 psi/ft per degree F. Thus, the precision of gradient measurement via pressures above, about 0.00050 psi/ft, suggests that the measured gradients could be used as thermometers with a precision of about +2 degrees. Of course, besides the factors of helium loading and compression, which are already accounted for, there are factors of salt content, wellbore inclination, and fluid friction against the wellbore, but those are factors-in-common for the pressure measurements. The salt content has been measured directly, hence compensation for it is precise. The wellbore inclination has been measured at one point within the zone of interest. Fluid friction is rate related, thus the two rates plus the static measurement permit an estimate of friction. The purpose of the following sections is to obtain an estimate of liquid (pre-flash) temperature from the pressure data by making adjustments to the measured gradients in order to reduce them to those expected for pure water in simple circumstances. Then, the finally adjusted gradients will be compared to gradients expected from pure water and a most probable resource temperature will be selected. The sequence of calculations involves several steps which, with the factors required, are summarized in Table 7. SALT EFFECTS ON THE PRESSURE GRADIENTS The density, rho, of salty water above 200°F is given accurately by equation (2) rho = 69.383 + 0.3209N + T[0.0004888N - 0.04104] (2) Units of rho are pounds per cubic foot, T is degrees F, and N is weight percent NaCl which is equivalent to the mixed salt composition of a real liquid. At uniform temperature the density varies by (0.3209 + .0004888T) per weight percent of NaC] equivalent. -12- The temperatures of the wellbores at the times of pressure surveys were measured by a thermistor lowered downhole. Unfortunately, the results are not entirely uniform between runs, nor are they in exact agreement with the vapor pressure relationship, if one accepts the pressure data at face value. Thus, at this point in the assessment, it is expedient to assign a temperature of 380°F to the wellbores (pressure surveys) jin order to continue. This value is near the true value and an improved estimate of temperature will be made by iteration of the assessment process. The fluid composition was determined on samples of post flash liquid that had cooled at 178°F, presumably adiabatically from the resource temperature, assigned here as 380°F. The flash fraction is computed to be 20.7 weight percent. The N-value for post-flash liquid is 0.71 for samples collected July 5 through 7, the counterpart pre-flash value is 0.563 weight percent. Samples collected on July 25, July 31, August 7 and August 8 showed continual decreases in salt content, approximately 4 percent (relative) over the production period. For purposes of this section, the resource temperature will be considered constant, thus the variation in salt content will be treated as a progressive lightening of the salt content of pre-flash liquid. Accordingly, the (pre-flash) N-values for July 4-6, July 19-21, and August 7 will be taken as 0.563, 0.553, and 0.540, respectively. These are shown in Table 7, line 4. The corresponding portions of the measured gradients that are due to the salt content are 0.00198, 0.00195, and 0.00190 psi/ft, respectively, and are shown in Table 7, line 5. EFFECT OF WELLBORE INCLINATION The wellbore inclination was measured at three places: 720 feet -- 3/4° S20W 1050 feet -- 1° N45E 1450 feet -- 2-1/4° N75E -13- The effect on the measured pressure gradients is an undermeasurement proportional to the cosine of the deviation. The inclination below 1450 can only be surmised. If the results for the 1050 and 1450 levels indicate a trend, then the bottomhole inclination might be estimated as near 3.5 degrees. Alternatively, the 2-1/4 degree value could be used as an estimate for the average inclination of the bore, including the unmeasured part. Thus, the measured gradients could be increased by a factor near 1/cos(2-1/4) = 1.00077 to account for inclination, or by 1/cos(3.5) = 1.00187. An intermediate value of 1.0013 has been used in the computations, as shown in Table 7, line 6. The net gradients (A) adjusted for wellbore inclination and salt content are shown in Table 7, line 7. The values are computed by multiplying line 2 values by line 6 and subtracting line 5 values. WELLBORE FLUID FRICTION Wellbore friction is absent in the static survey of July 4, but is present in different amounts in the other surveys. In turbulent flow friction is proportional to the square of fluid speed, thus the friction increments are related to the flow rates. The ratio of flow rates is 65,000/33,000 = 1.97, for which the square is 3.88. Thus, the frictional components of the gradients are proportional to 1:3.88 and the difference in average gradients (Line 9) is 2.88/3.88 of the total frictional gradient for the 65,000 1b/hr flow rates. The partitioning is shown in Line 10. CONVERSION OF ADJUSTED PRESSURE GRADIENTS TO TEMPERATURES The net gradients (B) of Line 11 represent the fully compensated gradients which are to be compared with pure water gradients. The comparison made here is to use those gradients to enter a table of water properties, finding the temperature of the water that would yield the gradients in Line 11. Those temperatures are shown in Line 12. -u4- CHECKS ON COMPUTED TEMPERATURES Except for the effect of salt on the gradients, the Line 12 temperature estimates are independent of temperature measurements of the ordinary kind. It is possible to test them further for internal consistency in this pressure model by the following principles. The ar depth is the deepest point in the wellbore where the hydraulic pressure is equal to the net vapor pressure of the fluid. For the flowing conditions, this is known as the bubble point because CO, and H,0 vapor bubbles begin forming at this level. For the static survey, a few hundred feet below the static liquid level in the wellbore, the upper portion of the single (liquid) phase column can be at the temperature-pressure conditions for saturated liquid. The length of this part of the column and its lower limit can be deduced by comparing a plot of the water vapor pressure curve and the temperature and pressure (data) profiles for the wellbore. The aL position is the lowest point in this portion of the column and is marked by where the T-P data diverge from the vapor pressure curve. Because the vapor pressure of the liquid is computable from the temperature, it is possible to compute the ZL values based on the "gradient" temperatures of Line 12 and the least squares pressure profiles of Table 1. Comparing them with the values in Line 13, which are based on profiles, provides a check on the internal consistency of the data in regard to presumptions and adjustments. The a (flashing) depths of Table 2 were based on the shapes of the temperature and pressure profiles. They are listed again in Line 13. These were the tops of the isothermal zones for temperature surveys and July 6, 19, and 21 and the break-a-way point for temperature in the static profile that was partly at the temperature/pressure boiling curve. There was no temperature survey on Aug 7, so the ZL depth was estimated, with less precision, from the breaks in slopes of the pressure profile. - 15 - The vapor pressure of salty water is given by Equation (3). PSIA = exp[6.7028 - 0.00335N - 3712/(T + 460)] (3) wherein T is degrees F given by the surveys and N is the equivalent weight percent NaCl for thermodynamic factors derived elsewhere, and shown in Table 7, Line 14. The computed pressures are shown in Line 15. The component of pressure due to carbon dioxide was about 8 psia during the early July surveys and decreased to about 7.4 psia by August 7. re ~ J oO te ee ee ee ee ee = CWODHMAMNS WN owaowstoa OPwWwn— | TABLE 7 CONVERSION OF PRESSURE GRADIENTS TO TEMPERATURES MAKUSHIN ST-1 - 1984 Gradient Table 1 Table 5 Uncertainty Neq (density) sait component of gradient 1/(Cos incl) Net gradient (A) Flow rates (1b/hr) Average gradient Frictional component of gradient Net Gradient (B) Gradient B Temps ZiL from Table 2 Neq (thermal) PH20 (calc. psia) Pnet (calc. psig) ZLL computed ZLL mismatch (13-17) AT (Eq. 4) Comp Resource Temp July 4 -37494 -37952 -00415 0.563 - 37803 380.2 1134 0.557 191.8 184.4 1132 0.27 380.5 duly 6 -37912 38125 - 16 - July 19 July 21 . 38206 .38312 .38418 128524 tee 0.00050--------- 0.553 0.540 .00195 .00190 .38273 .38384 33,000 65,000 38132----- -----. 38278 0005 ee 00197 . 38232 38187 364.7 366.3 1145 1170 0.547 0.534 158.5 161.7 150.8 154.0 1053 1065 92 105 16.0 18.3 380.7 384.6 Aug 7 -38101 - 38313 The net pressures of Line 16 are the gauge pressures, adjusted for carbon dioxide and helium (from Table 2) that are to be matched with the least squares fits of Table 1. The a values of Line 17 are the computed flash depths and identify where the least squares pressures of Table 1 meet the Line 16 pressures. The mismatches, Line 18, are the discrepancies with the measured profiles described earlier. RESOLUTION OF ZL MISMATCHES The mismatch values in three columns of Line 18 are larger than reasonable uncertainties due to judging slopes in the profile plots for the flowing surveys. Also, the temperatures in Line 12 are less than indicated by direct measurements and by most chemical geothermometers of the liquid composition (see section of chemistry). Thus, it is useful to attempt a resolution. By inspection, the computed aL values are too shallow for the flowing surveys. They would be deeper if the vapor pressure were higher. However, higher temperatures would imply smaller pressure gradients that would tend to elevate the computed Zi: Specifically, in the vicinity of 380°F the vapor pressure increased by about 2.42 psi/degree and the liquid pressure gradient decreased by about 0.00029 psi/ft per degree. It is possible to compute a temperature increment, AT, that when added to the gradient temperatures (Line 12) would be consistent with the observed ZL values. The two effects of temperature are accounted for in equation (4). 1950 - Z P P - 2.42 AT)/(G - .00029 AT) (4) it = rg50 - wherein G is a gradient value from Table 1 and P is the calculated pressure from Table 7, Line 16. The AT values which satisfy (4) are listed in Line 19. -17- - The fluid temperatures that are compatible with the revised gradients (denominator of Eq. 4) and the revised vapor pressures (numerator of Eq. 4) at a are listed in Line 20 as the sum of AT and Gradient B temperatures (Line 12). These temperatures are based entirely on the pressure data except for the choice of Zo They are the most internally consistent values the data can yield. Their average values indicate a resource temperature of 384.86 +5.1°F. The value for July 6 (393°) is statistically remote from the others. If it were rejected, then the average bottomhole (resource) temperature would be 382.83 + 2.6°F. For comparison, the average of the measured bottomhole temperatures was 380.28°F, a difference of 2.55°F. VAPOR PRESSURE-TEMPERATURE EVALUATION Figures 1, 2, and 3 are plots that combine measured wellbore temperature with wellbore (absolute) pressures in a boiling curve format. These are checks on whether the measured temperatures and pressures conform to the physto-chemical demands of two-phase co-existence. The full solid lines represent the boiling curve for pure water. The dotted and dashed lines represent selected brines. Data for measurements at Makushin ST-1 are circles with a continuous curving line drawn through. The data have not been adjusted for effects of salt or carbon dioxide, but both are small to negligible at temperatures cooler than about 368°F. The salt effect causes the water vapor pressure to be 0.4 percent lower at temperatures in the vicinity of flashing. The maximum effect is less than 1 psi, which is the limit of discernibility on the figures above 100 psia. The carbon dioxide effect is maximum at the point of initial flashing where it adds less than 8 psia to the ST-1 vapor pressure. As flashing proceeds the effect is less as indicated in Table 8, becoming negligible after about 10 degrees of adiabatic flashing. TABLE 8 CO> PRESSURE DURING FLASHING oF 379.5 379.0 378.0 377.0 376.0 375.0 374.0 369.0 Flash Fraction 0.0000 .0006 .0019 .0032 .0045 0057 .0070 .0133 Pco2 7.6 6.0 41 3.2 2.5 2.1 1.8 1.0 - 18 - The mismatch of the data from the boiling curves in Figures 1, 2 and 3 at temperatures more than 20° below the resource temperature represents errors in either or both the temperature or pressure measurements. The objective of this section is to apportion the error to the two measurements. The linear least squares analysis of pressure profiles in the previous section revealed that the pressure measurements were consistent within 0.2 psi for individual runs. Also, the total pressure variation, ostensibly due mainly to reservoir drawdown, was only 1.35 +0.59 psi. Thus, mismatches between data and vapor pressure curves which exceed about 1.4 psi or one degree must be due to an error in the temperature tool calibration. The absolute accuracy of the temperature tool can be quantitatively assessed by the use of a special wellbore computer model program developed to operate on wellbore pressure data of the two-phase zone. This program is capable of calculating the pre-flash brine temperature, since the composition of the fluid and wellbore dimensions are well known, and appropriate values are available to account for wellbore friction and heat losses. The computer results for the four flowing pressure surveys are shown in Table 9. TABLE 9 WELLBORE FLOW MODEL RESULTS Pressure Survey duly 6 July 19 July 21 August 7 Computed Flash Depth 1159 1165 1155 1155 Computed Flash Temp. 319..9°F 381 .5°F 379.2°F 379.2°F Measured Flash Temp. 376.2°F 378 .4°F 378.0°F at computed Flash Depth The four computed flash temperatures average 379.95°F and the average of the three temperature measurements recorded for those flash depths average 377.53°F, a difference of 2.42°F. Alternatively, the average difference - 19 - between the computed flash temperature and the measured flash temperature for each of the first three surveys is 2.63°F. These results, combined with the one-phase results described previously (Table 7), indicate that a calibration adjustment of +2.5°F should be applied to all the temperature measurements (made with Box #2) during the 1984 flow test of ST-1. - 20 - So titi | | titi a é ; B ° - —|— ‘| 7 P. . HATA ET Le I} bed dk RAKSHA | Pre HI - i SA HEE ll i GG Bis Se ak She SE i et re tHe . fh? fit pad ft 7 je . 400 si Fe a fate coe Ua Pe ete ae - My Af Fe I “EEEEEEHE “EFEEEEE : 300 400 si APPENDIX B-2 ST-l: FLASH FRACTION CALCULATIONS APPENDIX B2 FLASH FRACTION FOR ATMOSPHERIC SAMPLES The two-phase discharge from the James tube cools by two mechanisms, mixing with the cool atmosphere and by steam losses. Cooling continues until the ambient temperature is reached. Sampling the discharge intercepts the liquid before it has completely cooled, but substantially more steam is lost compared to normal atmospheric boiling at 212°F. In effect, the sample collection is done at an indefinite lower temperature than 212°F, which causes two technical problems. (1) In reconstituting the pre-flash concen- trations of the liquid, the precise steam loss correction may not be avail- able and (2) the adiabatic quartz geothermometer will yield high results due to the extra residual concentration beyond the boil-at-212°F assumption which is built into it. In this case a method is available for deducing the total steam flash fraction experienced by the liquid prior to sampling. This method is based on the sample results of August 7, when the portable Weber separator was used. The samples collected August 8 from the silencer had higher concentra- tions of all components than the August 7 samples, thus, the flash fraction from the 269°F temperature of the separator to the effective flashing tem- perature of the atmospheric samples can be deduced from concentration ratios. That flash increment can be added to the calculable flash fraction for the separator samples, which can be based on the collection temperature of 269°F and an estimate of the resource temperature. The resource tempera- ture measured by instruments in the wellbore was about 383°F. The flash fraction from 269° to atmospheric sampling conditions is given by (1 - CS/CA), where C refers to analytical concentrations and S and A refer to separator and atmospheric conditions respectively. Since there were two samples collected under each condition, it is useful to use their sums to determine the concentration ratios, and to use several components to improve the statistical reliability of the calculation. The results are shown in Table 1. TABLE 1 CS/CA VALUES SAMPLES (26 and 36)/(28 and 32) Sodium -8384 Potassium - 8885 Calcium -8818 Lithium -8885 Chloride -8856 Average - 8866 flash fraction = 0.113 Between 382 and 269°F, enthalpy conservation yields a flash fraction of 0.125. The total flash fraction, "f", from 382°F to atmospheric sampling condi- tions is therefore f = 0.125 + 0.113 (1 - .125) = 0.224 or 22.4 percent. This value is used in Table 7B of the main report text to convert the Pog flash concentrations (column 20) to pre-flash concentrations in column 26. Additionally, the measured silica concentrations (Row 22a, Tables 7A and 7B) are reduced by the factor (1 - .224) to yield the pre-flash concentrations in Row 22b. Accordingly, the quartz geothermometer temperatures given in Row 26 are based on the flash-adjusted silica concentrations of Row 22b. APPENDIX B-3 ST-1l: MONITORING OF WATER QUALITY AND FLOW WATER QUALITY AND FLOW DURING TEST OF GEOTHERMAL WELL MAKUSHIN ST-1; JULY 5 TO AUGUST 8, 1984 UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION PROJECT Prepared for REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL, INC. December 1984 800 Cordova, Suite 101, Anchorage, Alaska 99501 12023-015-20 UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION PROJECT WATER QUALITY AND FLOW DURING TEST OF GEOTHERMAL WELL MAKUSHIN ST-1; JULY 5 TO AUGUST 8, 1984 FINAL REPORT By Laurence A. Peterson L.A. PETERSON & ASSOCIATES, INC. Fairbanks, Alaska Prepared For DAMES & MOORE Anchorage, Alaska And REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL, INC. Santa Fe Springs, California December 1984 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . INTRODUCTION. . 2... .- METHODS AND LOCATIONS . 3.1 Methods. ..... 3.2 Locations. .... RESULTS . . 2 2 6 ce TABLE OF CONTENTS ee ee ew ew ew ew 4.1 Plateau Creek and Makushin Valley River Baseline . . 4.2 Plateau Creek and Makushin Valley River During Well Test ....... 4.3 Plateau Creek and Makushin Valley River After Well Test... ..... 4.4 Sugarloaf Canyon Creek. .....-. 5.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS... ......2. 6.0). REFERENCES... s 00 ole eevicie a ele.'s fo" APPENDIX A: APPENDIX B: WATER QUALITY AND FLOW DATA GEOTHERMAL FLUID ANALYSES n Wn WW 12 13 13 18 20 21 23 LIST OF TABLES Table : Page 1 Range, Mean, and Standard Deviation of Baseline Flow, Chloride, Conductivity, and Temperature at Stations PCD, PCA, PCB, PCC, and MVB ... 2-22 ee ee ee e 14 2 Range, Mean, and Standard Deviation of Flow, Chloride, Conductivity, and Temperature at Stations PCD, PCA, PCB, PCC, and MVB During Well Test ......-. 16 APPENDIX TABLES A1 Station PCD A2 Station PCA A3 Station PCB A4 Station PCC AS Station MVB A6 Water Quality at the Mouth of Plateau Creek and in Makushin Valley River Before Well Test A7 Water Quality at the Mouth of Plateau Creek and in Makushin Valley River During Well Test AB —- Station PCD Ag Station PCA A10 Station PCB A11—- Station PCC A12. Station MVB A13 Water Quality at the Mouth of Plateau Creek and in Makushin Valley River A14 Baseline Conditions in Sugarloaf Canyon Creek and Makushin Valley River B1 ST-1 Geothermal Fluid Physical/Chemical Data ii Figure Nn Ww FF ww LIST OF FIGURES Project Location. .......2.2.2e-. Project: Area. 4.) 6 gs ee ae oe Water Quality Sample Stations Near Well. Sample Stations Near Drill Site. .... Decrease in Chloride and Conductivity Values vs. Time at Station PCB. .... iii 11 19 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Republic Geothermal, Inc. (RGI), under contract to the Alaska Power Authority, drilled a deep exploratory well to a geothermal resource on Unalaska Island, Alaska in 1983. This well was tested over a 2-day period in 1983 and over a 35-day period in 1984. Water quality and flow data collected before, during, and after the 2-day test in 1983 (Peterson and Nichols 1983) demonstrated that the geothermal well test had no adverse impacts on water quality or freshwater aquatic biota in Makushin Valley River at station MV. Information appearing in this report demonstrates that the 1984 geothermal well test had no adverse impacts on water quality at station MVB or on freshwater aquatic biota at station MV. This report presents data collected before, during, and after the 35-day well test conducted in 1984. The well was tested at two different liquid discharge rates, 0.11 cubic feet per second (cfs) from July 5 through July 20, and 0.21 cfs from July 20 to the end of the test on August 8, 1984. The discharged geothermal fluid was less than 99°C at discharge, and miner- alized with sodium chloride and other compounds. The total dissolved solids concentration was approximately 7900 mg/L. Geothermal fluid was discharged into tributaries of the Makushin Valley River under approvals from the Alaska Departments of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) and Fish and Game (ADF&G). Water quality and flow measurements made before and during the well test revealed that stream temperatures were not significantly affected by the test. Chloride and conductivity levels were significantly higher than baseline levels of these parameters in Plateau Creek during the well test. These parameters were not significantly higher than baseline conditions in Makushin Valley River, however. The minimum dilution factor from the well to Makushin Valley River immediately downstream from Plateau Creek was 430. Farther downstream at station MV, the minimum dilution factor was 1,200. Consequently, levels of all the parameters measured at stations MVB and MV during the well test complied with Alaska water quality criteria, which provides for the protection of freshwater aquatic biota. Station MVB is the point in the stream system where ADEC personnel applied their criteria for the short-term well test. ADF&G personnel were concerned with data collected at station MV. Data contained in this report demonstrate that the geothermal well test had no adverse impacts on water quality at station MVB or on freshwater aquatic biota at station MV. This report also describes baseline water quality conditions in Sugar- loaf Canyon Creek. These data were collected in anticipation of a flow test from the drilling of a second geothermal well being drilled near Sugarloaf Canyon Creek. Drilling was halted on this well prior to encountering a geothermal resource. 2.0 INTRODUCTION The 1984 water quality program is a complement of the 1982 baseline data collection effort and the 1983 well test monitoring effort conducted in support of the Alaska Power Authority's Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project being performed by RGI. Background information regarding water resources characteristics of the project area, drainage basin descriptions, and Makushin Volcano geothermal manifestations was previously presented by Dames & Moore (1983) and is not reprinted herein. Results of monitoring the 2-day well test in 1983 are presented by Peterson and Nichols (1983) and are ‘also not reprinted in this report. The 1984 sample effort was limited in scope and areal extent compared to the 1982 baseline program, but was similar to the 1983 sample effort. The major focus of the 1984 program was to measure stream water quality and flow to assess potential water quality impacts on receiving streams during geothermal resource well testing performed by RGI. This well, 1,946 ft deep, was drilled by RGI during late spring and summer 1983. The well was con- firmed by a short flow test lasting few hours on August 27, 1983. Labora- tory analyses of samples collected during this test indicated the geothermal resource water was of the sodium chloride type, and exhibited a total dis- solved solids concentration of approximately 7800 mg/L. A 2-day well test was conducted in September 1983. Subsequently, RGI received approval from Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) to discharge the geothermal fluid for a 40-day flow test from July to August 1984 into tri- butaries of Makushin Valley River. The point of primary monitoring for water quality impacts to the river from this discharge was station MVB, immediately downstream from Plateau Creek (see Figure 3, Section 3.0). The point of primary concern to Alaska Department of Fish & Game (ADF&G) was station MV (see Figure 1), approximately 3.2 stream-miles downstream from the point of discharge, but upstream of the spawning area of pink salmon. Baseline water quality monitoring was initiated in Sugarloaf Canyon Creek in anticipation of a flow test from a well being drilled adjacent to this creek. Drilling of this well, however, was terminated before a geother- mal resource was reached. FIGURE | PROJECT LOCATION AMV Sample Station Hi camp @ GEOTHERMAL RESOURCE WELL ST-1 * PROPOSED GEOTHERMAL RESOURCE WELL Driftwood Deo € o Mokushi J NZ ahd Valley’ ( Nateekin Drainage Basin Boundary 5 Kilometers The objectives of the 1984 water quality program were limited to: (1) (2) (3) monitor water quality in Plateau Creek and Makushin Valley River before, during, and after the well test to determine: (a) base- line conditions, (b) the degree of impact, if any, caused by the release of geothermal fluid, and (c) the amount of time required for baseline conditions to return after flow from the well was stopped; monitor parameters in Makushin Valley River at stations MVB and MV to determine whether ADEC and ADF&G criteria were met during the well test; and initiate water quality monitoring in Sugarloaf Canyon Creek. 3.0 METHODS AND LOCATIONS ee eS This section summarizes sample collection and analytical techniques as well as sample station locations. 3.1 Methods Water quality sampling, preservation, and shipping techniques, and field and laboratory analyses were performed in the same way in 1984 as in 1982 and 1983. The techniques followed in 1982 are described by Dames & Moore (1983) and are not repeated here. The measurement of chloride in the field, per- formed in 1983, but not in 1982, is described by Peterson and Nichols (1983). Tracing the movement of geothermal fluid through the stream system was accomplished by performing temperature, chloride, and conductivity measure- ments at various locations in the stream system downstream from the geo- thermal well. These parameters were the best "tracers" available because the geothermal fluid was known to be significantly hotter and to contain much higher chloride and total dissolved solids concentrations than the streams. It was important to determine water quality at the peak concentration of geothermal fluid to allow a prediction of the worst case, albeit short-term, water quality impacts on the receiving streams. Staff gages were installed at stations where numerous field measurements were made. Three or more flow measurements were made at each of these stations to develop stage-discharge relationships. This was necessary to allow more time for field measurements of temperature, chloride, and conduc- tivity, and to provide a fast indication of flow during the well test. 3.2 Locations The project is located entirely within the Makushin Valley River drainage basin (Figure 1) on Unalaska Island. Figure 2 displays the project area and the location of the MV sample station. This station is the point at which ADF&G indicated that protection of fish and fish habitat was FIGURE 2 PROJECT AREA Sugarloaf Cone Drainage Basin Boundary So — Seal er eeu AT Hi camp 1 Mile ~~ seotermal Resource Well,ST-1 ww 0 1 Kilometer Amv Sample Station _— "7 as ¥xProposed Geothermal Resource Well important. The area upstream from station MV is not critical habitat for anadromous fish. Figure 3 presents the locations of water quality sample stations near the geothermal resource well. Discharge from the well was directed toward Plateau Creek, and almost all geothermal fluid entered Plateau Creek via a small unnamed intermittant tributary after flowing overland for about 100 m. Consequently, water quality sampling and flow measurements were concentrated in Plateau Creek. Four stations were established along Plateau Creek (in downsteam order: PDC, PCA, PCB, and PCC) and two stations were established in Makushin Valley River near Plateau Creek. Station MVA is upstream from the mouth of Plateau Creek and MVB is downstream. Station MVB is the point where ADEC indicated that state water quality criteria had to be met. ADEC, however, provided RGI with a short-term variance for temperature, total dissolved solids, total suspended solids, turbidity, arsenic, boron, cadmium, ‘chloride, lead, manganese, mercury, selenium, sodium, and zinc for the sections of Plateau Creek and Makushin Valley River down to station MVB (Martin 1984). All other water quality parameters had to comply with Alaska water quality criteria. Station PCD is in a small tributary to Plateau Creek which drains the the area immediately downslope from the well. This narrow stream, cut through the organic soil layer, has a sand and gravel bed and a relatively steep gradient between the plateau lip and Plateau Creek, This was the point closest to the well where stream flow could be measured. Station PCA is located about 100 m downstream from the PCD tributary. At this station, Plateau Creek is narrow, has a sand and gravel bed, and the gradient is fairly low. Station PCB is similar to PCA, but there are many small rapids upstream and downstream from the station and the gradient is much steeper. Station PCC is located on a narrow bench above Makushin Valley River, the only suitable location for a staff gage. Numerous waterfalls exist immed- iately upstream, and the creek downstrean from station PCC divides around many boulders as the creek falls to the river. Stations MVA and MVB are located in a narrow canyon having many boulders, in a stretch of the river having a single channel. The river is turbulent during high flow. FIGURE 3 WATER QUALITY SAMPLE STATIONS NEAR WELL GEOTHERMAL RESOURCE 1000 Feet a sas ms Sample locations in the Sugarloaf Canyon drainage appear in Figure 4. Sugarloaf Canyon Creek was highly turbid, flows through a narrow canyon, and has an extremely steep gradient. Station SCA was located upstream from the drill site and 25 m below the confluence of Sugarloaf Canyon Creek and a clear water tributary flowing in from the north. Station SCB was located about 500 m downstream from the drill site. Station SCC was near the mouth of the creek just upstream from Makushin Valley River. The creek bed at all three locations was comprised of cobbles and boulders. Station MBS was in Makushin Valley River downstream from Sugarloaf Canyon Creek. Field work was conducted July 1 through 6, and August 6 through 11, 1984. Baseline data were collected July 2 through 4 and on the morning of July 5. The well test started at 1356 hours on July 5 and continued until 1116 hours on August 8. Monitoring during the well test occurred only July 5 and 6, and August 7 and 8. Monitoring after the termination of the well test was performed August 8 through 10, and on August 17. Water samples were collected at stations PCA and PCB on August 17 by an employee of RGI. The well flowed at two rates during the 35-day well test, 0.11 cubic feet per second (cfs) from July 5 through July 20, and 0.21 cfs from July 20 to August 8. These maximum rates assume no evaporation and none of the fluid being carried away by wind. Samples were also collected from the well (source) by RGI personnel. Water quality data were collected from Sugarloaf Canyon Creek on August 9 and 10, 1984. FIGURE 4 SAMPLE STATIONS NEAR DRILL SITE a / * PROPOSED GEOTHERMAL RESOURCE WELL / 4.0 RESULTS Water quality and flow data collected in 1984 prior to, during, and after the geothermal resource well test are presented in this section. Emphasis is placed on field measurements of temperature, chloride, con- ductivity, and flow. Baseline conditions in Plateau Creek and Makushin Valley River are described first, followed by discussions of water quality in these streams during and after the well test. Sugarloaf Canyon Creek base- line conditions are also described. Field and laboratory water quality data collected at the various sample stations are presented in Appendix A. Tables A1 through A5 display flow, chloride, conductivity, and temperature data collected before and during the well test at stations PCD, PCA, PCB, PCC, and MVB, respectively. Field and laboratory water quality data collected before the well test at the mouth of Plateau Creek and in Makushin Valley River are presented in Table A6, and Table A7 displays data collected in these areas during the well test. Tables A8 through A12 present flow, chloride, conductivity, and temperature data collected during and after the well test at stations PCD, PCA, PCB, PCC, and MVB, respectively. Field and laboratory water quality data collected during and after the well test at stations PCC, MVA, MVB, and MV appear in Table A13. Table A14 displays baseline water quality conditions in Sugarloaf Canyon Creek and at station MBS. Six separate geothermal fluid samples were collected from the well by RGI personnel and analyzed for a variety of parameters. Table B1 in Appendix B displays the geothermal fluid physical/chemical data. Most parameters exhibited levels less than their respective detection limits in all six samples. Some parameters exceeded their respective detection limits and the highest level for each of these parameters from all six samples is presented in Table B1, along with the applicable Alaska water quality criteria. -12- 4.1 Plateau Creek and Makushin Valley River Baseline Baseline water quality and flow data were collected prior to the well test at all stations in Plateau Creek and at stations MVB and MV in Makushin Valley River. Emphasis of this testing was on flow, chloride, conductivity, and temperature data. Dissolved oxygen, pH, alkalinity, turbidity, and settleable solids levels were measured in addition to the above at stations PCC, MVB, and MV prior to the test. Station MVA was not sampled since the water quality characteristics at MVA and MVB before the test were assumed to be identical. Flow averaged 1.3 cfs at PCC, and 97 cfs at MVB, resulting in a dilution factor of 75 under baseline conditions. Stations PCD, PCA, PCB, PCC, and MVB exhibited low levels of chloride and conductivity before the well test (Table 1). Chloride ranged from 1.5 to 5.4 mg/L at the four Plateau Creek stations, and 3.4 to 4.2 mg/L at MVB. Conductivity ranged from 13 to 44 micromhos/cem @ 25°C in Plateau Creek and 41 to 44 micromhos/cm 25°C at MVB. Temperatures were low at all stations because of snowmelt throughout the drainage. Field and laboratory water quality data collected at the mouth of Plateau Creek (station PCC) and in Makushin Valley River indicate these streams are highly oxygenated, have a low buffering capacity (low alkalinity concentrations), and are neutral with respect to pH (Table A6). Plateau Creek is a clear stream having a low turbidity level, whereas Makushin Valley River contains more suspended material of glacial origin. Both streams are rather dilute and display low concentrations of total dissolved solids (Table A6). 4.2 Plateau Creek and Makushin Valley River During Well Test The well was opened at 1356 hours on July 5, 1984. It took the geo- thermal fluid 1-1/2 hours to flow overland from the well to station PCD, the closest station to the well. This situation occurred because the weather had been clear and dry and there was no surface water flow in the tributary leading to station PCD or downstream from this station prior to the time when -13- RANGE, MEAN, AND STANDARD DEVIATION OF BASELINE FLOW, CHLORIDE, CONDUCTIVITY, AND TABLE 1 TEMPERATURE AT STATIONS PCD, PCA, PCB, PCC, AND MVB Low Mean High S.D.(1) #0bs.(1) Station PCD Flow <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.0 4 Chloride 1.5 3.82 5.5 1.68 4 Conductivity 13 23.0 32 8.0 4 Temperature 2.1 3.32 5.5 1.52 4 Station PCA Flow 0.56 0.67 0.82 0.12 4 Chloride 2.8 4.71 5.3 1.03 4 Conductivity 23 30.0 34 4.8 4 Temperature 3.8 5.02 5.7 0.87 4 Station PCB Flow 0.84 1.03 1.4 0.26 4 Chloride 2.9 3.68 5.0 0.91 4 Conductivity 22 27.2 34 6.2 4 Temperature 4.0 4.45 5.0 0.42 4 Station PCC Flow 1.0 1.32 2.2 0.58 4 Chloride 3.3 4.50 5.4 0.95 4 Conductivity 26 33.2 42 6.6 4 Temperture 3.1 4.75 5.7 1.14 4 Station MVB Flow 96 97.0 98 0.82 4 Chloride 3.4 3.75 4.2 0.37 4 Conductivity 41 42.8 44 1.26 4 Temperature 3.1 4.22 4.8 0.80 4 (1) S.D represents standard deviation and #0bs is the number of observations used to calculate the mean and standard deviation. Units: Flow, cubic feet per second, cfs Chloride, mg/L Conductivity, pmhos/em @25°C Temperature, °C geothermal fluid entered this tributary. Consequently, forward progress of the geothermal fluid was stopped until each depression in the tributary was filled. Station PCD exhibited the highest chloride, conductivity, and temper- ature levels of all stations (Table 2). Table 2 summarizes all the measurements made during the well test. Maximum liquid discharge from the well was 0.12 cfs for the last 19 days of the test. However, the maximum flow at station PCD during this period was 0.05 cfs, indicating that some of the discharge was: (1) lost to evaporation; (2) blown out of the Plateau Creek drainage toward Fox Canyon Creek; (3) trapped by vegetation on the plateau; or (4) soaked into the ground. The portion of the discharge trapped by vegetation or soaked into the ground will slowly work its way to the stream system and be flushed out. Chloride levels were significantly elevated at station PCA within 2 hours after the well was opened (Table A2). Comparison of average baseline and test conditions at station PCA indicates that flow increased by an average of 0.15 cfs during the test. The average chloride concentration increased from a baseline of 4.71 mg/L to 1359 mg/L during the test, and average conductivity levels increased from 30.0 to 3116 micromhos/cm @ 25°C. The average temperature increase at station PCA was 6.4°C. Station PCB also displayed significant increases in chloride and conductivity levels within 2 hours (Table A3). The average flow level increased by 0.11 cfs over baseline, and the average chloride concentration increased from 3.68 to 1330 mg/L. The average baseline conductivity level was 27.2 micromhos/cm @ 25°C. The average temperature increase was 6.2°C, similar to the increase at station PCA. Significant increases in chloride and conductivity levels occurred in less than 3 hours at station PCC (Table A4). Average levels of both of these parameters measured during the well test remained well above baseline condi- tions. Flow increased by an average of 0.60 cfs. Temperature during the well test at station PCC, however, only averaged 3.4°C higher than baseline -15- RANGE, MEAN, AND STANDARD DEVIATION OF FLOW, CHLORIDE, CONDUCTIVITY, AND TEMPERATURE TABLE 2 AT STATIONS PCD, PCA, PCB, PCC, AND MVB DURING WELL TEST Low Mean High s.D.(1) Station PCD Flow 0.01 0.03 0.05 0.01 Chloride 1040 3258 4,750 1703 Conductivity 3300 8333 12,200 4179 Temperature 7.8 17.78 27.0 7.60 Station PCA Flow 0.17 0.78 1.5 0.64 Chloride 25.6 1359 3470 1724 Conductivity 103 3116 7600 3795 Temperature 4.4 11.40 21.1 8.60 Station PCB Flow 0.27 1.14 2.6 1.09 Chloride 9.6 1330 2700 1377 Conductivity 37 3496 6900 3555 Temperature 3.7 10.67 19.5 7.48 Station PCC Flow 0.44 1.92 3.8 1.63 Chloride 7.7 598 1400 726 _ Conductivity 33 1843 4300 2210 Temperture 4.5 8.18 13.6 4.69 Station MVB Flow 90 110.0 130 18.7 Chloride 3.7 10.8 18.6 6.96 Conductivity 33 70.2 110 37.5 Temperature 3.2 4.82 6.0 1.17 (1) #0bs.(1) Wann NAAD Www NANAA Wann S.D represents standard deviation and #0bs is the number of observations used to calculate the mean and standard deviation. Units: Chloride, mg/L Conductivity, pmhos/em @25°C Temperature, °C Flow, cubic feet per second, cfs conditions. Other field parameters (dissolved oxygen, pH, alkalinity, tur- bidity, and settleable solids) displayed no significant response to the well discharge. The effect of the well discharge on water quality in Makushin Valley River downstream from. the mouth of Plateau Creek was insignificant for most parameters. Dissolved oxygen, pH, temperature, alkalinity, turbidity, and settleable solids levels at station MVB were the same or very nearly the same as levels of these parameters at MVA. Comparison of data in Tables A6é and A7 indicates a slight increase in chloride and conductivity levels downstream from Plateau Creek. The average baseline chloride concentration at MVB increased from 3.75 to 10.8 mg/L during the well test, and conductivity increased from 42.8 to 70.2 micromhos/cm @ 25°C (compare data in Tables 1 and 2). Temperature, however, only displayed an average increase of 0.60°C. The dilution factor from the well (flowing at two rates of 0.11 and 0.21 cfs) to station MVB ranged from 430 to 870. These figures are conservative because not all of the geothermal fluid reached Plateau Creek. Analytical results of six representative samples of the geothermal fluid collected by RGI personnel are summarized in Appendix B (Table B1). This table presents the highest level of each parameter from all six sets of samples. These analyses include numerous metals and anions as well as silica. Applying the dilution factors to the results of these analyses indicates that all parameters in Table B1, except passibly arsenic, would exhibit levels at station MVB that comply with Alaska water quality criteria (ADEC 1982). The arsenic concentration at MVB, as well as at MV, was less than the detection limit (0.0005 mg/L) for arsenic during the well test (Tables A7 and A13). Sampling was conducted at station MV on two days during the well test, July 6 and August 7, 1984. All field and laboratory parameters measured (dissolved oxygen, pH, temperature, conductivity, chloride, alkalinity, turbidity, settleable solids, total dissolved solids, and arsenic) displayed levels within their respective natural variation at station MV. Discharged geothermal fluid did not adversely affect water quality or freshwater aqua- tic biota at station MV because of the large dilution factor between the -17- well and this station. Maximum flow from the well was 0.21 cfs and the lowest flow at MV was 260 cfs, which provided a dilution factor of at least 1,200. This figure is conservative because not all geothermal fluid reached the stream system. 4.3 Plateau Creek and Makushin Valley River After Well Test The well test was terminated at 1116 hours on August 8, 1984. Flow at station PCD decreased from 0.05 to 0.01 cfs within 1-1/2 hours after the well stopped flowing (Table A8). Flow at this station continued to decrease and was zero after 7-1/2 hours. Chloride, conductivity, and temperature also displayed decreasing levels during this period. Station PCA (Table A9) exhibited a significant decrease in chloride, conductivity, and temperature levels after the well test. For example, the chloride concentration decreased from 3000 mg/L to 81.7 mg/L within 7-1/2 hours after the well test ended, and to 13.5 mg/L roughly 50 hours after the well test. These levels would have been lower and attained in less time in rainy weather. However, the weather was clear and dry, and this situation retarded the flushing process. Even so, the levels for chloride, conduc- tivity, and temperature at station PCA after 7-1/2 hours were less than the Alaska receiving water criteria for these parameters (ADEC 1982). The most complete data for tracking the reduction in chloride and conductivity values following the end of the well test were obtained for station PCB (Table A10). Figure 5 displays the rapid decrease in chloride and conductivity levels following completion of the well test over the first few hours, followed by a gradual decline in values. Chloride had decreased by 2 orders-of-magnitude within 36 hours after the well test, was 20.4 mg/L after 50 hours, and 10.6 mg/L after 216 hours. These levels are signifi- cantly less than the Alaska receiving water standard for chloride of 250 mg/L (ADEC 1982). Station PCC exhibited a decrease in the chloride concentration from 1400 mg/L during the well test to 95.1 mg/L 50 hours after the well test -18- FIGURE 5 DECREASE IN CHLORIDE AND CONDUCTIVITY VALUES VERSUS TIME AT STATION PCB Chloride o—_________e Conductivity e Chloride, mg/L Conductivity, umhos/cm at 25°C t | | | 6 \ | | | \ | \ | | | \ \ \ | \ \ \ | \ 40 Time After Completion of Well Test, Hours (Table A1). Station MVB displayed chloride levels of 4.9 and 9.9 mg/L after the well test (Table A12). These levels are not significantly different from baseline levels at this station. The dilution factor at MVB at the end and after the well test ranged from 430 to 480. Based on these dilution factors and the chloride concentrations at MVB, it can be stated that all Alaska receiving water criteria were met at the end of the MVB mixing zone. 4.4 Sugarloaf Canyon Creek Sugarloaf Canyon Creek flows through a narrow canyon, has an extremely steep gradient, and is highly turbid. Turbidity levels measured on the two days that baseline data were collected were 95 and 240 NTU (Table A14). Settleable solids levels were also high, 0.2 and 0.5 ml/L. These natural, high turbidity and settleable solids values are atypical of Alaska streams. The particle size and color (yellow-brown) of the suspended and settleable solids indicates that the solids load was coming from soil erosion and not glacially derived. This material originated high in the drainage, well above RGI's drill site. The field parameters, other than turbidity and settleable solids, displayed levels typical of many Alaska streams. Chloride, conductivity, total dissolved solids, and temperature values were low. Dissolved oxygen concentrations were high. Alkalinity and pH levels were at the low end of the typical range for these parameters in Alaska streams. -20- 5.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS This report presents data collected before, during, and after a 35-day well test conducted in 1984. The well was tested at two different liquid discharge rates, 0.11 cfs from July 5 through July 20, and 0.21 cfs from July 20 to the end of the test on August 8, 1984. Water quality and flow measure-- ments made before and during the well test revealed that stream temperatures were not significantly affected by the test. Chloride and conductivity levels were significantly higher than baseline levels of these parameters in Plateau Creek during the well test. These parameters, however, were not significantly higher than baseline conditions in Makushin Valley River. Levels of all the parameters measured at stations MVB and MV during the well test complied with Alaska water quality criteria, which provide for the protection of freshwater aquatic biota. A review of the major water quality characteristics in the project area is presented below. Particular attention has been directed toward the potential impact of discharging geothermal fluid on water quality in Makushin Valley River. 1. Levels of all parameters measured at station MVB during the well test complied with Alaska water quality criteria, which provide for the protection of freshwater aquatic biota. 2. As expected, the upper section of Plateau Creek displayed the highest chloride, conductivity, and temperature levels in response to the geothermal resource well discharge. The highest measured chloride, conductivity, and temperature values at station PCD were 4750 mg/L, 12,200 micromhos/cm 25°C, and 27.0°C, respectively. The values of these parameters indicate that relatively pure geo- thermal fluid was reaching station PCD. oq 3. 5. 6. Most of the well discharge, having flow rates of 0.11 and 0.21 cfs, was contained in the Plateau Creek drainage. A small volume of the discharge was lost to evaporation, and some was carried out of the drainage by wind at times. A portion of the discharge was delayed in moving to and down Plateau Creek by being trapped by vegetation, soaking into the ground, and being retained as bank storage. Rapid atmospheric cooling of the discharge resulted in a maximum measured temperature of 27.0°C at station PCD, the station closest to the well. Water temperatures decreased downstream from station PCD in Plateau Creek and were near baseline levels in Makushin Valley River near the mouth of Plateau Creek. Of the field parameters measured at the mouth of Plateau Creek, only chloride, conductivity, and temperature exhibited levels exceeding baseline conditions for these parameters. Chloride and conductivity levels were slightly elevated above baseline levels of these parameters in Makushin Valley River im- mediately downstream from the mouth of Plateau Creek. The minimum dilution factor from the well to station MVB was 430. -22- 6.0 REFERENCES ee ADEC, 1982. Water quality standards. Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, Juneau, Alaska, 20 pp. Dames & Moore, 1983. 1982 environmental baseline data collection program final report. Prepared for Republic Geothermal, Inc. and Alaska Power Authority by Dames & Moore, Anchorage, Alaska 55 pp. + appendices. Martin, Bob, 1984. Letter regarding water quality variance (8421-CA001) written to Timothy Evans, Republic Geothermal, Inc. by Bob Martin, Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, Anchorage, Alaska, 1 “pp. dated July 5, 1984 Peterson, L.A., and Gary Nichols, 1983. Unalaska geothermal project water quality and flow during geothermal well test. Prepared for Dames & Moore and Republic Geothermal, Inc. by L.A. Peterson & Associates, Inc., Fairbanks, Alaska, 23 pp. + appendices. -23- APPENDIX A WATER QUALITY AND FLOW DATA TABLE A1 STATION PCD Water Quality Before Well Test Sample Date 07/02/84 07/03/84 07/04/84 07/05/84 Sample Time 1410 1145 1620 1240 Flow <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 Chloride 5.5 4.2 1.5 4.1 Conductivity 32 26 13 21 Temperature 5.5 2.5 2.1 3.2 . Water Quality During Well Test Sample Date 07/05/84 07/05/84 07/06/84 Sample Time 1555 1725 ~ 1015 Flow 0.02 0.01 0.02 Chloride 1230 1040 3500 Conductivity 3800 3300 9900 Temperature 11.8 7.8 14.9 ge Units: Flow, cfs Chloride, mg/L Conductivity, micromhos/cm @ 25°C Temperature, °C TABLE A2 STATION PCA Water Quality Before Well Test . Sample Date 07/02/84 07/03/84 07/04/84 07/05/84 Sample Time 1430 1150 1645 1245 Flow 0.71 0.56 0.82 0.59 Chloride 4.3 5.3 2.8 4.3 Conductivity 31 34 23 32 Temperature 3.8 5.6 5.0 5.7 Water Quality During Well Test Sample Date 07/05/84 07/05/84 07/06/84 Sample Time 1600 1730 1010 Flow 1.4 1.5 0.64 Chloride 33.4 25.6 264 Conductivity 103 105 870 Temperature 5.4 4.4 5.6 Units: Flow, cfs Chloride, mg/L Conductivity, micromhos/cm @ 25°C Temperature, °C TABLE A3 STATION PCB Water Quality Before Well Test Sample Date 07/02/84 07/03/84 07/04/84 07/05/84 Sample Time 1630 1200 1610 1255 Flow 1.0 0.84 1.4 "0.87 Chloride 3.4 5.0 2.9 3.4 Conductivity 22 34 22 31 Temperature 4.0 4.5 4.3 5.0 Water Quality During Well Test Sample Date ~~ 07/05/84 = =———s«07/05/84 07/06/84 Sample Time 1615 1735 1000 Flow 2.4 2.6 1.0 Chloride 21.2 9.6 201 Conductivity 77 37 660 Temperature 4.3 3.7 4.4 nt Units: Flow, cfs Chloride, mg/L Conductivity, micromhos/cm @ 25°C Temperature, °C TABLE A4 STATION PCC Water Quality Before Well Test Sample Date 07/02/84 07/03/84 07/04/84 07/05/84 Sample Time 1010 1250 1525 1310 Flow 1.1 1.0 2.2 1.0 Chloride 5.1 5.4 3.3 4.2 Conductivity 33 42 26 32 Temperature 3.1 5.1 5.1 5.7 Water Quality During Well Test Sample Date 07/05/84 07/05/84 . 07/06/84 Sample Time 1645 1750 0945 Flow 3.5 3.8 1.4 Chloride 15.6 7.7 189 Conductivity 63 33 620 Temperature 5.2 4.6 4.5 Units: Flow, cfs Chloride, mg/L Conductivity, micromhos/cm @ 25°C Temperature, °C TABLE AS, STATION MVB Water Quality Before Well Test Sample Date 07/02/84 07/03/84 07/04/84 07/05/84 Sample Time 0945 1230 1540 1320 Flow 97 96 97 98 Chloride 3.9 4.2 3.4 3.5 Conductivity 43 44 41 43 Temperature 3.1 4.2 4.8 4.8 Water Quality During Well Test Sample Date 07/05/84 07/05/84 07/06/84 Sample Time 1650 1755 0930 Flow 120 120 130 Chloride 5.2 3.7 8.9 Conductivity 40 33 58 Temperature 4.7 4.3 3.2 Units: Flow, cfs Chloride, mg/L Conductivity, micromhos/cm @ 25°C Temperature, °C Sample Date Sample Time Flow cfs Chloride, mg/L Conductivity, umhos/em @ 25°C Temperature, °C Dissolved Oxygen, mg/L D.0., % Saturation pH, pH Units Alkalinity, mg/L as CaC03 Turbidity, NTU Settleable Solids, ml/L Total Dissolved Solids, mg/l Total Arsenic, mg/1 -- TABLE A6é WATER QUALITY AT THE MOUTH OF PLATEAU CREEK AND IN MAKUSHIN VALLEY RIVER BEFORE WELL TEST Sample Station PCC wve (1) 07/02/84 07/02/84 1010 0945 1.1 97 5.1 3.9 33 43 3.1 3.1 12.6 12.8 96 98 6.6 6.7 10 12 0.66 4.6 <0.1 <0.1 Ww 9.0 <0.0005 MV 07/02/84 1815 280 4.0 39 5.7 12.6 101 6.7 10 20 <0.1 4.0 <0.0005 (1) Baseline data at MVA were judged to be the same as at MVB before the well test. TABLE A7 WATER QUALITY AT THE MOUTH OF PLATEAU CREEK AND IN MAKUSHIN VALLEY RIVER DURING WELL TEST Sample Date Sample Time Flow cfs Chloride, mg/L Conductivity, umhos/cm @ 25°C Temperature, °C Dissolved Oxygen, mg/L D.0., % Saturation pH, pH Units Alkalinity, mg/L as CaCOz Turbidity, NTU Settleable Solids, ml1/L Total Dissolved Solids, mg/L Total Arsenic, mg/L PCC 07/06/84 0945 1.4 189 620 4.5 12.5 97 6.6 2.4 <0.1 Sample Station MVA 07/06/84 0940 130 2.6 33 3.0 13.1 98 6.8 13 20 <O.1 _ MVB 07/06/84 0930 130 8.9 58 3.2 13.1 99 6.7 12 18 <O.1 7.0 <0.0005 MV 07/06/84 1115 400 3.7 60 4.1 13.2 100 6.8 37 <0.1 2.0 <0.0005 TABLE A8 os STATION PCD Water Quality During Well Test Sample Date — 08/07/84 08/07/84 08/08/84 Sample Time 1540 1700 0900 Flow 0.05 0.04 0.05 Chloride 4,630 4,750 4,400 Conductivity , 12,100 12,200 11,700 Temperature 25.2 27.0 20.0 Water Quality After Well Test Sample Date 08/08/84 08/08/84 08/08/84 Sample Time 1223 1528 1845 Flow 0.01 <0.01 0 Chloride 4,250 4180 i Conductivity 10,400 9900 - Temperature 16.7 13.3 a Units: Flow, cfs Chloride, mg/L Conductivity, micromhos/em @ 25°C Temperature, °C TABLE A9 STATION PCA - Water Quality During Well Test Sample Date 08/07/84 08/07/84 Sample Time 1550 1710 Flow 0.18 0.17 Chloride 3470 3000 Conductivity 7600 6900 Temperature 20.5 21.1 Water Quality After Well Test Sample Date 08/08/84 08/08/84 08/10/84 08/10/84 08/17/84 Sample Time 1850 1855 1000 1345 1200 Flow 0.07 0.07 0.04 0.04 0.03 Chloride 81.7 16.3 15.4 13.5 10.1 Conductivity 290 94 92 84 86 Temperature 13.9 17.6 11.3 13.9 -- OO Units: Flow, cfs Chloride, mg/L Conductivity, micromhos/cm @ 25°C Temperature, °C TABLE A10 STATION PCB Water Quality During Well Test Sample Date 08/07/84 08/07/84 08/08/84 Sample Time 1600 1720 0908 Flow 0.27 0.27 0.32 Chloride 2430 2700 2620 Conductivity 6700 6600 6900 Temperature 18.8 19.5 13.3 Water Quality After Well Test Sample Date 08/08/84 08/08/84 08/08/84 08/09/84 Sample Time 1214 1515 1855 0920 Flow 0.19 0.17 0.15 0.15 Chloride 2260 228 142 36.3 Conductivity 5200 570 320 160 Temperature 13.3 -- 13.9 -- Sample Date 08/09/84 08/10/84 08/10/84 08/17/84 Sample Time 1845 0940 1325 1145 Flow 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.08 Chloride 28.0 21.6 20.4 10.6 Conductivity 140 120 110 90 Temperature 17.4 10.8 13.0 -- Units: Flow, cfs Chloride, mg/L Conductivity, micromhos/cm @ 25°C Temperature, °C Units: TABLE A11 —— STATION PCC Water Quality During Well Test 08/07/84 Sample Date 08/07/84 Sample Time 1625 Flow 0.46 Chloride 1380 Conductivity 4300 Temperature ' 13.0 Water Quality After Well Test 08/10/84 Sample Date 08/09/84 Sample Time 1815 Flow 0.18 Chloride 134 Conductivity 510 Temperature 15.0 Flow, cfs Chloride, mg/L Conductivity, micromhos/cm @ 25°C Temperature, °C 0.44 1400 4200 13.6 Units: TABLE A12 STATION MVB Water Quality During Well Test Sample Date 08/07/84 08/07/84 Sample Time 1615 Flow 90 Chloride 18.6 Conductivity 110 Temperature 5.9 Water Quality After Well Test ‘Sample Date 08/09/84 08/10/84 Sample Time 1825 Flow 110 Chloride 4.9 Conductivity 57 Temperature 6.4 Flow, cfs Chloride, mg/L Conductivity, micromhos/cm @ 25°C Temperature, °C 1750 TABLE A135 WATER QUALITY AT THE MOUTH OF PLATEAU CREEK AND IN MAKUSHIN VALLEY RIVER During Well Test Stn. PCC Stn. MVA Stn. MVB Stn. MV Sample Date 08/07/84 08/07/84 08/07/84 08/07/84 Sample Time 1810 1800 1750 1840 Flow 0.44 90 90 260 Chloride 1400 3.2 17.7 7.1 Conductivity 4200 60 110 150 Temperature 13.6 6.0 6.0 6.8 Dissolved Oxygen 9.6 11.7 11.7 12.0 D.O., % Saturation 94 96 96 98 pH 7.0 6.9 6.8 6.6 Alkalinity 12 14 18 13 Turbidity 0.63 5.4 4.8 33 Settleable Solids <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 : <0.1 Total Dissolved Solids -- =~ 72 20 Total Arsenic -- -- <0.0005 <0.0005 After Well Test Stn. PCC Stn. MVA Stn. MVB Stn. MV Sample Date 08/10/84 08/10/84 08/10/84 08/10/84 Sample Time 1230 1245 1300 1025 Flow 0.18 100 100 280 Chloride 95.1 3.6 9.9 2.5 Conductivity 370 48 150 48 Temperature 11.1 5.5 5.5 4.6 Dissolved Oxygen 10.1 12.2 12.1 12.4 D.O., % Saturation 101 99 98 96 pH 7.3 7.0 6.9 7.4 Alkalinity 24 15 14 25 Turbidity 0.81 11 10 39 Settleable Solids <0.1 <O.1 <O.1 <O.1 Total Dissolved Solids -- -- 24 30 Total Arsenic -- -- 0.37 <0.0005 Units: Flow, cfs Chloride, mg/L Conductivity, micromhos/cm @ 25°C Temperature, °C Dissolved Oxygen, mg/L pH, pH Units Alkalinity, mg/L as CaC03 Turbidity, NTU Settleable Solids, ml/L Total Dis solved Solids, mg/L Total Arsenic, mg/L TABLE A14 BASELINE CONDITIONS IN SUGARLOAF CANYON CREEK AND MAKUSHIN VALLEY RIVER Stn. SCA Station SCB Sample Date 08/10/84 08/09/84 08/10/84 Sample Time 1055 1600 1035 Flow 90 120 100 Chloride 2.6 9.9 2.9 Conductivity 48 44 49 Temperature 1.8 3.6 2.6 Station SCC Station MBS Sample Date 08/09/84 08/10/84 08/09/84 08/10/84 Sample Time 1640 0835 1650 0820 Flow 130 110 290 270 Chloride 2.7 2.5 2.9 -2.7 Conductivity 42 54 40 51 Temperature 4.3 3.2 5.0 3.5 Dissolved Oxygen 11.8 13.0 11.4 12.8 D.O., % Saturation 1 95 90 98 pH 6.3 6.2 6.9 7.0 Alkalinity 5.4 5.3 12 17 Turbidity 240 95 170 65 Settleable Solids 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 Total Dissolved Solids 12 33 29 28 Total Arsenic 0.0217 <0.0005 0.76 <0.0005 Units: Flow, cfs Chloride, mg/L Conductivity, micromhos/cem @ 25°C Temperature, °C Dissolved Oxygen, mg/L pH, pH Units Alkalinity, mg/L as CaCOz Turbidity, NTU Settleable Solids, ml/L Total Dissolved Solids, mg/L Total Arsenic, mg/L APPENDIX B GEOTHERMAL FLUID ANALYSES TABLE B1 ST-1 GEOTHERMAL FLUID PHYSICAL/CHEMICAL DATA Parameters Less Than Parameters Exceeding Their Their Respective Respective Detection Limits Detection Limits Alaska Detection Parameter Conc. , mg/L Criterion, mg/L Parameter Limit, mg/L Arsenic 13.8 0.05 Aluminum 0.610 Boron 58.4 0.75 Antimony 0.732 Calcium 161 -- Barium 0.610 Chloride 4170 200 Beryllium 0.005 Fluoride 0.14 2.4 Bismuth 2.44 Iron 0.04 1.0 Cadmium 0.061 Lithium 11.49 -- Cerium 0.244 Potassium 302 -- Chromium 0.049 Silica 364 -- Cobalt 0.024 Sodium 2480 250 Copper 0.061 Strontium 3.63 -- Gold 0.098 Sul fate 107 200 Lanthanum 0.122 Total Lead 0.244 Dissolved Magnesium 0.488 Solids 7950 250 Manganese 0.244 Mercury 0.0002 Molybdenum 1.22 Nickel 0.122 Phosphorus 0.610 Silver 0.049 Tellurium 1.22 Thorium 2.44 Tin 0.122 Titanium 0.122 Tungsten 0.122 Uranium 6.10 Vanadium 1.22 Zine 0.122 Zirconium 0.122 APPENDIX B-4 ST-1: REGULATORY COMPLIANCE CORRESPONDENCE REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL. INC. 11823 EAST SLAUSON AVENUE, SUITE ONE SANTA FE SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 90670 1Y 910-586-1696 (213) 945-3661 August 17, 1984 Mr. Jack Heesch . Alaska Office of Management and Budge 2600 Denali Street, Suite 700 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Dear Mr. Heesch: This letter is to notify you that minor revisions have been made to Republic Geothermal, Inc.'s original plan of operation for the Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project 1984 field season. Following are the changes and also a status report on operations completed or in progress: . : The drilling of the Sugarloaf temperature gradient hole, originally planned for approximately 1,200 feet, will now be continued to a maximum depth of 2,000 feet. Drilling is currently being conducted. - ‘The Makushin ST-1 well will not be deepened any further - as originally planned, nor will there be an additional 4-day flow test. The originally planned 40-day flow test at ST-1 was completed on August 8, after only 35 days of flow. —— : Necessary revisions have been made to the Geothermal Drilling Permits through Mr. Ted Bond of the Alaska Department of Natural Resources. Should any additional changes to the 1984 program which require permit modifications be necessary, Republic will keep you fully informed. If you have any questions or concerns regarding the above, please do not hesitate to call. Thank you. Sincerely, : ce CL. ZL Chris Joseph Environmental Affairs Specialist CAJ/vis ec: Distribution List Distribution List: Mr. Carl Harmon Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 437 E street, Suite 200 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Ms. Julie Howe Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 437 E street, Suite 200 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Mr. James C. Allen Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 437 E street, Suite 200 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Mr. Derby Lloyd Alaska Department of Fish and Game 333 Rasberry Road Anchorage, Alaska 99502 Mr. Fred Zeillemaker U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service P. O. Box 521 Naval Air Station FPO Seattle, Washington 98791 Mr. Roger Mochnick U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Region X 1200 Sixth Avenue Seattle, Washington 98101 Mr. Ted Bond Alaska Department of Natural Resources Division of Oil and Gas Pouch 7-034 . Anchorage, Alaska 99510 TN REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL, INC. 11823 EAST SLAUSON AVENUE, SUITE ONE SANTA FE SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 90670 910-586-1696 - (213) 945-3661 “August 24, 1984 Ms. Julie Howe vs ial ; Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 437 E Street, Suite 200 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Dear Ms. Howe: As we discussed in our telephone conversation, this letter is Republic Geothermal, Inc.'s formal request for a short-term ‘water quality variance for the non-point discharge of geothermal fluid associated with our geothermal exploration program at the Sugarloaf A-l temperature gradient hole site on Unalaska Island. Details of the proposed operations are enclosed as Attachment 1, which will also amend and update that information sent to you through Jack Heesch on June 6, 1984, - and August 17, 1984. A water quality variance is requested for the following parameters: - tay Temperature Tm 8) Lead °2). Total Dissolved Solids 9) Manganese 3) Total Suspended Solids 10) Mercury 4) Turbidity PMMA | i 11) Selenium - 5)- Arsenic te Ul 12) Sodium : 6) Boron see pees 13) Zine 7) Cadmium Weal WINN 14) Chlorides The variance is requested for the section of "Sugarloaf Creek" between the sample sites SCA and SCC (as referenced in the attachment). ; 7 : ; Page Two Ms. Julie Howe Sugarloaf A-1l The proposed 24-hour flow test and discharge of Sugarloaf A-l temperature gradient hole would replace the previously approved 4-day flow test from the Makushin ST-l well. (The approved 35-day flow test from ST-l was completed on August 8, with preliminary analysis showing that all terms of the variance issued by DEC on July 5 were met.) If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to call either Dwight ee of Republic or myself. Thank you. ery “Chris mM Joseph ; Environmental Affairs Specialist CaJ/vls cece eee eae eae eee : Attachment ae ee cc: Mr. Denby Lloyd/Alaska Department of Fish and Game Mr. Jack Heesch/Alaska Office of Management and Budget Mr. Roger Mochnick/Environmental Protection Agency Mr. Fred Zeillemaker/U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL. INC. 11823 EAST SLAUSON AVENUE, SUITE ONE SANTA FE SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 90670 910-586-1696 August 31, 1984 : (213) 945-3661 Ms. Julie Howe . Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation . Ife 437 E Street, Suite 200 - : wet tis Anchorage, Alaska 99501 - . : Dear Ms. Howe: Se . : : Soe yet : Pursuant to our telephone conversation today, this letter is | Republic Geothermal, Inc.'s formal request for an extension to ..: the July 5, 1984 ADEC short-term water quality variance granted to Republic for discharge of geothermal fluids at the Makushin ST-1 well on-Unalaska Island. Republic requests that the. — variance be extended until September 6, 1984, and that the: - following changes be made to the flow tests proposed in our June 6, 1984 letter. ; . Shiels ete woe ae : ° A two-hour flow test at the ST-l1 site will be conducted - on Wednesday, September 5. The purpose of the test will be to demonstrate to key citizens and politicians of Unalaska Island the viability and commercial ~— possibilities of geothermal energy. The maximum liquid discharge rate for the test will be approximately - se ll cubic feet per second (cfs). The total amount of fluids being discharged will not exceed 5000 gallons. - The two-hour test described above will substitute for the previously approved four-day flow test at Makushin~ st-1. serene nth ot As we discussed, a resource was not encountered upon ~~ completion of drilling at the Sugarloaf A-l temperature gradient hole site. As such, Republic's August 24 request for an additional water quality variance is formally withdrawn. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Thank yous. ..-° Leer [eis tele : = tiis ace Ht Sincerely, ~ Chris(A. Joseph lh Environmental Specialist CAI :bds » 1 IF t iC \U) IP [R\ IL A) In\ [A\ BILL SHEFFIELD, GO\’ERNOR DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION SOUTHCENTRAL REGIONAL OFFICE 437 — STREET/SUITE 200 ANCHORAGE, AK 99501 274-2533 September 4, 1984 Mr. Timothy Evans Republic Geothermal 11823 E. Slauson Avenue, Suite 1 Sante Fe Springs, CA 90670 Dear Mr. Evans: RE: Water Quality Variance - 8421-CA001 The Department of Environmental Conservation has reviewed your request for an extension of your short term water quality variance for the non- point discharge of water associated with geothermal exploration in the Makushin Valley on Unalaska Island. A water quality variance is granted for the test described in your June 6, 1984, application, and in your letter dated August 31, 1984, for the following parameters: 1) Temperature 6) Boron 11) Selemium 2) Total Dissolved Solids 7) Cadimium 12) Sodium 3) Total Suspended Solids 8) Lead 13) Zinc 4) Turbidity . 9) Manganese 14) Chloride 5) Arsenic 10) Mercury This variance is granted for the section of Plateau Creek between the 1983 sample sites PCD and MVB (as referenced in the application). This shall become effective upon this date of signature and will expire on September 6, 1984. Department of Environmental Conservation regulations provide that any person who disagrees with any portion of this decision, may request an adjudicatory hearing in accordance with 18 AAC 15.200-310. The request should be mailed to the Commissioner of the Alaska Department of Environ- mental Conservation, Pouch 0, Juneau, Alaska 99811, or delivered to his office at 3220 Hospital Drive, Juneau. Failure to submit a hearing request within thirty days of receipt of this letter shall constitute a waiver of that person's right to judicial review of this decision. Sincerely, Li - £41 . Z a Cen LA LG < Bob Martin Deputy Director BM:clh . cc: Julie: Howe, Anchorage, ADEC Steve Grabacki, Dames & Moore Anchorage/Western District Office Urblesle SSPUBLIC GEOTRMERMAL, INC. Separlont 4-/ 1 1623 CAST SLAVUSSN AVENUE, SUITE ONE TT _/ SANTA FE SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA S0€70 Ble. “’X $10-SE6-1E9E (213) $45-3661 Mr. Robert C. Flint Regional Program Coordinator ‘ Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 437 BE Street, Suite 200 Anchorage, Aleska 99501 Dear Mr. Flint: Republic Geothermal, Inc's. letter to Jack Heesch on hugust 17, 1984 (and copied to Mr. Carl Harmon) outlined our program changes to the Unaleske Geothermal Exploration Pro- ject. As stated in that letter, Republic did not drill the existing Makusnin ST-1 well eny deeper as originally planned. Therefore, Republic formally withdraws our solid waste disposal permit application No. 8421-BA023. If you have any questions regarding the above, please do not hesitate to call. Thank you. ‘CLA Chris Joseph Environmental Affairs Specialist CAJ/v1s ce: Mr. Carl Harmon/ADEC Mr. Steve Grabacki/Dames and Moore Mr. Denby Lloyd/ADFsG APPENDIX C A-1 TEMPERATURE GRADIENT HOLE DRILLING APPENDIX C-1l1 A-1: DRILLING HISTORY 7/19/84 7/20 7/21 7/22 7/23 7/24 7/25 7/26 7/27 7/28 7/29 7/30 7/31 8/1 DRILLING HISTORY OF “SUGARLOAF" A-1 TEMPERATURE HOLE Moved in timbers and rig parts by helicopter. Completed substructure, assembling rig. Continued assembling rig components. Completed rig assembly, spudded Sugarloaf A-1 temperature hole at 1800 hrs. Cored HQ (3.782") size hole in soil-ash-weathered rock to 17 ft, and in hard volcanics to 22 ft. Cored HQ hole from 22 ft to 150 ft in volcanics. Pulled coring tools out of hole, picked up rotary tools and 6" bit, opened hole from surface to 20 ft. Opened hole with 6" bit from 20 ft to 59 ft. Opened hole with 6" bit from 59 ft to 150 ft. Drilled 6" hole in soft to medium-hard volcanics from 150 ft to 161 ft, looking for hard rock zone to set surface casing. Drilled 6" hole from 161 ft to 162 ft (suitable for casing point). Pulled out of hole and changed to 7-3/8" bit. Cleaned mud pit and mixed mud. Opened hole from surface to 29 ft. Opened hole with 7-3/8" bit from 29 to 98 ft. Opened hole with 7-3/8" bit from 98 to 130 ft. Drive bushing in draw-works broke at 1400 hrs, called for replacement to be airshipped ASAP. Circulated continuously and periodically lifted drill rods to minimize risk of becoming stuck. Same as above. Drive bushing arrived and was installed. Opened hole with 7-3/8" bit from 130 ft to 162 ft. While pulling out of hole the transmission began to develop problems, finished POH in 2nd gear. Contractor ordered replacement transmission, removed mast and began disassembling rig power drive. Completed disassembly of rig power drive, replacement transmission arrived, installed new transmission, reassembled rig power drive and waited on extremely high winds to sufficiently subside to again raise mast and resume operations. DRILLING HISTORY OF “SUGARLOAF" A-1 TEMPERATURE HOLE Page 2 8/2 8/3 8/4 8/5 8/6 8/7 8/8 8/9 8/10 Wind sufficiently subsided at 1000 hrs for ERA helicopter to bring in drilling crew. Helicopter had starter troubles, ordered parts. Called out Maritime Helicopter, which soon developed engine problems when bringing in crew. Waited on helicopter parts. Replacement parts for ERA helicopter arrived and were installed. Assembly and raising of derrick completed. Conditioned mud, opened hole with 8-1/2" bit from surface to 40 ft. Opened hole with 8-1/2" bit from 40 ft to 160 ft. Opened hole with 8-1/2" bit from 160 ft to 162 ft. Formation considered too soft for casing shoe. Drilled 8-1/2" hole from 162 ft to 210 ft. Pulled out of hole. Ran 209 ft of 5-1/2" casing (15-1/2#/ft., 5" I.D.). Mixed and pumped 60 saxs class "G" cmt with 2% CaClg, displaced with 35 cu.ft. water. Waited on cement. RIH with 4-1/2" bit to tag cmt. No cmt at shoe, pulled out bit. Pressure tested casing to 300#, had fluid returns around annulus. Purchased 60 saxs of “high early" portland cement. Waited on weather to move cmt to drillsite. Recemented 5-1/2" casing with 60 saxs of portland cmt, displaced with 13 cu.ft. of water. Waited on cement. Mixed and used 5 saxs of cmt around 5-1/2" casing at surface. RIH with 4-1/2" bit and tagged cmt at 100 ft. Drilled out cmt to 210 ft. Helicopter rotor blade accidentally damaged (punctured) during a scheduled maintenance and inspection operation; unable to change out drilling crew. Drilled 4-1/2" hole to 220 ft. Day crew walked to rig. Ran HQ pipe (3.16" I.D.) to bottom (220 ft.), rigged up NQ (2.75" 0O.D.) core barrel and tools, cored NQ hole from 220 ft to 260 ft in volcanics. Helicopter became fully operative. Cored NQ hole from 260 ft to 275 ft, POH and installed Master valve on drilling spool, RIH and cored from 275 ft to 369 ft. Total loss circulation occurred at 346 ft in fractured volcanics. DRILLING HISTORY OF “SUGARLOAF“ A-1 TEMPERATURE HOLE Page 3 8/11 8/12 8/13 8/14 8/15 8/16 8/17 8/18 8/19 8/20 8/21 Cored NQ hole from 369 ft to 419 ft. POH to change core bit and grease drill pipe, RIH. Cored from 419 ft to 425 ft, during which drill string became stuck and soon freed. Total loss circulation continued. Cored NQ hole from 425 ft to 487 ft with severe loss circulation in fractured volcanics. Adding LCM to mud. Tripped to grease drill pipe. Cored from 487 ft to 538 ft. Formation reported to have changed from volcanic lavas to Unalaska Fm volcanic agglomerate at 533 ft. POH to check core barrel. RIH with same core bit, cored NQ hole from 538 ft to 696 ft. Water level in the well is standing at about 500 ft. Cored NQ hole from 696 ft to 877 ft. Starting at about 775 ft the core was noticeably warm upon retrieval at the surface. Fluid level in the well remains at a depth of about 500 ft, consequently no fluid returns. Cored NQ hole from 877 ft to 967 ft. Tripped to change core bit. Cored NQ hole from 967 ft to 973 ft, experiencing problems with new bit. Tripped again and changed to another new bit. Ready to resume coring. Cored NO hole from 973 ft to 1135 ft. Pulled up 200 ft off bottom, repaired break, returned to bottom to resume coring. Repaired hydraulic chuck of rig, cored NQ hole from 1135 ft to 1257 ft. Cored NQ hole from 1257 ft to 1277 ft. Nippled up BOPE. Cored from 1277 ft to 1317 ft. Worked on hydraulic chuck. Cored from 1317 ft to 1357 ft. POH to change core bit and work on rig. Tore down hydraulic chuck, waiting on replacement parts. Received and installed new chuck parts. RIH, cleaning out bridge at 1250 ft and reamed to bottom. Cored NQ hole 1357 ft to 1359 ft. POH to repair core barrel inner tube. RIH, cored NQ hole from 1359 ft to 1481 ft. DRILLING HISTORY OF “SUGARLOAF" A-1 TEMPERATURE HOLE Page 4 8/22 8/23 8/24 8/25 8/26 8/27 8/28 8/29 8/30 8/31 9/1 9/2 Cored NQ hole from 1481 ft to 1537 ft, tripped to change bit, cored from 1537 ft to 1567 ft. POH to change bit. RIH, cored NQ hole from 1567 ft to 1638 ft, POH to change core bit. Reported to be coring in intrusive rock starting at a depth of 1603 ft. RIH, cored NQ hole 1638 ft to 1677 ft, pulled up 100 ft off bottom and shut down to wait for extremely strong winds to subside. Cleaned up site after storm passed. Ran to bottom and cored NQ hole from 1677 ft to 1739 ft. POH to change core barrel and bit. RIH with new bit, cored NQ from 1739 ft to 1763 ft. Tripped to change out crooked drill pipe causing excessive vibrations. Cored from 1763 ft to 1795 ft. Cored NQ hole from 1795 ft to 1857 ft, tripped to change bit and repair core barrel, cored from 1857 ft to 1860 ft. Cored NQ hole from 1860 ft to 1867 ft. Twisted off core pipe at 1500 ft while attempting to core ahead with severe vibrations in drill string. Recovered all of fish and laid down crooked drill pipe. Greased pipe. RIH and had trouble cleaning out sloughing fill with core barrel. POH. RIH with NQ reaming shell, cleaned out hole to bottom. Ran 1867 ft of 1-1/2 inch tubing, inside NQ pipe, to bottom. Pulled out NQ pipe. Tore down BOPE. Laid down drill pipe, cut off 5-1/2 inch casing, filled 1-1/2 inch tubing with water. Packed off hole and tubing with cement to 20 ft below surface. Rigged down drilling equipment for removal to Dutch Harbor by helicopter. Began slinging equipment off drill site. Completed slinging all drilling contractor's equipment off drill site to airport and warehouse. Weather conditions severe at drill site, moved remaining drilling equipment from airport to inside warehouse. DRILLING HISTORY OF “SUGARLOAF" A-1 TEMPERATURE HOLE Page 5 9/3 Removed part of timber substructure from drill site. Suspended sling operations because of weather. 9/4 (No activity, weather delay.) 9/5 (No activity, slinging out camp equipment. ) 9/6 Completed removal of timbers from drill site. 9/7/84 Completed final clean-up of all materials and trash from drill site. Drilling and completion operations satisfactorily finished. APPENDIX C-2 A-1l: REGULATORY COMPLIANCE CORRESPONDENCE REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL, INC. 11823 EAST SLAUSON AVENUE, SUITE ONE SANTA FE SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 90670 X 910-586-1696 (213) 945-366! August 17, 1984 Mr. Jack Heesch Alaska Office of Management and Budget 2600 Denali Street, Suite 700 Anchorage, Alaska 99503 Dear Mr. Heesch: This letter is to notify you that minor revisions have been made to Republic Geothermal, Inc.'s original plan of operation for the Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project 1984 field season. Following are the changes and also a status report on operations completed or in progress: : * . The drilling of the Sugarloaf temperature gradient hole, originally planned for approximately 1,200 feet, will now be continued to a maximum depth of 2,000 feet. Drilling is currently being conducted. . The Makushin ST-1 well will not be deepened any further - as originally planned, nor will there be an additional 4-day flow test. The originally planned 40-day flow test at ST-1l was completed on August 8, after only 35 days of flow. Necessary revisions have been made to the Geothermal Drilling Permits through Mr. Ted Bond of the Alaska Department of Natural Resources. Should any additional changes to the 1984 program which require permit modifications be necessary, Republic will keep you fully informed. If you have any questions or concerns regarding the above, please do not hesitate to call. Thank you. Sincerely, Chris Joseph Environmental Affairs Specialist CAJ/vlis cc: Distribution List Distribution List: Mr. Carl Harmon Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 437 E street, Suite 200 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Ms. Julie Howe Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 437 E street, Suite 200 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Mr. James C. Allen Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 437 E street, Suite 200 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Mr. Derby Lloyd Alaska Department of Fish and Game 333 Rasberry Road Anchorage, Alaska 99502 Mr. Fred Zeillemaker U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service P. O. Box 521 Naval Air Station FPO Seattle, Washington 98791 Mr. Roger Mochnick U. S. Environmental Protection Agency . Region X 1200 Sixth Avenue Seattle, Washington 98101 Mr. Ted Bond Alaska Department of Natural Resources Division of Oil and Gas Pouch 7-034 ; Anchorage, Alaska 99510 REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL, INC. 11823 EAST SLAUSON AVENUE, SUITE ONE SANTA FE SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 90670 X 910-586-1696 (213) 945-3661 August 17, 1984 Mr. Ted Bond Alaska Department of Natural Resources Division of Oil and Gas Pouch 7-034 : Anchorage, Alaska 99510 Dear. Mr. Bond: Pursuant to your telephone conversation with Dwight Carey on August 14, this letter is Republic's formal request for changes to Geothermal Drilling Permit 84-2. Specifically, the drilling of the Sugarloaf temperature gradient hole will be drilled to a maximum depth of 2,000 feet, rather than the previously specified depth of 1,200 feet. Secondly, casing was set to a depth of 209 feet rather than the 150 feet requested in our permit applica- tion. Attached you will find a revised schematic diagram which reflects these changes. If you have any questions or concerns, please give either Dwight or myself a call. Thank you. Sincerely, / Chris Joseph Environmental Affairs Specialist CAJ/vls Attachment FIGURE 1 SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM OF PROPOSED CASING PROGRAM FOR 2,000 FT. TEMPERATURE GRADIENT HOLE SUGARLOAF A-1 SCREW CAP SURFACE 7 (SS CEMENT TOP 20FT. OF ANNULAR SPACE 8 1/2" HOLE 5 1/2” CASING TO 150 FT. 209 FT. (ACTUAL) -. 11/2" GALVANIZED PIPE 4 1/2” AND/ OR NQ (2.98) HOLE o—————- CLABBERED MUD IN HOLE TO T.D. SCREW CAP 2,000 FT. FOI ol47 REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL. INC. 11823 EAST SLAUSON AVENUE, SUITE ONE ms SANTA FE SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 90670 £910-586-1696 (213) 945-3661 August 20, 1984 Mr. Ted Bond Alaska Department of Natural Resources Pouch 7-034 : Anchorage, Alaska 99510 Dear Mr. Bond: Enclosed please find the July Monthly Report of Drilling Operations pursuant to ll AAC 87.110(e) for Sugarloaf A-1l on Unalaska Island, currently being drilled under Geothermal Permit 84-2. If you have any questions or concerns about. this information, please do not hesitate to call. Thank you. ~ Sincerely, — . Chris A oseph Environméntal Affairs Specialist CAJ/vls Enclosure MONTHLY REPORT OF DRILLING OPERATIONS PURSUANT TO 11 AAC 87.110 (e) SUBMITTED TO THE ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Geothermal Drilling Permit No.: 84-2 Well Name: Sugarloaf A-l Well Location: Unalaska Island, Alaska Reporting Period: July, 1984 Date of Report: August 20, 1984 Opérator: Address: 7/19/84 7/20/84 7/21/84 7/22/84 7/24/84 7/25/84 Republic Geothermal, Inc. 11823 East Slauson Avenue, Suite l Santa Fe Springs, California 90670 (213) 945-3661 . Moved in timbers and rig parts by helicopter. Completed substructure, assembling rig. Continued assembling rig components. Completed rig assembly, spudded Sugarloaf A-1l tempera- ture hole at 1800 hrs. Cored HQ (3.782") size hole in soil-ash-weathered rock to 17 ft., and in-hard volcan- ics to 22 ft. Opened hole with 6" bit from 20 ft. to 59 ft. Opened hole with 6" bit from 59 ft. to 150 ft. Drilled 6" hole in soft to medium-hard volcanics from 150 ft. to 161 ft., looking for hard rock zone to set surface casing. Page Two Monthly Report of Drilling Operations Pursuant to 11 AAC 87.110(e) Submitted to the Alaska Department of Natural Resources 7/26/84 7/27/84 7/28/84 7/29/84 7/30/84 7/31/84 Drilled 6" hole from 161 ft. to 162 ft. (suitable for casing point). Pulled out of hole and changed to 7-3/8" bit. Cleaned mud pit and mixed mud. Opened hole from surface to 29 ft. Opened hole with 7-3/8" bit from 29 ft. to 98 ft. Opened hole with 7-3/8" bit from 98 ft. to 130 ft. Drive bushing im draw-works broke at 1400 hours, called for replacement to be airshipped ASAP. Circulated continuously and periodically lifted drill rods to minimize risk of becoming stuck. Same as above. Drive bushing arrived and was installed. Opened hole with 7-3/8" bit from 130 ft. to 162 ft. While pulling out of hole the transmission began to develop problems, finished POH in 2nd gear. Contractor ordered replacement transmission, removed mast and began disassembling rig power drive. REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL. INC. 11823 EAST SLAUSON AVENUE, SUITE ONE SANTA FE SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 90670 910-586-1696 (213) 945-3661 August 21, 1984 Ms. Julie Howe Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 437 E. Street, Suite 200 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Dear Ms. Howe: Pursuant to our phone conversation yesterday, attached please find a short summary on the small spill of material that occurred on August 6. If you have any questions or concerns, please give me a call. Sincerely, Chris A Environmental Affairs Specialist CAJ/vls Attachment ce: Mr. Carl Harmon f Mr. Fred Zeillemaker Mr. Denby Lloyd SPILL HISTORY: SUGARLOAF A-1 HOLE UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL PROJECT On August 6, 1984, a slurry of water and cement was accidentally discharged from the drilling operations at the Sugarloaf A-l temperature gradient hole site on Unalaska Island. Approximately 160 gallons of material migrated from the drillsite, down a small gully, over a cliff, and into Sugarloaf Creek. It is estimated that no more than ten gallons of material found its way into the creek; most of the material was deposited in the gully and on the cliff. Other than its unsightly appearance, it is not believed that any appreciable environmental damage took place. The cause of the spill was a significant excess of water and cement discharged into the mud pits during the normal casing cementing process. These excess returns (as they are known) resulted from an overestimation by the drilling crew of the amount of water needed to displace the cement into the annulus (the space between the casing and the wall of the hole) during the setting of casing in the hole. The pit capacity was sufficient to retain all of the excess returns except the estimated 160 gallons. Additional pit capacity has been provided and the casing correctly cemented. Cleanup of the accessible portions of the spill was completed on August 22. The material was disposed of in existing mud pits. RECEIVED AUG 2 8 1984 STATE OF ALASKA / s+ DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES POUCH 7-034 DIVISION OF OIL AND GAS ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99510 August 23, 1984 Republic Geothermal, Inc. 11823 E. Slauson Avenue Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670 Attn: Chris A. Joseph Environmental Affairs Specialist Subject: Geothermal Drilling Permit 84-2 Sugarloaf A-1 Anendment Dear Chris: Your request dated August 17, 1984 concerning the deepening of the Sugar] oaf A-1 temperature gradient well is hereby approved. Drilling to a maximum depth of 2000' is permitted. As I informed you on the telephone, it will be necessary for the drilling equipment and operations to be in compliance with the drilling regulations for geothermal wells (11 AAC 87.070 - 87.190); specifically the blowout prevention. equipment must be installed, tested, and remain in good working order and the 5 1/2" surface casing string must be pressure tested in accordance with the geothermal drilling and-conservation regulations. Sincerely / nw TedfJ. Bond Petroleum Engineer ce: Pat Cyr, ADEC Phil Brna, ADF&G Mike Budbill, DLWM Jack Heesch, OMB Dave Denig-Chakroff, APA TB/rh#01291 REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL, INC. 11823 EAST SLAUSON AVENUE, SUITE ONE SANTA FE SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 90670 € 910-586-1696 (213) 945-3661 August 24, 1984 Mr. Harold E. Geren U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Region X 1200 Sixth Avenue Seattle, Washington 98101 ,Dear Mr. Geren: Pursuant to my phone conversation today with Mr. Roger Mochnick, enclosed please find a copy of Republic Geothermal, Inc.'s request to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation for an alternative short term (24-hour) water quality variance at our temperature gradient hole, Sugarloaf A-l, on Unalaska Island. The proposed 24-hour test would replace the previously approved 4-day flow test at the existing Makushin ST-l well. Your office granted this previous approval, in concurrence with the ADEC and the Alaska Department of Fish and Game, on July 31 of this year (see attached). As requested by Mr. Mochnick, I will be contacting you Monday morning to discuss this matter. Thank you. Sincerely, 7 A-? anal Chris A.{Joseph Environmental Affairs Specialist CAJ/vlis Attachment cc: Mr. Roger Mochnick Ms. Diane Soderlund U.S. ENVIRONMENIAL FRY EEE TEN were ott 5, REGION X Ss. 2 GY % 1200 SIXTH AVENUE 2W7 s SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101 f ! < ~ oes Ap. & ‘40 prote nenly 39 wail Stop 521 _ JUL 31 1884 Chris A. Joseph Environmental Affairs Specialist Republic Geothermal Inc. 11823 East Slawson Avenue, Suite One Santa Fe Springs, California 90670 Re: NPDES Application No.: AK-003956-0 Dear Mr. Joseph: We have received your updated National PolTutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit application for the discharge of geothermal test fluids on Unalaska Island. Based on our review of the updated application, the planned activities for 1984 will not affect EPA's determination on the permitting status of the project. As such, Republic Geothermal will not be issued an NPDES permit for the wastewater discharge at this time. ~ . However, during the discharge of test fluids into unnamed tributaries in the Makushin Valley, you are expected to comply with the July 5, 1984, Water Quality Variance issued to Republic Geothermal by the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. In addition, any other provisions placed on the discharge by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game or any other involved agency should be adhered to. If these or similar discharges are anticipated for the 1985 season please contact our office at least 180 days prior to the projected start up date. Failure to do so could result in unavoidable delays to the project due to mandated permitting time schedules. Sincerely, fare efrich, Re . Geren, Chief SS Water Permits & Compliance Section cc: Soderlund, EPA Anchorage Kreizenbeck, EPA Juneau Howe, ADEC Anchorage REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL, INC. 11823 EAST SLAUSON AVENUE, SUITE ONE SANTA FE SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 90670 _ 910-586-1696 - (213) 945-3661 -. Rugust 24, 1984 Ms. Julie Howe AE : Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation 437 E Street, Suite 200 Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Dear Ms. Howe: As we discussed in our telephone conversation, this letter is Republic Geothermal, Inc.'s formal request for a short-term “water quality variance for the non-point discharge of geothermal fluid associated with our geothermal exploration ‘program at the Sugarloaf A-l temperature gradient hole site on Unalaska Island. Details of the proposed operations are enclosed as Attachment 1, which will also amend and update that information sent to you through Jack Heesch on June 6, 1984, and August 17, 1984. = = ee oo A water quality variance is requested for the following parameters: ag : . 1) ‘Temperature gy Lead 2) Total Dissolved Solids 9) Manganese 3) Total Suspended Solids 10) Mercury . 4) Turbidity . at 11) Selenium - 5)- Arsenic eee ee ere 12) Sodium 6) -Boron . - . 13) Zinc 7) Cadmium ~ 14) «Chlorides The variance is requested for the section of "Sugarloaf Creek" between the sample sites SCA and SCC (as referenced in the attachment). Page Two Ms. Julie Howe Sugarloafé A-1 The proposed 24-hour flow test and discharge of Sugarloaf A-l temperature gradient hole would replace the previously approved 4-day flow test from the Makushin ST-l1 well. (The approved 35-day flow test from ST-l was completed on August 8, with preliminary analysis showing that all terms of the variance issued by DEC on July | 5 were met.) If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to call esther py a Carey of Republic or myself. Thank you. ely e oe Chris ™ Joseph Environmental Affairs Specialist CAg/vls Tee ee ee i Attachment lt ie euiten| Bo eee ae cc: Mr. Denby Pi ova mele Department of Fish and Game Mr. Jack Heesch/Alaska Office of Management and Budget Mr. Roger Mochnick/Environmental Protection Agency Mr. Fred Zeillemaker/U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service I. It. ATTACHMENT 1 GEOTHERMAL FLUID DISCHARGE TO SUGARLOAF CREEK UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL PROJECT: DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS 1984 Introduction . The Sugarloaf Temperature Gradient Hole has recently been reprogrammed and is currently being drilled as a resource confirmation hole. If and when a resource is encountered, a maximum 24-hour flow test is proposed for the well in late August, in order to more accurately quantify the well flow parameters, to collect data regarding the reservoir, and to characterize the geothermal fluids encountered by the well. The liquids from this flow test are proposed to be discharged above sampling point SCA in the Sugarloaf Creek, a tributary of the Makushin Valley River (see draft Figure l). Well Flow Test Design and Flow Rate Because some of the produced geothermal fluid is flashed to steam and is lost to the air, the maximum feasible production rate would result in a maximum Liquid discharge rate of approximately 0.08 cubic feet per second (cfs), or about 17,000 pounds per hour. The test will last no more than 24 hours, with the total amount of fluids being discharged not exceeding 46,000 gallons. To undertake the flow test, NQ-size casing (2.98 inches) will be run to a depth of 600 feet and cemented through ports near bottom. After cleaning out to the bottom with BQ-size tubing (2.36 inches), upward fluid flow will be allowed to occur to the surface, where it will be directed through a metered flow line and James tube. The effluent will be directed towards a small tributary of Sugarloaf Creek, above Station SCA. FIGURE 2& PROJECT AREA Oraincge Basin. Boundary _- ~~ S O amp 4 pa _—_— FT 1 Mile > Seotnermal Resource Well ————— . MV Sample Station ——— . ° 1 Kilometer PAGE Two ATTACHMENT 1 GEOTHERMAL FLUID DISCHARGE TO SUGARLOAF CREEK UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL PROJECT: DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS 1984 IIt. Iv. Receiving Water Characteristics Earlier this month, a baseline environmental data collection program for Sugarloaf Creek was conducted by Dames and Moore to supplement the environmental data collectedfor Makushin river and Plateau Creek in 1982 and 1983. Sample locations in the Sugarloaf Canyon drainage are shown in the attached draft Figure l. Field parameters measured (flow, chlorides, conductivity, temperature, pH, dissolved oxygen, alkalinity, turbidity, and settleable solids) indicate that, with the exception of turbidity, baseline conditions in Sugarloaf Creek are quite similar to Plateau Creek (see draft Table l). Laboratory samples for metals and other components have yet to be analyzed. Because of their known sensitivity and commercial value, the pink salmon are the aquatic species in Makushin Valley River of greatest concern. The 1984 salmon run (which peaked earlier this month) is much larger than that observed in 1983, and fish are expected to be in the Makushin Valley river at the time of the flow test. However, to date no fish have been observed upstream of Station MV. Although protection of water quality at station MV has been previously cited by the Alaska Department of Fish and Game as their primary concern, Republic proposes that Station SCC (approximately 1-3/4 miles upstream from MV) serve as the point where all state and federal water quality criteria be met. Discharge Characteristics Analyses Of Samples taken during the 1983 flow test of Makushin ST-l were discussed in the June, 1984, plan of operations. In general, samples taken from the 35-day flow test at Makushin ST-l earlier this summer indicate that maximum concentrations of contaminants were very similar to analyses of 1983 samples. Should a resource be encountered at the Sugarloaf A-1 site, it is anticipated that discharge characteristics from the 24-hour flow test will also be similar. TABLE 1 BASELINE CONDITIONS IN SUGARLOAF CANYON CREEK AND MAKUSHIN VALLEY RIVER Stn. SCA Station SCB Sample Date 08/10/84 08/09/84 08/10/84 Sample Time 1055 1600 1035 Flow 90 120 100 Chloride 2.6 9.9 2.9 Conductivity 48 44 49 Temperature 1.8 ‘ 3.6 2.6 Station SCC Station MBS Sample Date 08/09/84 08/10/84 08/09/84 08/10/84 Sample Time 1640 0835 1650 0820 Flow 130 110 290 270 Chloride 2.7 2.5 2.9 27 Conductivity 42 54 40 51 Temperature E eee 5.0 3-5 Dissolved Oxygen 11.8 13.0 11.4 12.8 D.O., % Saturation 91 95 90 98 PE 6.3 6.2 6.9 7.0 Alkalinity 5.4 5.3 12 17 Turbidity 240 95 170 65 Settleable Solids 0.5 0.2 0.2 Q.1 nn Units: Flow, cfs Chloride, mg/L Conductivity, micromhos/cm @ 25°C Temperature, °C Dissolved Oxygen, mg/L pH, pH Units Alkalinity, mg/L as caco, Turbidity, NTU Settleable Solids, ml/L PAGE THREE ATTACHMENT 1 GEOTHERMAL FLUID DISCHARGE TO SUGARLOAF CREEK UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL PROJECT: DESCRIPTION OF OPERATIONS 1984 Vv. vi. Potential Impacts As discussed in the June, 1984, plan of operations, a water quality monitoring program was conducted during the 1983 four-day flow test by Republic's environmental subcontractor, Dames and Moore. The results of the 1983 water quality program, as expected, indicated that levels of parameters measured at station MV during the well test complied with Alaska water quality criteria and the ADEC variance. Similarly, preliminary analyses from the 1984 35-day flow test at Makushin ST-1 indicate that all Alaska receiving water criteria were met at the end of the MVB mixing zone, as specified by the ADEC variance issued to Republic on July 5, 1984. Water quality impacts resulting from the proposed 24-hour flow test of Sugarloaf A-l are expected to be generally equivalent to those negligible impacts detected in 1983 and earlier this summer. All water quality parameters will be at or below standards which prevent impacts to Beak salmon at the point nearly 2 miles upstream of the salmon. Monitoring and Mitigation Measures Republic will continue to have the pink salmon spawning run monitored in cooperation with the Alaska Department of Fish and Game. In addition, Republic will have environmental scientists in the field to quickly interpret data collected during and after the flow test, and will be prepared to reduce the flow rate of the test discharge at the first indications that water quality standards are being exceeded at Station SCC. MEMORANDUM State of Alaska TO FROM: BY: Julie Howe DATE: August 27, 1984 Environmental Engineer Department of Environmental FILE NO: 0684-IV-150 Conservation TELEPHONE NO: 267-2346 Dennis D. Kelso SUBJECT: Republic Geothermal Deputy Commissioner. |. ; Water Quality Department of Fish and Game “4 : Variance - Unalaska xy 3 SID AK840608-17A Denby S. Lloyd * a Habitat Biologist Region IV Habitat Division Department of Fish and Game The Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G) has reviewed the request for a water quality variance, dated August 24,°1984, submitted by Republic Geothermal, Inc. for a 24-hour flow test of Sugarloaf A-1 temperature gradient hole in the Makushin Valley River drainage, Unalaska Island. Given that previous flow tests have resulted in compliance with State Water Quality Standards (18 AAC 70) at a point upstream of anadromous fish distribution in the Makushin Valley River and that fluid constituents from this flow test are expected to be similar, we have no objection to issuance of the requested variance. We request that Republic's proposed water quality monitoring program be incorporated as a condition of the water quality variance. We appreciate the opportunity to comment. If you have any specific questions, please contact Denby Lloyd (267-2333). cc: J. Heesch, OMB S. Grabacki, Dames & Moore La Joseph, Republic Geothermal REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL, INC. 11823 EAST SLAUSON AVENUE, SUITE ONE SANTA FE SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 90670 “XK 910-586-1696 August 31, 1984 ! : (213) 945-3661 Ms. Julie Howe qi Alaska Department of. Environmental Conservation . ii 437 E Street, Suite 200 Ie Wi : alsa Anchorage, Alaska 99501 Haan att Dear Ms. Howes: = : : FAA lates seen Feil Pursuant to our telephone conversation today, this letter is Republic Geothermal, Inc.'s formal request for an extension to the July 5, 1984 ADEC short-term water quality variance granted to Republic for discharge of geothermal fluids at the Makushin ST-1 well on-Unalaska Island. Republic requests that the -- variance be extended until September 6, 1984, and that the. _ following changes be made to the flow tests proposed in our June 6, 1984 letter. i Srp es : A two-hour flow test at the ST-1 site will be conducted on Wednesday, September 5. The purpose of the test will be to demonstrate to key citizens and politicians of Unalaska Island the viability and commercial. : possibilities of geothermal energy. The maximum liquid discharge rate for the test will be approximately ~ll cubic feet per second (cfs). The total amount of fluids being discharged will not exceed 5000 gallons. + The two-hour test described above will substitute for the previously approved four-day flow test at Makushin ~ sT-1. ue As we discussed, a resource was not encountered upon 4 completion of drilling at the Sugarloaf A-l temperature gradient hole site. As such, Republic's August 24 request for an ; additional water quality variance is formally withdrawn. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Thank you. : . ; Sincerely, Environmental Specialist CAJ:bds APPENDIX D ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO SURFACE DISPOSAL OF GEOTHERMAL FLUIDS REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL, INC. MEMORANDUM June 12, 1985 TO: J.L. Smith FROM: C.A. Joseph SUBJECT: Environmental Regulatory Requirements Related to the Disposing of Geothermal Fluids into Makushin River on Unalaska Island The following is a response to your inquiry regarding the environmental permitting requirements for the long-term disposal of geothermal fluids into Makushin Valley River on Unalaska Island. Permission to dispose of waste geothermal fluid into Makushin River would have to be received from four governmental agencies: 1) The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) in the form of a Waste Water Disposal Permit; 2) The Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF & G) in the form of a Title 16 Habitat Protection Permit; 3) A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; and 4) a Special Use Permit from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to allow nonservice use of Wildlife Refuge Lands. Briefly, the major concern of these agencies is the protection of the known distribution of anadramous fish (salmon) in Makushin River. Basically, I believe that it would be extremely difficult to obtain these permits. To understand why, it is important to compare the disposal operations that are performed during short-term production tests (such as the 34-day flow test of well ST-1 in July/August 1984) versus the waste water disposal requirements associated with the full-time commercial operation of a geothermal project. Variances to state and federal regulations were (and probably could again be) granted for short-term (summer season) production testing, because it has been demonstrated that water quality standards can be maintained at critical locations in the Makushin Valley River during that season when the river flow is high, if the well discharge rate is relatively low. In contrast, waste water disposal operations conducted year-round for commercial operations would undoubtedly cause violations of provisions found in existing law, because of the much higher volumes of produced fluids, and because of the generally lower volume of river flow that is caused by seasonal changes. Consequently, before any or all of the various permits could be granted, it would be necessary to obtain variances or waivers to the regulations, based on either the rationale that the reduction of water quality would be justified because of the . necessity for economic development, or based on operational modifications that include extensive chemical treatment of the fluid before disposal. Even assuming that they could be obtained, these permit acquisitions would be a very time consuming and costly process for the developer. -To further illustrate the specific problem inherent in obtaining even one of the permits mentioned above, I refer you to the Alaska Administrative Code, Title 18, Section 70.010 (a) which states that: "No person may conduct an operation which causes or contributes to a violation of the water quality standards established by this chapter." For example, given an anticipated commercial operation production volume of 1,200,000 lbs. per hour of geothermal reservoir fluid, I have put together one testing and two commercial operation scenarios (see Attachment #1 and Table #1). In both commercial cases the Water Quality Standards would be significantly violated, and that would likely cause denial of a Waste Water Disposal Permit by the ADEC. Furthermore, such an obvious violation of the Water Quality Standards would certainly be (at a minimum) a major concern both to the Alaska Department of Fish and Game and to the U.S. EPA. cc: T.M. Evans Scenario 1: 1) 2) 3) 4) ATTACHMENT 1 *River flow at station MV Geothermal Fluid Flow at discharge point: Dilution Factor: Conclusion: Short-term (summer season) production flow test : 260 c.f.s. 100,000 Ibs/hr or 0.445 c.f.s. 260 = 584.26 0.445 Applying this dilution factor to chemical concentrations found in the fluid (see attached Table 1) indicates that no state water quality standards would be exceeded. Scenario 2: Commercial Operation - same period of year (July, August) 1) 2) 3) 4) *River Flow at station MV: Geothermal Fluid Flow: Dilution factor: Conclusion: 260 c.f.s. 1,200,000 Ibs/hr or 5.34 c.f.s. 260 = 48.68 5.34 Arsenic and Boron would exceed state standards. Production would be limited to approximately 260,800 pounds/hour. Scenario 3: Commercial Operation - (Late Autumn or Early Spring) 1) 2) 3) 4) *River Flow at Station MV: Geothermal Fluid Flow: Dilution Factor: Conclusion: 100 c.f.s. 1,200,000 Ibs/hr or 5.34 c.f.s. 100 = 18.73 5.34 Arsenic, Boron, and TDS would all exceed state standards. Production would be limited to approximately 100,300 pounds/hour. MV station, located approximately 3.2 stream-miles downstream from the expected point of geothermal waste water discharge, but upstream of the salmon spawning area, is the point of primary concern to the ADF & G. TABLE 1 Comparison of Short-Term and Long-Term Disposal of Geothermal Fluid into Makushin River versus Alaska Water Quality Standards ST-1 Geothermal ANTICIPATED CONCENTRATION Reservoir AT STATION MV Alaska Water Chemical Chemical Data Scenario Scenario Scenario Quality Standard, Parameter Conc., mg/1 *] **2 xkK3 mg/1 Q) Arsenic 11.2 02 -23 -60 0.05 Boron 44.7 -08 -92 2.39 0.75 Chloride 3180 5.44 65.32 169.78 200 Fluoride 0.1 -- -- -- 2.4 Iron 024 -- -- -- 1.0 Sodium 1836 3.14 37.72 98.02 250 Sulfate 80.8 14 1.6 4.31 200 Total Dissolved Solids 5823 9.97 119.62 310.89 250 * Dilution Factor is 584.26 ** Dilution Factor is 48.68 *kk Dilution Factor is 18.73 (1) From the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, Water Quality Standards. 1982, 20 pgs. APPENDIX E RESISTIVITY SURVEY AND INTERPRETATION APPENDIX E-1l REPORT ON E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SURVEY PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. ADVANCED TECHNIQUES IN LORATION 1184 FORGE WALK, VANCOUVER, B.C., CANADA V6H 3P9 - (604) 732-1618 PETROLEUM EXP! Report on E-SCAN electrical resistivity survey at Makushin Volcano, Unalaska Island, Alaska. for Republic Geothermal, Inc. Santa Fe Springs, California. November 30, 1984 CONTENTS page 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 SCOPE OF REPORT 1 3.0 RESISTIVITY PERFORMANCE EXPECTED IN MAKUSHIN GEOLOGY 2 4.0 SURVEY RESULTS 3 4.1 Major division of hydrothermal regimes 4 4.2 Well ST-1 within a strong resistivity anomaly 5 4.3 Fox Canyon 6 4.4 Sugarloaf 7 4.5 Upper Makushin Valley intrusions 9 5.0 SUMMARY 10 6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 11 6.1 Main resistivity anomaly at ST-1 11 6.2 Main north-south fault zone 11 6.3 Sugarloaf - area D 11 Figures (appended in order) 1 + Geology after Alaska DGGS Report 84-3 2 Summary of survey findings 3 Plan plot of pole-pole array apparent resistivity, 200-2000 meters 4 ™ 200-500 meters 5 " 500-1000 meters 6 1000-1500 meters 7 7 1500-2000 meters 8 Location of pole-pole array pseudosection sets at four main orientations. 9-12 Location of pseudosection sets facing southwest, west, northwest, north Pseudosections: 71-98 Facing southwest 46-70 Facing west 1-16 Facing northwest 20-45 Facing north PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. 1.0 INTRODUCTION In July and August, 1984, Premier Geophysics Inc. of Vancouver, British Columbia operated a full-grid E-SCAN electrical resistivity survey over a selected portion of the eastern flank of Makushin Volcano, Unalaska Island, Alaska. The survey was commissioned by Republic Geothermal, Inc., of Santa Fe Springs, California, as part of an ongoing geothermal resource exploration program on Unalaska Island. 2.0 SCOPE OF REPORT The report presents summary interpretation of the distribution of resistivities in the survey area, and interpretation of the location of resistivity contacts and fault structures. Except for some trial modelling on one pseudosection, no computer modelling has been done, pending examination of the primary interpreted results and appropriate planning of a modelling strategy, if any. In addition to the summary results plots and plan plots of the data set, sets of pseudosection plots are presented, together with key maps indicating section position on the plan map. Not presented are some 200 intermediate plots and tables used for evaluation of the data set and the building and testing of structural model aspects. The report makes recommendations for further study of the data using l-, 2-, and 2 1/2 dimensional computer-assisted methods where such methods appear to be useful in describing structure to drill-siting levels of confidence. PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. 3.0 RESISTIVITY PERFORMANCE EXPECTED IN MAKUSHIN GEOLOGY The survey area geology is shown in Figure 1. The geological contacts and structure are used in the base map for many data present- ations for correlation and reader orientation. The location of gabbronorite intrusions is a useful marker of geothermal manifestations southwest of the survey area, where fumaroles and hot springs often occur at the exposed contact between the intrusive and the host Unalaska formation. Producing well ST-1 is intimate with an exposure of gabbronorite; two warm springs also occur northeast of ST-1 in or near a mapped lobe of the gabbronorite. The survey area covers four exposures of gabbronorite intruding Unalaska formation, from the ST-1 area northeast toward Makushin Valley. Gabbronorite will exhibit a range of resistivities typical of granitic intrusions, its variation dependent upon degree of fracturing, degree of alteration, present temperature regime, and salinity of fracture fluids. Fresh, unfractured rock will exhibit resistivities of 3000 to 20,000 ohm-meters. Heavily fractured rock, unaltered and saturated with fresh water, will yield resistivities in the 500 ohm-meter range. Given the low-salinity fluids expected for the ST-l area, with elevated temperatures and substantial alteration along fracture surfaces, "reservoir" gabbronorite resistivities would range from 20 to 75 ohm-meters. Due mostly to the initial impermeability of the granitic rock, the type of complete alteration to clays which in permeable rock types yields resistivities of 2 or 3 ohm-meters will not usually occur. A resistivity of 20 to 75 ohm-meters in granitic reservoir rocks would appear to be the survey target, with expectations of lower values in PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. zones of extreme alteration, or due to alteration of Unalaska formation or other volcanics in the area. Resistivity expectations for volcanics are less predictable, there being a wider range of chemistries, permeabilities and modes of deposition available, and hence increased variability of access (permeability) by thermal fluids, gases and other alteration agencies. While some notions of expectation are available ( The glassy flow Qhvf would be expected to return 5000 to 10,000 ohm-meter values), correlation of widespread sampling by the arrray with mapped units is usually the best guide. 4.0 SURVEY RESULTS Figure 2 is referred to continuously in this section. The map Summary of Survey Findings (Figure 2) presents the major exploration results derived from examination and testing of plan presentations of resistivity data, together with sets of pseudosections oriented at four main headings. The dashed resistivity contacts numbered 1 to 9 correspond with locations indicated by at least two (and often 3 to 6) different tests. The principal test has been the evaluation of resistivity breaks in the upper 300 to 400 meter data in pseudosections, and the plotting of such breaks on a summary plot to assess correlation of observation between various orientations of pseudosection. The 9 contacts shown are heavily supported in the data. The contacts shown often cross geological boundaries as mapped PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. at surface, so there is a tendency to consider the resistivity changes as indicating faults at depth. This is a reasonable assumption, but the possibility of simple geologic contact at depth as the source of some linears should be kept in mind. 4.1 Major division of hydrothermal regimes. The central north-south fault zone 4-5 is heavily supported in the resistivity data. It's possible extension north of Sugarloaf and south of the survey area is untested. This zone divides the area into two suites of rock resistivity characteristics: East of the zone: Here the intrusive rocks yield high resistivities typical of limited fracturing and alteration, and the volcanic units provide a nominal range of resistivities. West of the zone: Throughout this area the same volcanic units as mapped east of the zone provide resistivity signatures 2 to 10 times lower. A notable example is the Unalaska (Tu) unit involved in shallow, anomalous responses in areas B, D and A, reporting much higher resistivities throughout the area east of the fault zone. The gabbronorite of area A is highly anomalous in resistivity; its fresher counterpart in area E is in the high, unaltered range. The fault zone is a major area feature, appearing to mark the eastern limit of a large scale hydrothermal regime which has altered, and may continue to heat anomalously, the whole of the survey area to the west. PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. 4.2 Well ST-1 within a strong resistivity anomaly A line drawn down the south edge of Fox Canyon (fault 1) and extending across the valley to the block fault area (DGGS) opposite marks the northerly cutoff of a strong resistivity anomaly enclosing well ST-1. This anomalous area (A+B) is further divided in the area of the curved fault (DGGS) crossing to the northeast into areas A and B. In area B, anomalous resistivities extend to depths on the order of 400 to 600 meters. The appearance of the more resistive underlying rocks is evident in Figures 4, 5 and 6. Area A (in the same sequence of figures) continues to be very conductive at depth, and extends beyond survey reach both to depth, and laterally to the southwest. The general descriptions of areas A and B are confirmed in pseudosections. The exact location of the boundary between A and B, and of the boundary to the northeast must be determined with the aid of 2-pD modelling, due to the extremes of topographic variation, and the need to maintain sensitivity to detailed resistivity zoning which could identify a fault zone as opposed to simply a change in resistivity character. With well ST-1 so close to the boundary of area A, the possibility of a fault actually forming the boundary appears more likely, and is of increased exploration/exploitation significance. The initial identification of (probable) fault #1 beside Fox Canyon adds importance to the question of boundary detail. PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. 4.3 Fox Canyon Fox Canyon has been of exploration interest for several reasons, including a high temperature in hole D-l. The expectation for resistivity results was for a resistive response from the glassy flow unit Qhvf, with more conductive rock beneath. The expected response is evident in Figures 4, 5 and 6, and more clearly in all of the pseudosections crossing Fox Canyon. North-south pseudosections 47 through 50 show the reducing apparent resistivities with deeper pene- tration in the right portion of each pseudosection. To resolve the question of actual resistivity of the sub-flow rocks, 2-D modelling must be applied. The effects of topography are eliminated first, and a balance between resistivity and depth of the flow unit (and its cross-sectional shape) and the resistivity of the underlying unit sought. In a trial modelling effort, topographic effects were reliably eliminated (+25-40% impact only) from pseudosection 47 data, and an initial model tried using a guess at Fox Canyon layering, and a block of conductivity adjacent in area A. The model quickly asserted an apparent need for a 100 to 200 meter wide, deep-running vertical zone at the south edge of Fox Canyon, with zone resistivity in the 5 to 20 ohm-meter range. The sub-flow layer in central Fox Canyon meanwhile approached a 300-400 ohm-meter mode which would be considered to hold limited interest. PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. This is a first model attempt for the area, but the similarity of pseudosections 47 through 50 implies similar requirements in terms of structure. A confirmed conductive fault would appear to strike roughly ESE along the edge of Fox Canyon, across the boundary of Area A near ST-1 and connect with mapped block-faulting on the valley side opposite. Resolution of the uniqueness of such a model, and detailing of such a structure's strike, dip, width and internal resistivity characteristics would appear to be a significant contribution to the understanding of both the ST-l area and Fox Canyon conditions. (4.4 Sugarloaf The shallow (300-500 meters) conductive zone of area D west of Sugarloaf is of unknown significance. Like the anomaly area B, the rocks are mapped as Unalaska formation (Tu). Factors affecting its consideration are proximity to the known elevated temperatures associated with the fumarole west of Sugarloaf, proximity to the intersections of major fault zones near and at Sugarloaf, and downslope position relative to some resistivity indications in northwestern Fox Canyon. No evidence of deeper, large-volume anomalous resistivity is seen in the area surrounding the anomalous zone. PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. Because unit Tu is conductive in all mapped locations west of the main fault zone, it is plausibie to declare that such conductivity is the normal condition for the unit, a result of area-wide hydrothermal alteration, past or ongoing. In terms of focussing on areas of sufficiently intense activity as to warrant economic consideration, this unit may simply be noise. That the anomaly extends out into the flow-covered area toward Sugarloaf, and toward a known high-temperature fumarole is possibly significant. Present data do not allow the assumption that the outcropping Tu beside the flow extends under the flow and is responsible solely for the anomaly. It is possible that a narrow, fault-defined convection system or steam-dominated system could exist within the present resistivity data set, and not be apparent to the eye. Whether or not computer-assisted modelling of the area would yie'd any insights is unknown. At present, from a resistivity standpoint, nothing has been proven about area D, positive or negative. The flow rocks which cover the area surrounding Sugarloaf prevent simple evaluation of sub-flow resistivities or structure. If the pattern of structural indication of Figure 2 appears to have exploration significance, then resolution of these indications and detection of other structure will have to be done with computer- assisted modelling, using the available data. PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. 4.5 Upper Makushin Valley intrusions. The survey was extended to cover the area surrounding two outcropping occurrences of gabbronorite in the upper Makushin Valley area. The resistivity results provide no evidence of past or present hydrothermal activity in the area. PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. 10 5.0 SUMMARY The E-SCAN electrical resistivity survey was successful in obtaining a dense catalog of resistivity data throughout the survey area. The subsequent formatting of raw data components has provided pseudosectional views of the property from all orientations, and across sections which in the field represent impossible traverse conditions for conventional collinear arrays. The survey area is divided into two broad zones east and west of a major fault system running north-south through the Sugarloaf area. West of this zone, area-wide hydrothermal alteration is evident, with localized zones of more intense activity, particularly near well ST-1, being identified. East of this zone, evidence of hydrothermal activity is less or lacking. The intrusions in upper Makushin Valley lie in an area showing no resistivity evidence of hydrothermal activity of significance. The identification of structures and probable structures which appear to control the boundaries of the anomaly containing well ST-1 is the most significant contribution to the exploration effort, and also represents the area in which most additional information can be obtained through further data analysis and modelling. PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. 6.0 11 RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 Main resistivity anomaly at ST-1 Undertake intensive 2-D and 2 1/2 D computer- assisted modelling of data to define the presence and characteristics of fault zones believed to control the boundaries of the main resistivity anomaly and believed to extend west along Fox Canyon. 6.2 Main north-south fault zone Undertake limited 2-D investigation of the location, dip and general characteristics of this fault zone. Test for evidence of its continuation north of Sugarloaf under the resistive flow. 6.3 Sugarloaf - area D Undertake 2-D modelling of area data to determine whether a narrow geothermal structure or typical steam-dominated signatures could be lost in the data due to the effects of adjacent conductive Unalaska volcanics and/or the effects of the highly resistive flow unit. In the course of determining the above, look for evidence of such features in the existing data. PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. 12 November 30, 1984 Greg A. Shore Premier Geophysics Inc. PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL INC. UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION PROJECT UNALASKA ISLAND, ALASKA E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUAVE’ MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA JULY, AUGUST, 1984 GEOLOGY AFTER ALASKA DGGS REPORT OF INVESTIGATIONS 84-3 ABBREVIATED KEY Q@al ALLUVIUM, COLLUVIUM Qvct VOLCANIC COLLUVIUM Qvp PYROCLASTIC DEBRIS Qhvf HOMOGENEOUS VOL- @hvp CANICS: FLOWS AND PYROCLASTICS Q@Tvc INHOMOGENEOUS VOLCANICS Tu UNALASKA FORMATION, >75% PYROCLASTIC, SOME DYKES, SILLS Tuh METAMORPHOSED Tu, NEAR Tg INTRUSIONS Tuf FLOW-DOMINATED UNALASKA FORMATION Tg GABBRONORITE + SURVEY ELECTRODE SITE e DRILL HOLE SITE KILOMETERS 0.5 i 1.5 bt THOUSAND FEET 0 4 2 3 4 5 il ft PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. VANCOUVER, CANADA Figure # 1 REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL INC. \ \ UNALASKA se... GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION PROJECT UNALASKA ISLAND, ALASKA E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SURVE MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA JULY, AUGUST, 1984 SUMMARY OF SUAVEY FINDINGS, PRELIMINARY INTERPRETATION COMPLETED. KEY TO REFERENCES IN REPORT RESISTIVITY CONTACT OR FAULT IMPLICATION DERIVED FROM SHALLOW (<700 METERS) DATA. + SURVEY ELECTRODE SITE e DRILL HOLE SITE KILOMETERS 0 0.5 4 1.5 THOUSAND FEET 0 4 2 3 4 8 PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. VANCOUVER, CANADA Figure # 2 REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL INC. UNALASKA PROJECT UNALASKA ISLAND, ALASKA E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SURVE MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA JULY, AUGUST, 1984 PLAN PLOT OF POLE-POLE ARRAY APPARENT RESISTIVITY IN OHM— METERS. RANGE OF EFFECTIVE PENETRATION (Ze) IS APPROX 200 TO 2000 METERS APPARENT RESISTIVITY OHM-METERS =< 30 50 — 70 ——_— 74 — 100 — 150 — 154 — 200 - 300 - 301 - 500 - 700 - 704 - 4000 - 4500 * 2000 * 3000 + SUAVEY ELECTRODE SITE e ORILL HOLE SITE KILOMETERS 0 0.5 4 1.5 THOUSAND FEET o 4 2 3 4 5 PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. VANCOUVER, CANADA Figure # 3 REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL INC. St UNALASKA 2.4. GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION 2 PROJECT UNALASKA ISLAND, ALASKA _@. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUAVE ‘ MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA JULY, AUGUST, 1984 PLAN PLOT OF POLE-POLE ARRAY re APPARENT RESISTIVITY IN OHM— UN) METERS. RANGE OF EFFECTIVE 4. PENETRATION (Ze) IS APPROX: 200 TO 500 METERS APPARENT RESISTIVITY OHM-METERS =< 30 —— 50 — 70 — 71 — 100 — 150 — 1514 200 300 301 500 700 - 704 - 1000 + 1500 + 2000 + 3000 + SURVEY ELECTRODE SITE e ORILL HOLE SITE SN NS KILOMETERS “Ve 0 0.5 1 1.5 1 abt wh OS THOUSAND FEET PY o 4 2 3 4 #5 Moat a gs act 2 PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. VANCOUVER, CANADA Figure # 4 5 YA > ¥ REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL INC. ' UNALASKA \ GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION = PROJECT UNALASKA ISLAND, ALASKA E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUAVE MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA JULY, AUGUST, 1984 PLAN PLOT OF POLE-POLE ARRAY APPARENT RESISTIVITY IN OHM— METERS. RANGE OF EFFECTIVE PENETRATION (Ze) IS APPROX: 500 TO 1000 METERS APPARENT RESISTIVITY OHM-METERS =< 30 —_ 50 — 70 — 7 — 100 — 150 — 151 200 300 304 500 700 - 704 - 1000 - 4500 - 2000 + 3000 + SUAVEY ELECTRODE SITE e DAILL HOLE SITE KILOMETERS o 0.5 1 1.5 SSS THOUSAND FEET 0 4 2 3 4 5 che —— ee | PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. VANCOUVER, CANADA Figure # 5 REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL INC. UNALASKA =~.\.. GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION PROJECT UNALASKA ISLAND, ALASKA E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SURVE’ MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA JULY, AUGUST, 1984 PLAN PLOT OF POLE-POLE ARRAY APPARENT RESISTIVITY IN OHM- METERS. RANGE OF EFFECTIVE PENETRATION (Ze) IS APPROX: 1000 TO 1500 METERS APPARENT RESISTIVITY OHM-METERS =< 30 — 50 — 70 —— |e — 100 150 4154 200 300 301 500 700 - 704 + 1000 * 1500 + 2000 + 3000 serutdd + SURVEY ELECTRODE SITE e DRILL HOLE SITE KILOMETERS ° 0.5 4 1.5 SSS THOUSAND FEET 0 4 2 3 4 5 crt ret PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. VANCOUVER, CANADA Figure # 6 \ REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL INC. aA UNALASKA -\ GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION PROJECT UNALASKA ISLAND, ALASKA E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUAVE MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA JULY, AUGUST, 1984 PLAN PLOT OF POLE-POLE ARRAY APPARENT RESISTIVITY IN OHM- METERS. RANGE OF EFFECTIVE PENETRATION (Ze) IS APPROX 4500 TO 2000 METERS APPARENT RESISTIVITY OHM-METERS =< 30 — 50 — 70 — 74 — 100 — 150 — 151 200 300 304 500 700 704 - 1000 - 1500 - 2000 + 3000 + SUAVEY ELECTRODE SITE e DAILL HOLE SITE KILOMETERS o 0.5 i 41.5 THOUSAND FEET 0 i 2 3 4 5 al ot PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. VANCOUVER, CANADA Figure # 7 REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL INC. . _ UNALASKA S\_ GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION es PROJECT UNALASKA ISLAND, ALASKA J. » E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUAVE i” MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA JULY, AUGUST, 1984 NN iz is ps Si i LOCATION OF POLE-POLE ARRAY PSEUDOSECTION SETS AT FOUR MAIN ORIENTATIONS, RELATIVE TO KNOWN GEOLOGY AND TOPOGRAPHY SURVEY ELECTRODE SITE e DRILL HOLE SITE KILOMETERS 0.5 4 1.5 al THOUSAND FEET 0 4 2 3 4 5 ball —— pt PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. VANCOUVER, CANADA Figure # § : REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL INC. : UNALASKA --.§.. GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION : PROJECT UNALASKA ISLAND, ALASKA E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SURVE MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA JULY, AUGUST, 1984 a LOCATION OF POLE-POLE ARRAY PSEUDOSECTIONS FACING SOUTHWEST + SURVEY ELECTRODE SITE e DRILL HOLE SITE KILOMETERS oO 0.5 1 1.5 S| THOUSAND FEET Oo 1 2 3 4 5 SSS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. VANCOUVER, CANADA Figure # Q Is RAT A‘ 1 ND ty> A 4 v q wi) SAAN LN aM 4 wo 220 BSS AP REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL INC. aN tN aS UNALASKA Lhe S\_ GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION 2 PROJECT UNALASKA ISLAND, ALASKA E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUAVE MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA JULY, AUGUST, 1984 LOCATION OF POLE-POLE ARRAY PSEUDOSECTIONS FACING WEST + SUAVEY ELECTRODE SITE e DRILL HOLE SITE KILOMETERS o 0.5 1 1.5 THOUSAND FEET 2 3 4 5 al ed PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. VANCOUVER, CANADA Figure # 10 (CN ty> MAAN Sf OOo Uhl ae RG YL LS PCO SS REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL INC. v o Ye Rit \ SS UNALASKA . GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION PROJECT UNALASKA ISLAND, ALASKA E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUAVE MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA JULY, AUGUST, 1984 LOCATION OF POLE-POLE ARRAY PSEUDOSECTIONS FACING NORTHWEST 2 + SURVEY ELECTRODE SITE e DAILL HOLE SITE KILOMETERS 0 0.5 4 1.5 THOUSAND FEET 2 3 4 5 PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. VANCOUVER, CANADA Figure # 14 REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL INC. PROJECT UNALASKA ISLAND E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SURVE UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION ALASKA MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA 1984 JULY, AUGUST LOCATION OF POLE-POLE ARRAY PSEUDOSECTIONS FACING NORTH SURVEY ELECTRODE SITE DRILL HOLE SITE THOUSAND FEET 4 2 S s 8 NS g x q a 9 i u = ® a VANCOUVER, CANADA 1e Figure # tnalaska Seothermal Exploration Froject Unaleska Island, Alaska Feoublic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUFVEY, MAKUSHI!. VOLCANO AREA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE APPAY rsevdosecticns, locking SOUTEKEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters. Vertical scale is errey effective penetraticn (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 71 71> < 71° 63 -1500 - 2000 Ze, METEPS METEPS o 500 1000 1500 2000 —$ horizontal scale PREMIEF CEOPRYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: 7 Plot CT €41126140334 Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Fepublic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SURVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO APEA July, August, 1984 POLE-PCLE AFRAY fsewosections, looking SOUTHWEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 72 72> < 72° 17 80 36 13 Dan eanneeetenesll 12 84 -1500 - 2000 Ze, METERS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: 72 Plot DT 841120140548 METEPS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 i horizontal scale lnalacka Geotiermal Exploration Froject Unalaska Island, Alaska ferublic Ceothermal Inc, E-SCAT POSISTIVITY SJPVEY, MAKUSHIt VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1934 POLE-POLE AFFAY rreudosections, lcoking SOUTHWEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters, Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 73 73> < 73° 4l 49 19 12 53 (neelanenineeeneneeepnereeell n 161 118 60 126 4 -1000 83 82 -1500 -2000 Ze, ASTERS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: 73 Plot DT 841120140622 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 - 2000 +++ horizontal scale Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Republic Geothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUPVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE APPAY feeudosections, looking SOUTHWEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton # 74 74> < 74" 9 93 22 81 25 48 54 Se eT i ros 165 1% 140 79 -500 2 ng 2 Hl 69 1i6 112 Ld ~po00 104 158 -1500 70 -2000 Ze, METERS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: 4 Plot DT 641120140658 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 -——— $$ $+ +__4 horizontal scale tnalaska Geotnermal [xoloration Froject Unalaska Island, Alaska Fenublic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESICTIVITY SUIVEY, IAKUSNIi: VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE AFPAY rseulosections, looking SOUTHWEST Apparent Fesistivity in chn-reters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton + 75 5 > < 75° 9 93 55 53 98 1 69 15 66 43° 65 [ees eae Goce! Een eens food Eomeciccmsss beara’ cae Beart 1% 82 93 101 542 600 24g 4 95 124 500. - a” 108 104 5 4 120 9 183 37 100 %4 139 101 50 =o 107 104 7 4 a 40 62 =ten0 135 24 7 521 nT 55 20 96 -2000 Ze, ETERS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VA'ICOUVER, CAJADA Plot 2file: 75 Plot DT €41120140753 METERS 0 506 1000 1500 2000 + tt horizontal scale Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Feoublic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUFVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 PCLE-POLE APFAY frseudosections, looking SOUTHWEST Aoparent Fesistivity in onm-meters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 76 16 > < 76° 90 88 87 29 52 89 82 99 «14 15 66 3 16 be dd 82 % 75 sg 34 179 468 542 1065 92 160 2 “) 107 93 m2 582 22 ros *® 224 196 M2 263 113 219 1s 136 220 128 14 162 120 130 160 19g (126 1000 ‘Lo 150 132 126 131 139 131 97 «180 120 iy 6 7 ” 125 22 -1500 127 112 58 v7 28 %—§ 50 10 93 23 -2000 we, “ETERS PRENIEP GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: 76 Plot DT 841120140901 METERS 0 500 1006 1500 2000 ——————OO I horizontal scale Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, Slaska Fenublic Ceothermal Inc, E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SURVEY, MAKJSHIN VOLCAID APEA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE APPAY rseuiosections, looking SOUTEWEST Apparent Fesistivity in onm-meters, Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 77 71> <77° 27 26 28 44 100 39 40 «#17 6 72 Dana a al 80 82 ~500 125 nF 8 132 205 -1000 119 192 114 221 168 -1500 84 mn uM as |= 18 -2000 Ze, METERS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: 7 Plot DT 841120140948 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 -———t—————t_§_§_ +4 horizontal scale Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Feoublic Geothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUFVEY, NAKUSHIN VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE AFPAY pseulosections, looking SOUTHWEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 78 78 > < 78 60 59 71 62 45 97 «137 4679 n 2 = 10 Ln 164 joe 108 155 1209 1786 107 299 Ho Il tenn 1076 aoe at 130 241259 282 -500 261 161 ue oa 205 ws © 175 _ 155 129 05 153 -1000 as, ad 193 gy 129 yay 251 209 353 on 170 139 22 2027 -1500 204 81 200 242 217 au -2000 te, METERS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: 78 Plot PT 641120142549 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 _—<$—$+ ———_—_ + —_—_—_—_—___; horizontal scale Unalaska Geotnermal Exoloration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Republic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUPVEY, MAKJSHIN VOLCANO APEA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE AFRAY rseuwiosections, Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters. looking SOUTHWEST Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton # 79 79 > 86 85 38 47 8 70 35 < 79° x 144 23 61 32 «2B 94 ta 256 149 81 ie M9432 a4 275 188 86 121 384 112 178 -500 22 75 161 U5 103 = 197 n 186 300 43 1 135 119 19) 216 24 206 rll -1000 285 128 28 244 46 159 20 262 219 78 rida Fi 293 -1500 262 218 146 236 93 261 218 222 “ -2000 te, ABTERS PREMIEF GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: 719 Plot DI 641120142703 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 jt horizontal scale Unalaeka Geothermal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Republic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCAN FPESISTIVITY SUFVEY, MAKUSBKIN VOLCANO AREA . July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE ARFAY fseudosections, looking SOUTHWEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-metere. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton # 80 80 > < 80° Sl 50 64 63 57 % 75 150 210 149 127 43 234 138 at 66 120 137 152. 87 193 160 163 112 170 256 200 218 -1000 227 239 219 103 188 ~1500 203 te, METEFS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: &C Plot DT 841120142741 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 wt horizontal scale Unalagka Geothermal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Fepublic Geothermal Inc. E-SCAN PESISTIVITY SUPVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AFEA J uly, August, 1934 PCLE-POLE AFFAY rseudosections, locking SOUTHWEST Anparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters,”* Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 61 81> <1’ 113 106 105 109 101 2 9 9% 14123 (Ld dL mr; 303 in 3 36 oD 150 1 wl -500 164 214 22 124 184 207 43) 218 143 144 209 219 1M 139 -1000 244 133 189 218 20° 17 202 203” a1 ~1500 206 180 188 207 -2000 Ze, METERS PFENIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVEP, CANADA Plot 2file: €1 Plot CT 841120142830 METEPS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 rrr nner cee horizontal scale Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Fepublic Geothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUFVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 PCLE-POLE AFRAY feeuiosections, looking SOUTHWEST Apparent fesistivity in ohm-meters. Vertical scale is array effective peretration (Ze); see text. Pseudosectcn ¢# 82 82> < 82° 104 103 102 119 124117 120 (a en 4 100 ~500 : 156 148 14 ~1000 149 179 207 175 1500 194 186 223 191 199 -2000 Ze, METERS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: €2 Plot DT 841120142954 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 ooo horizontal scale Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Fepublic Geothermal Inc, E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUPVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE AFRAY frewosections, looking SOUTHVEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton # 82 83 > < 83° 122. 108107190 133 151 21 We 126 bed 48 186 86 TA 2756 6 104 -500 174 _ 47 155139 705 183 787 245 215 216 200 299 a -1000 63 180 336 421 15 457 23 207k -1500 ase 225 233 20 -2000 Ze, METERS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: 82 Plot CT 841120143225 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 ————$ tt horizontal scale Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Pepublic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUPVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE APFAY feewosections, looking SOUTHWEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters, Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton # 6&4 84 > < 84" 18 131 (158 135153 199 129 125 Licccechsisiceneniaiicaiieetaiataasstinadatmiightadethertemiseicistiand 61 92 663 180 146 ~500 161 160 190 210 310 228 153 233 ~1000 ae 261 144 2% 182 268 ~1500 212 251 221 -2000 Ze, METERS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: 84 Plot PT 841120143305 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 5 ———_—_+—_—_ horizontal scale (nalaska Geothermal Exploration Froject Unalaska Island, Alaska Peoublic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUPVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE AFPAY rreudosections, looking SOUTHWEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 85 85 > < 85° 1s2 139 159132127 134 M40 143 Male seein el eaeeieneseeetinsl ve 83s 23 840 232 7 141 500 412 350 222 201 247 «10 26 -1000 mn no ay 246 228 223 “2 ~1500 486 258 209 -2000 Ze, METERS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot zfile: 8s Plot CT 641120143346 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 ———+———_—_—_+—————_+————_ horizontal scale Unalaska Geotiaermal Exploration Froject unalaska Island, Alaska Fepuplic Geotiermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SURVCY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE AFFAY rreudosections, looking SOUTHWEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters, Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseujosecton # 86 86 > < 86° 162605 136063 Ml 47149 1 1085 x 4331 1021 -500 2315 356 418 245 1192 1000 ane = 253 69 42 243 1500 208 305 oy -2000 Ze, METERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 $+ —i horizontal scale PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: 86 Plot DT 841120143426 Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Republic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUPVEY, MNAKUSHIti VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1934 POLE-POLE APPAY pseuiosections, looking SOUTHWEST Apparent Fesistivity in onm-meters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton #¢# €7 87 > < 87° 1% 161 164 165 (146 142 166 148 155 154 cach alelcalaalalalsataieia elite ids alleadaale dc seeeaaemactemaaisana Mamas 2266 2455 732 3% 826 1458 882 1864 3265 -500 283 687 57393 153254 400 166 -1000 we 6 r 440 ue 239 282 43 116 a 254 -1500 102 238 268 262 173 101 69 -2000 Ze , METERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 PREMIER GEIPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: 87 Plot DT €41120143517 tt horizontal scale (nalaska Geotnermal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Renublic Ceothermal Inc. £-SCAN RESISTIVITY SURVEY, ‘AKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE APRAY rseujosections, looking SOUTHWEST Aoparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text, Pseudosecton # e8 88 > < 88° 170 189 188 230 175 171 1% 181 186 se et do 19280 24877 5907 6513 8062 PP 6018 1118 Ss 47 830 22 a 307 03 401 -1000 33 373583 133 763 530 291 91 201 1500 355 149 328 -2000 Ze, METERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 ———+——__+—————_+-———_ horizontal scale PRESNIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: 88 Plot DT 841120143611 Unalaska Geotnercmal Expleration Project Unalaska Island, \laska Fepudlic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUPVEY, IAKUSHIN VOLCANO APEA July, \ugust, 1994 POLE-POLE AFFAY reseudosections, looking SOUTHEST Apvarent Fesistivity in ohm-meters, Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢# €9 89> < 39 194 222 2c7 17 157 184 2 ta 3705 1050 2570 9295 1533 ~500 620 490 mm 2191 234 -1000 106 os 120 213 4 -18c0 33 25 293 -2000 ze, SSTEPS METERS 9 560 1¢90 1500 2000 fennel horizontal scale PrENMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VAUCIUVER, CAIADA Plot 2file: €s Plot ry €41120143649 Unalaska Geothernal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Republic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUFVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE AFPAY feeudosections, looking SOUTHWEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters, Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 90 90 > < 90 263 193 244233 «212-228 = 204 1g2 195 196 156 en ee oy 20 ya 16784 191 267 1aag 85291089 500 ong 1% oe 1893 362 113 Poa -1000 Le 404 2 346 6 wu. - an 336 oo 3 3 437 BL -2000 Ze, METERS METERS 0 506 1000 1500 2000 ———+ ef enl horizontal scale PRENIER CEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: 90 Plot DT 841120143751 Unalaska Geothermal Exnloration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Tepublic Ceotnermal Inc. E-3CAN RESISTIVITY SUFVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE AFPAY fseudosections, looking SOUTHWEST ADparent Fesistivity in ohm-reters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration Pseudosecton # 91 91 > 246 245 232 229 20 (Ze); see text, <9 5 201 200 acl il ene nemtenenooenell 237 -500 452 453 -1000 -1500 -2000 Ze, METERS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: 91 Plot DI 641120143827 315 481 2564333 215 236 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 +H tH horizontal scale Unalaska Geothermal Exoloration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Renublic Ceothermal Inc. L-3CAN RESISTIVITY SUPVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA July, August, 1984 POLE-PCLE APPAY rseudosections, looking SOUTHWEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton # 92 92 > < 92° 251 = 260 247 227 223 210 197 437 269 350 we -1000 320 450 179 403 229 -1500 ~ 2000 ze, “ETERS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: 92 Plot DT 641120143940 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 re +H horizontal scale Unalaska Geothermal Exoloration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Fepublic Geothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUFVEY, [:AKUSHIN VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE AFFAY frewosections, lcoking SCUTKVEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-reters. Vertical scale is erray effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosectcn #¢ $3 93 > < 93° 272° 268 251 243 239° 217235 208 Nanterre eee eres eeineeiel 184 41 -50 0 457 410 327 415 -1000 258 205 -15900 -2000 Ze, METERS PFENIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVEF, CANADA Flot Zfile: 93 Plot CI 641120144018 METEPS 0 500 10¢0 1500 200C +++ horizontal scale Unalaska Gectnermal Exploration Freject Unalaska Island, Alaska Republic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUIVEY, MNAKUSHIN VOLCAND AFLA July, August, 1984 PCLE-POLE AFRAY rseudosections, locking SCUTFYEST Apparent Ffesistivity in ohm-meters. Vertical scale is array effective peretration (Ze); see text. Pseudosectcon #¢ e4 94> < 94 274 «271-270 262 2H 224 218 237 219 an a ll 101g (82 500 233 a 48291 -1000 391 283 273 $380 -1500 -2000 Ze, METERS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: 94 Plot CT 641126144059 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 — horizontal scale Unalaska Geothermal Fxploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Republic Geothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SURVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE AFRAY feeuiosections, locking SOU1HKEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters. Vertical scale is array effective peretratior (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton #¢ 95 95 > < 95° 269 267 249 2% 225 226 240 «242 tt 737 546 -500 5A2 430457 1000 293 365 281 -1500 -2000 Ze, METERS METERS 0 500 1000 150¢ 20C0 a a horizontal scale PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: 95 Plot CT 641120144137 lnalacka Geothermal Explcraticn Eroject Unalaska Island, Alaska Fepublic Ceothermel Inc. E-SCAN FESISTIVITY SUFVEY, MAFUSHIN VOLCANC AFEA July, August, 1984 FCLE-PCLE AFFAY j.ceudosections, Iccoking SCUIBKELCET Avrerent Fesistivity in chr-neters, Vertical scale is array effective peretraticn (Zel); see text. Fseudosectcn 3: ge 600 -1000 3846 ~156C ase -2000 ze, METEPS PrENIER GECPRYSICS INC., VANCOUVET, CANADA Plot Z2file: £6 Plot CPI €411701444C8 PETERS 0 s0c 1000 1500 2000 a A herizontal scale Unalagka Geothermal {Ixplcraticn Eroject Unalagka Island, Alaska Fepublic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUFVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLC/FEC ATFA July, August, 1°84 FCLE-PCLE AFFAY -nsevdosections, lecking CUTEST Aprerent Fesistivity in chr-retere. Vertical scale is array effective peretraticn (Ze.); see text. Fsevdosecton 3: $7 97 > < 97" 258 © 253 255 741 eee nae hearers -500 546 1000 oa 557 -1500 - 2000 Ze , METERS rETEPS c £0c 10¢0 150C 2060 e———$ —————_-—__ + horizontal scale PREMIER GEOPFYSICS INC., VANCOUVEF, CANADA Plot Z2file: s7 Plot Ci €4112014444C Unalaska Gecthermal Explcraticn Froject Unalaska Island, Alaska Fepublic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCAN FESISTIVITY SUFVEY, MAKUSHIN VCLCANC AFEA July, August, 1984 FCLE-POLE AFFAY sprevdosections, looking SOUTEVEST Apparent fFesistivity in chmnetere. Verticel scale is arrey effective peretraticn ‘(Zei); see text. Fseudosecton 3: £€ 98 > < 8° 259 «264 24€ Deel, 716 -500 -1000 -1500 -2000 Ze, METEFS NETEPS c 50c 1000 1500 2000 fet horizontal scale PFEMIER GECPRYSICS INC., VANCOUVEF, CANADA Plot 2file: 8 Plot DT €4)320144£11 Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Froject Unalaska Island, Alaska Pepublic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUFVEY, SAKUSHIN VOLCANO AFLA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE AFPAY rseudosections, looking t&ST Apparent fesistivity in ohm-reters, Vertical scale is erray effective peretration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 46 46 > < 46° 65 16 72 10 4 pp La 591 -300 188 ps2 444 169 1211 -1000 -1500 2000 Ze, METERS METLFS oO soc 1060 1500 2000 a a horizontal scale PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Z2file: 46 Plot CT 41120152136 Unalasha Seothernal Exploration Froject Unalaska Island, Alaska Fecublic Ceothermal Inc. e-SCAN POCISTIVITY SURVEY, MAKUSHIN VCLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 PCLE-PCLE AFFAY ;seudcsections, looking WEST Anperent Fesistivity in chm-meters, vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text, Fseudosecton + 47 47> < 47° 37 13 53 aA 43 3 6 20 16 Lf 66 609 1682 110C 574 140 n 52 Mo 17 -s00 410 66 6 58 157 224 67 80 62 356 -1000 n 65 79 4a 61 48 36 61 -1500 46 2 63 -2000 ze, NEIEFS PPSMt SOPHYSICS IUC., VANCIIVEPR, CAIADA Plot file: 47 Plot MT €41120152221 METEFS 0 seo 1000 1500 +} $j horizontal scale 200C 4 Unalacka Seotnernal Lx>dloration Froject Unalaska Island, Alaska Fepublic Ceothernal Inc, E-3CNI POSTSTIVITY SUFVEY, SAKUSHIN VOLCAND AFELA July, August, 1984 FCLE-POLE APPAY rseudcsections, looking tesT Anparent Fesistivity in ohm-neters, vertical scale is array effective peretration (22); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 4e 43 > < 48° 37 13 53 A 66 17 73 ll 322 (eel irl are rel retell 66 1455 vais 362 40 43 500 7 445 135 Rn 60 i 315 108 67 8348 153 -1000 n 65 54 gy 63 633A 66 -1500 60 33 -2000 Ze, ‘\STEPS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot itfile: 48 Plot CT 41120152304 METERS 9 500 1006 1500 2000 —_—_——-————— tH horizontal scale Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Peoublic Ceothermal Inc. E-3CAN RESISTIVITY SUFVLY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE ARPAY rseudosections, looking VesT Aoparent Iesistivity in ohm-meters, Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton # 49 49> < 49° 36 12 48 15 40 5 79 «61 tt 439 3978 1066 2776 107 aad 402 1158 569 og 7 ul 181 64 wy 166 7 105 -1000 sc = 78 55 7 57 48 -1500 56 41 256 -2000 Ze, ETERS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: 4c Plot PT 641120152343 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 $f horizontal scale Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Fepublic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUPVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO APEA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE AFPAY rseudosections, looking VEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 50 50> < 50° % 42 25 oan 39 46922 | ES RS BR ORE RES RER EEE Sees RRs Nee PSRs | \ 2121 393 7 29 481 654 275 444147 -500 88 80 159 156 % 90 109 155 140 138 3 168 87 105 149 -1000 isi 79 97 13 iu nm (182 -1500 n a 4 42 62 5g -2000 Ze, \STEPS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: so Plot DT 841120152432 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 —————_—_+ +I horizontal scale Unalaska Seotnermal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Fepublic Czothernal Inc. E-SCAY RESISTIVITY SURVEY, MAKJSHIN VOLCANO AREA Jaly, August, 1984 POLE-POLE ARFAY rseulosections, looking WEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-reters, Vertical scale is array effective nenetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 51 51 > < 51° 7 42 81 1 69 99 137° 144 «150 «14123. «120 «:126.«25s43 149154 arate alt 101 49 104 oL 217 185109 gg 70 84 «83 2677 85 wl 119 190 -500 oa 22 13 443 u2 128 7 id 1m «(13848152159 107 200 140152 63 193 164 170 185 -1000 83 160 66216 60 166 200 «173 +«:182 79 93 180 216 239 165 207 86 221 163 229 259 -1500 199 146 “ 25 22 26 229 245 2000 we, MSTEPS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 Pen horizontal scale PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VA'ICOUVER, CANADA Plot Z2file: 51 Plot PT 841120153249 Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, \laska Fenublic Geothermal Inc. C-3CA1 FESISTIVITY SURVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE AFPAY fseudosections, looking VEST Avparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters, Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 52 52 > «< 52° 80 91 7 36 49 84 22 9082 83 100 97 347506 124 12128129 140147155 Le dd 40 $382 56 Tt 87 a4 4 59 38 79 ee 27433, 82 agp 85 97 293 1001 2297 my l 161 123 104 i st th 1440 1s2 ise 147258445 -500 80 22 43, 52 167 157 125 188 6M 59 444,139 80 165 218 95, Fe 191 190 99 2 793 U6 341 207 aight 202 |e 23 25 397 -1000 88 in 2 182 169 206 235 7 225 Ho is 207 243 7 167 255 719 5. 67 206 185 245 12% «10 187 189 180 204 Uae 113, «47-220 203 ye 112135” agg 289 163-197 191 8 202 2 446 201 an [293 1s7 270 Mae || \23 -2000 Ze, “AETERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 b+ + —_+—__4 PREMLER GEOPPYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: 52 Plot DT 841120153520 horizontal scale Unalaska Geothermal Exnloration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Pexublic Ceothermal Inc. E-3SCA' RESISTIVITY SUFVFY, MAKJSIE VOLCANO APEA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE AFFAY fseudosections, locking VEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-reters, Vertical scale is array effective peretration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ $3 53> Wea mA 93 so 44 45 3 7 869% 124 121 «199-134 14114883 TT ee de ee ee LL 98 184 gy 85 102 209 320 1015 158 23 - 148 165 199 G1 -500 140 112 oe ps| 157 143 203 181 ce 18 266 150 146 230 20€ -1000 242 7 221 164 ae 1091 64 140 257 uv 156 195 7 -1500 27 164 We aos | hae 391 a3 213195 283 -2000 Ze, AETEFS NETEFS 0 500 ~—-10ce 1500 2000 Ht horizontal scale PPEMLER GEOPHYSICS ItC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: £3 Plot Pl €4€1120153649 (nalacka Seothermal Exploration Froject Unalaska Island, Alaska Fepuolic Ceotnermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUFVEY, NAKUSHIN VOLCANO AFCA July, August, 1984 PCLE-PCLE AFFAY feeudicsections, locking VEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-reters. Vertical scale is array effective peretration (Ze); see text. Fseudosectcn ¢ 54 54> < 54° 55 52 89 28 70 % 95 Ue 15) 199 134 141 «148 182 lace eeenaenseneel nee eet ae nie eter bel, 55 84 116 ° (320 . 104 1% 423 20 1015 123 140 199 61 l us 500 168 18 110 167 6 200 19L 247 2 -1000 27 282 a Bn 239 sz 195 248 188 173 104 ©=—-260 -1500 211 2100-22 i 184 226 240 7) * 189 693 241 1% 385 -2000 Ze, ‘ETERS METERS 0 500 10¢c0 1500 2000 et t—H4 horizontal scale PREMIER CEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: 54 Plot DT 41120153804 Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Penublic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCAN PESICTIVITY SUPVEY, NAKUCHIt VCLCANO AEA July, August, 1984 PCLE-PCLE AFPAY rseudcsections, lccking WEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-reterc, Vertical scale is crray effective peretraticn (Ze); see text. Pseudosectcn ¢ 55 55 > < 55° 9 93 29 24 m4 62 8 57 2 133 153 172 181 186 Hee ee ee ee de ene ee en eee Leg % 56 97 8583 24877 ae lio 73 261 100 130 133 1920 -500 Ang pend | pa 201 UE 179 146 143 126 295 149 296 17 ~1000 M0 139 229 2n 174 0 11 2 126 205 256 244 290 132 HA 192 wE 212 -15900 13s 289 223 254 os 214 168 204 217 -2000 Ze, METEPS METERS 0 500 1060 1500 2000 ee horizontal scale PFEMLER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: 55 Plot CT 641120153¢20 Unalaska Geothermal Exnloration Project Unalagcka Island, Alaska Fepuolic Ceotnernal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUFVEY, JAKJSRIN VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE AFPRAY rreviosections, looking ‘EST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters. Vertical scale is array effective neretration (ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 56 56 > < 56° 37 26 67 7 47 57 2 133 153 172. 181 = 186 Dan ce | 130 «13 os 8583 24877 129 261 133 1920 -500 124 161 149 120 162 a7 149 296 -1000 134 Me 174 no 282 ou) 174 in =a 192 305 -1500 164 1% 170 214 254 175 175 217 -2000 Ze, NETERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 $+ — horizontal scale PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CAWADA Plot 2file: 56 Plot CPT €4112€154031 Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Froject Unalaska Island, Alaska Fenublic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCA!] RESISTIVITY SUFVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 PCLE-POLE AFRAY rseuwlosections, looking tEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-reters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 57 57> 27 68 59 B 63 101 135 7 <57 163 166 18G = 182 i ee ee ee ee ee a § 102 18 sO217 148 146 -! 122.150 500 188 145 14 185 1000 7 165 220 177 -1500 2000 Ze, METERS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: £7 Plot CT £€41120154135 1070 184 192 143 210 237 189 210 4g Ss28 821 10457 13728 2205 1055 1526 1795 281 1018 354 27359 282 METEFS 0 500 1¢00 1500 2000 +} + + 4 horizontal scale Unalaska Geothermal Exoloration Froject Unalaska Island, Alaska Penublic Ceothermal Inc. E-3CAN RESISTIVITY SUPVEY, MAKUSKI' VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE AFFAY rsewosections, looking t£ST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters. Vertical scale is array effective peretration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 58 58 > 60 85 158 < 58 1320 «136 «142 «167 «174 «(180 «182 Da 293 7 2050 2498 4741 26552 13728 7 i etsecees ely 249 “eso re 924 1688 2703 10715 213 152 344164 186 366 405 648 1637 198 168 22995 11 18 223 331547 1000 213 230 188120 251 349 en 25218 -85 101 ba 316 1500 poe 2 OS 889 199 337 207 sz 1% 6 — 260 186 -2000 we, METERS VETEFS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 Ht PRENIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: 58 Plot DPT €41120154552 horizontal scale Unalaska Geothermal [Ixpleration Ircject Unalatka Island, \laska Texublic Ceotnernal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUIVEY, AAKJOUIEY VOLCANG fIEA July, \ugust, 1934 -PCLE AFFAY reetdosections, lccking VEST tert Fesistivity in chr-retenc. vortical scale is crrey .ffective ccretration (22); see text. Ps2ulesectcn + s¢ 59 > < 52° 36 50 105 107 159 146 «168 «(171 «1730 WS 2h Laenontnnesll nesters nenemesee aon lesen ieee apt 95 21799 7334 9207 152 eat 3319 73: 8 ~00 A 147 i. 2523 3524 1249 1496 240 193 ies 608 1486 538 8 20 ie 498 576 -1000 H 447 220 222 276 484 255 32 -1500 353 nae 269 24 334 -2000 Ye, SEVERS METCPS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 e—S_——— HF horizontal scale PRENLER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVEP, CA.JADA Plot Zfile: 59 Plot DT €41120154648 Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Froject Unalaska Island, Alaska Penublic Geothermal Inc. E-SCA’l RESISTIVITY SUFVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1934 POLE-POLE AFRAY fseulosections, looking t&ST Avparent fesistivity in ohm-meters, Vertical scale is array effective peretration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton # 60 60 > < 60° 51 106 103 102 131 159 146 «168 170 #178 #184 231 1% 156 Dac ll a ae ened, 5405 108186435 3672 2014 13476 16784 185 Wn 1999 588 1149 4400 jo35 1082 2117 1525 i 110 240 ih ie 818 114 49, on 3% 408 14s i U3 536 gee 266 -1000 an 130 264 173 252 520, 0 257 239 167 i 312,125 308 -1590 199 245 ee 237 -2000 Ze, METERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2006 ——_—+-—_—_—_—_+--————_—+————— horizontal scale PREMIER GEOPEYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: €0 Plot DT 641120154803 Unalaska Geothermal Exolcration Project Unalaska Island, \laska Tepublic Geothermal Inc. T-3CAN PESISTIVITY SUFVFEY, “MAKUCLIN VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE AFRAY rseudjosections, locking ‘LST Apparent fesistivity in ohm-retere. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton § 61 61> <6l 104° «122: «130 «138 «6139 «145 «(165 177, «157, 191 «6195 1% 200 Dd 4% M3 233 151 499 17901 27889 9908 3790 1391 moll ae ie 27% 363 628 5289 939 249 215 537 sie 398 i 828 1536 306 305 207 3a Soalll-a68 -1000 185 101 295 27 a 2% 69 17% 473 262 64 «= 204-294 -1500 161 -2000 fe, METERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 et horizontal scale PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: 61 Plot PT 841120154911 Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Froject Unalaska Island, Alaska Republic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUFVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCAKO AFLA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE APRAY feeulosections, leoking VEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-reters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢# Gz 62 > < 62 152 160 «164 8169 175 178 187 192 202 201 197 Daehn eel el el el ned aoenmneel, 4613 8267 5729 29632 445 325 2 gay 379 2789 2311 31 -500 442 0 97 2409 30 43, 201 469 7227 9171280 749 344149494 165 650 1000 By 340 64 «184129 149 406 133 96 «150-120 -1500 137 -2 a, METERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 ————— tt horizontal scale PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot “file: 62 Plot DT 841120155005 Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Republic Geothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUFVCY, “MAKUSHIMN VOLCAND AFEA July, August, 1984 PCLE-POLE AFRAY rseuwosections, lcoking ‘LST Aoparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters, Vertical scale is array effective penetration (ze); Pseudosecton ¢ €3 PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: 63 Plot DT 41120155047 see text. < 63 230 206 204 205 209 210 208 a 1061 907 642 514 267 3 540 -500 6 546 2% 237 4 419 204 -1000 167 -1500 be 159 ~2000 uu7 2e, METERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 w+} +- ——_+—— horizontal scale Unalaska Geotnermal Cxploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Republic Geothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUFVCY, MAKJSHIN VOLCAND AFEA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE ARPAY rseuwosections, looking VEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters, Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton # 64 64> < 64 1% 188 222 221 212228 229 8223 235 «4237: «219 «240 «242 Danese aoe eet ape nl een, “07 m1 449 318 619 480 “— 38 215 289 394 sd 268 229 rT -1000 rea an 182 219 7 159 in 212 1500 167 2000 Ze, METERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 4 +4 horizontal scale PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: 64 Plot DT 6841120155150 (nalaska GSeotaermal Exoloration Project Unalaska Island, \laska Tenublic Ceothermal Inc. E-3CA' RESISTIVITY SUFVCY, MAKJSHIN VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE AIFAY reeudiosections, looking ‘EST Aonarent Fesistivity in ohm-meters. vertical scale is crray effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton # GE PEEVIEF GEOPBYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: 6s Plot DT €41)206155412 65> 194 244 233° 214) (232 217° «218 = 225) 226 <65 215 216 Lt i 1054 737 463 es) 605 549 255 557 520 227 587 442 -1000 276 259 420 183 -1500 1% 222 -2000 Ze , METERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 St horizontal scale Unalaska Geothermal Explcration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Fepublic Ceotnermal Inc. E-3CAN RESISTIVITY SUIVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 PCLE-POLE AFFAY freeudosections, lcoking VEST Apperent Fesistivity in ohm-reters. Vertical scale is erray effective peretration (Ze); see Pseudosecton ¢ 6€ PFEI'LCR CEOPHYSICE INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: 66 Plot fl 41120155454 text. 66 > < 66 193 245 227) 239 224 «2% 238 220 241 Ua el enroll. 562 538 352 306 an 680 246 510 215 521 -1000 an 251 186 -1500 2000 Ze , ‘IETEPE METEPS 0 500 1000 1500 20¢¢ ot horizontal scale (nalaska Geotnermal Exploration Froject Unalaska Island, Alaska Feoublic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUFVEY, MAYUSHIN VOLCANO AFEA July, \ugust, 1994 PCLE-PCLE AFPAY rseudcsectiors, locking ‘EST Apperent Fesistivity in chm-reters, Vertical scale is erray effective peretration (Ze); Pseudosectcn ¢ €7 PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Z2file: €7 Plot DT €41120155541 see text. 67> < 67° 263-246 247 243° «234 224 «23% «238-220-241 Soe tis 538 1? 562 225 178 306 a 24 «384 ih 247 510 in 521 219 pve 34 2 297 26 218 287 -1500 -2000 Ze, METERS MCTERS 0 500 1000 = 1500 =~. 2000 a ae horizontal scale Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Froject Unalaska Island, Alaska Pepublic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCAIL RESISTIVITY SUFVEY, itAKUSHIT VOLCANC ATEA July, \ugust, 1994 PCLE-POLE AFFAY freudosections, looking FEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-reters. Vertical scale is array effective peretration (ze); Pseudosecton ¢# 8 PREMIEF GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: €8 Plot CT &41126155622 see text. 68 > < 68° 261 268 251 262 256 24925 255 248 Ld 194 298 426 205 285 -spo 202 418 578 202 444 yg 433 264 372 -1000 332 287 222 2n -1500 -2000 Ze, METERS METERS 0 soc 100 1500 2660 ht horizontal scale (nalaska Geotnermal Exploration Froject Unalaska Island, Alaska Fenublic Ceothermal Inc. E-3CAN RESISTIVITY SUFVEY, "IAKUSEIN VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 PCLE-POLE AFFAY prevdosections, looking WEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-reters, Vertical scale is array effective penetraticn (Ze); see Pseudosecton ¢ ce PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVEF, CANADA Plot Z2file: €¢ Plot PT 641126155700 text. 69 > < 69 274 «271 «6270 »=— 269267 252 253 264 265 Le ey 190 18) 409 -500 268 503 279 -1000 -1500 -2000 Ze, METERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 a ae horizontal scale Unalacka Geothermal Exploration Froject Unalaske Island, Alaska Fenublic Ceotnermal Inc. bE-SCAY RESISTIVITY SUFVFY, NAKUSHIY VCLCANO AREA July, August, 1984 PCLP-POLE AFFAY yseudosections, locking tEST Aorarent Fesistivity in ohm-meters, vertical scale is array effective reretration (Ze); see text. Pseudosector ¢ 70 70 > < 70° 254 257 258 259 266 273 Lt -500 -1000 -1500 ~ 2000 Ze, NSTCRS METERS 0 500 1¢00 1500 2000 $4 ——_ + _—_4 horizontal scale PrErLE? CEOPHYCICS IMC., VANCOUVIFR, CANADA Plot ifile: 70 Plot CT €4112C155731 Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Republic Geothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SURVEY, MAKUJSHIN VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1934 POLE-POLE ARRAY pseuwdjosections, looking NORTHWEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 1 l> <1 10 18 125 143 147 183 186 ee ee a 94 169 500 144 47 -1000 578 -1500 2000 Ze , METERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 ++ +4 horizontal scale PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: 1 Plot DT 841120114733 Unalaska Geothermal Fxploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Repuolic Geotnermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SURVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE ARRAY pseudosections, looking NORTHWEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 2 2> 120 126 <2° 129 140 148 «181s 182 Pa 242 1338 = 708 500 «182 -1000 323 1% 206 -1500 U2 ag 23 2000 Ze , METERS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: 2 Plot CT 41120114825 243 293 701 211 (13479 137 M2 239 2586 351 187 323 203 yy, 243 308 225 230 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 bn fer horizontal scale Unalaska Seotnermal Ex>loration Project Jaalaska Reouolic Island, \laska Gzothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SJRVEY, 4AKJSHIN VOLCAN) AREA July, \ugust, 1984 POLE-POLE APRAY vseudosections, Aoparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters. looking NORTHWEST Vertical scale is array effective venetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 3 3> <3 118 128 134 141 172 1800 21L_ 1% 200 16 6 lu 123 (al ete ee ef hee eee eel reeled 1932 83 320 5940 a 79 144 gssa 5908 6305 124 -50 «677 ua) 67 1739 yg 265 7889 44 9 159 192 15 sg (179 707410 208 -1000 160g 2 in 306 (701 216 129 gg 224 asa 710 226 -1500 218 316-232 in 75 975 193 gg 302 25 on -2000 we, “ETERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 4 + ++ horizontal scale PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot z2file: 3 Plot DT 841120114937 Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Renublic Geothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SURVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE ARRAY pseudosections, looking NORTHWEST Aoparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters, Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton # 4 4> 65 330073 61 115 117 121 199 166 174 <4 185 231 198 197 td 446 iio 110 500 203 163 120 142 199 148 1000 1% 130 175 207 1500 1% 210 175 -2000 Ze, METERS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: 4 Plot DT 641120115054 102 9094 31472 9684 2433 264 308 a2 4276 1596 24) 46792839) 28 336 342 245 380 x2 28 215 MG 240 415 20 244 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 — horizontal scale Unalaska Seotnernal Exploration Project Jnalaska Island, Alaska Re 2ublic Geothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISPIVITY SURVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA July, \ugust, 1934 POLE-POLE ARRAY psewiosections, looking NORTHWEST Aoparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton # 5 5> “5 14, re 19° (23 113.124 153 163-167 «-173:«184 195202 Da hd tt 303 eo 1077 140 360 9669 376 1124 862 122 7124 173 153 1076 1422 -500 268 123 25 2449 378 175 41 103 226 237 223 515 B2 “7 -1000 WL aig sa = 560 155 = 1 195 215 320 321 267 ~1500 198 290 248 247 = 293 -2000 Ze, METERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 bee tH horizontal scale PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: 5 Plot DT 841120115212 Unalaska Seotnermal Exoloration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska R2oublic Geothermal Inc. E-3CAN RESISTIVITY SJRVEY, WAKJSHIN VOLCAND AREA July, S4ugust, 1984 POLE-POLE ARRAY nseujosections, looking NORTHWEST Aoparent Resistivity in ohm-meters, Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseujosecton # 6 6> <6" 43017 5 2 150 1300-2: 1SL_s 153.127 142 «1M 17919202 208 240216 Vg 2733 93 3534 1077 323 2748 509 132 om 207 482 2026 8048 9344 7 442 699 286 «14 38 372 22 1733 2216 419 -500 244 1159 us 201 45 163 24 3a. (137 969 dos 12. 2 29 550 282 215 425 7 202-223 35 20 -1000 123 282 197 315 301 i 197 330 = a 225 (372 278 206 299 993 x20 121 208 28 295 294-297 -1500 224 293 263 200 “ 380 326273 227 248 265, = 83 -2000 ze, “METERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 nt horizontal scale PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: 6 Plot DT 841120115406 Unalaska Seothernal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Republic Geothermal Inc. E-3CAN RESISTIVITY SJRVEY, NAKJSHIN VOLCANO AFEA Jul y, August, 1984 POLE-POLE APFAY pseuwosections, looking NORTHWEST Anparent Pesistivity in ohm-meters, Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton # 7 7> <n 66 40 «(46a 9 119 133 135 132 136 168 170 157 192 209 219 226 © 241 Le ee ee eee ee ey 99 2849 45 324 52 13 200 4. 10818 19762 29939 gies no 673 693 139 899 500 282 a a6 || 328 1298 794 1820 55g sae 689 7 1M jg 18 in 197 533 441 44590 196 204 197 310 887 oe 27 2M -1000 23 228 6 322 aso 729 251 275) 09/1 and | tae 197 aia 330 301 8627 21 264 22 6 ag “ l 1500 259 ul 274 » 248 288 390 110 hid 294 -2000 we, METERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 erect horizontal scale PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: 7 Plot DT 841120115718 Unalaska Geothermal Exoloration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Republic Geothernal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SJRVEY, MAKJSHIN VOLCANO AREA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE ARRAY pseudosections, looking NORTHWEST Apparent Resistivity in ohm-meters, Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton # 8 8> < 8° 54 15 39 137 34 75 95 119 133 135 132 146 177 187 205 235 225 220 Dae el la al ae al el a a rl 40 6 529 1617. 199 182 49 ayy 324 592-1743 a 6903 4400 187-128 900 281 186 137 181-28 42 898 or 3” 17% 151 225 ist 47 an 527 606 202 192 178 466 202 187 212 199 “1000 "259 24219204 297 45947 456 66 8 21s 282 244-243 269 296 189 455 102 22 376 20 30 -1500 280 353 499 -2000 Ze, METERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 Wt tt HH horizontal scale PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: 8 Plot DT 641120115908 Unalaska Geothermal Exnloration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Republic Geothernal Inc. E-SCAH RESISTIVITY SUPVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE APRAY prsewosections, looking NOFTHKEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton # 9 9> <9 249 13° 12 21 69 99 100 97 35 76 2 190 158 = «159165 169 207 206 228 «232 «0239224 250 255 265 tod 1 po L L 1 pop fo 126 97 104 162 497 174 a5 798 a4 sie 2 132 1012 101 io 281 en 217 500 88 1% a7 206 2653827993 5505. 39 265 1 88 ce 246 © 262 ae 305 83 23 271 2861 2% ~~ oona 6 228 292 © 261 = 99 334 289 86 275 294 122 226-339 282 319 a 104 308 9) 364 279 296 - 154 = 239 333 3 326-307 38 M7 a4, 193 403 374 375 -2000 Ye, METERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 a PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: 9 Plot CT 841120120209 horizontal scale Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Reoublic Geothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SURVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE AFPAY pseudosections, looking NOFTHWEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters, Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton #¢ 10 10> <16 ‘ 249 Bb 2 21 69 99 100 97 35% 190 «158159 «165 169 207 206 228 2% 239 «224 250 255 265 be 97 28 126 sox 104 462 497 ip tous 798 on 4 S16 281 697 194 - 8 19% 217 500 8 177-206 265 527,993, B85 505 39) 265 m1 oe 70 244 262 2 305 3 = 27. 286184 28 m4 - 228 100 99 illite 334 89 86 275 294 226 282 122 330 319 350 104 308 49, 364 279 296 - 154 1500 239 353 326 307 333 M7 oa 193 403 374 375 2000 Ze, “ETERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 -—_—+—_—___+—_ + horizontal scale PREMIER CEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVEF, CATAD\ Plot ifile: 10 Plot CT 641126120510 Unalacka Seothernal [xnloration Froject Jaalaska Island, \laska Pe.ublic Ceothermal Inc. E-3SCAN RESISTIVITY SURVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE AFPAY fseudosections, looking OFTHWEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-reters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton # ll 37 (36 19s BL 90 44 70 57 101 102 1¢7 131 «(139 164 230 <li 252 243 256 25259 266 182 307 84 a“ 153 102 283 ba 89 144 79 -500 214 254 170 253 76 Bg 43 258 51 in 320 232 168 935 n3 201 a] 333 -1000 35 223 3 103 ao as 3 sis a 102 117 218 259 2795 an 394 371 480 -1500 1% 325 328 oo 80 296 299 365 23 444 -2000 Ze , METERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 rn nfl horizontal scale PREIMER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANOOUVER, CAVADA Plot 2file: ll Plot DT 841120120756 Unalaska Geothermal ftxnoloration Froject Unalaska Islani, Alaska Fenublic Geothermal Inc, E-SCAY RESISTIVITY CJRVEY, “IAKJSHIN VOLCAGD AFA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE ARPAY rseudosections, looking WFIl'vnST Avparent Fesistivity in onm-reters, Vertical scale is array effective neretration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 12 12> < 12° 31 138 73 42 49 84 98 28 62 47 63-105 «103130 222 244 245 247 231 269 257 Lan a en rer el 67 67 49 114 ta 215 58 215 119 214 4 307 bol LF 69 223 122 " ia 7 161 6 417 84 wo | 140 - 125 461191 199 180 299 512 182 177,210 61 we 202 ~1000 . 201 245° 212 459 496 132 165 281 64 250 sid 133 156 294 568 296 -1500 144 ae 326 346 hd it 393 435 352 252 487 48 -2000 Ye, ETERS METERS 0 500 1000 ~=1500 ~—.2090 PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CAWADA Plot 2file: 12 Plot CPT 41203215947 Sd horizontal scale Unalaska Geothermal Exvloration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Reoublic Geotheraal Inc. “SCAN RESISTIVITY SJRVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA July, August, 1934 POLE-POLE ARRAY pseudosections, Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters, looking NORTHWEST Vertical scale is array effective venetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton # 13 105 103 16176 189 < 13° 246 260 268 271 13> 73 42 49 84 98 89 m 7 47 63 130 194 193 be 2266 1964 1929 325 19 217 115 “9 67 lll 58 215 % ML 214 n 223 -00 5, 130 123 150 176175 148 25 190 189° 9380 129 201 200 233 1000 oy 159 198 4g, 161 165 259 241 283 162 479 298 -1500 161 ae 260 313 393 435 252 467 -2000 Ze, METERS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: 13 Plot DT 841120121312 197 254 21 281 346 633 352 644 «143 600 1249 1547 387-26 106 aig 1506 447 sn 1404 1523 408 365 1600 510 431 515 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 $s horizontal scale Unalaska Geotnermal Exnloration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Reoublic Geothermal Inc. E-3CAN RESISTIVITY SURVEY, MAKJSHIN VOLCAND AREA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE AFRAY peeudosections, locking NOFTHWEST Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton # 14 14 > <4’ 7 42 55 52 24 67 59 38 50 106 104 ncaa 55 66 45 04 7 B aa 99 217 eg 101 105 121 128 -500 228 «264 139 M5 i532 a8 isa 27H 148 148 227 1000 15% 184 1920 183 197 195 268 202 294 278 211189 -1500 89 250 ya 2000 Ze, “ETERS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: 14 Plot DT €4112€121409 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 — horizontal scale Unalaska Seotnernal Exoloration Project Jnalaska Island, \laska Reoublic Geothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SJRVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCAND AREA July, August, 1934 POLE-POLE ARRAY pseudosections, looking NORTHWEST A>oparent Resistivity in ohm-meters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Z2); see text. Pseujosecton # 15 < 15° 15 > 29 26 68 60 85 Sl 7 93 Dn ad 58 86 35 293 196 540 86 126 us 162 an 193 193 -1000 . 201 250 220 -1500 ~2000 te, METERS METERS 0 500 1900 1590 2000 -——$—$—$$ + +4 horizontal scale PREMIER GEIPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: 15 Plot DT 841120121448 Unalaska Geothermal Exolocation Project ‘Unalaska Island, Alaska Penublic Geothernal Inc. 1 VOLCANO AREA E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUPVEY, ‘1AKJSEI July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE AFRAY fseudosections, looking NORIHIEST Apparent Resistivity in ohm-meters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 16 16 > < 16 9 87 27 86 114 -190 -2000 Ze, METERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 -—$—$—$—+$ $+ ___ +4 horizontal scale PRENIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVEF, CANADA Plot Zfile: 16 Plot DT 841120140239 Unalaska Geotnermal Exploraticn Froject Unalaska Island, \laska Feaublic Ceotnersal Inc. C-3SCAs FESUCTIVIGY CJIVEL, SAKJSETI VCLCWD ATE? July, sugust, 1984 I-POLE AFF Y + eters cechions, leoking NORTH Ar-parent Tesistivity in olm-mreters, vertical scale is array effective veretration (22); see text. eseulosectcon ¢ 20 PPEMIER GEOPRYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plct Zfile: 20 Plot DT 841120144739 20 > < 20° 242 216 | 342 -100C -1500 ~-2000 Ze, METERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 eh HH horizontal scale Unalacka Geothermal Exploration Froject Unalaska Island, \laska Pepudlic Geothernal Inc. E-SCAN RESICTIVITY SUIVEY, ‘IAKUSHIN VOLCAND AFSA July, \uyust, 1934 PCLE-POLE AFFAY rseulosections, lcoking NOFTH Apparent fesistivity in oium-meters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton * 21 PREMIER CEOPHYSICS INC., VAICOUVER, CANADA Plot Z2file: z1 Plot CT 41120144809 21> <2. 240 215) 241 Vaeeeenclemeeeed, 450 550 602 -500 -1000 -1500 -2000 Ze, M2TERS MSTERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 a horizontal scale Unalaska Geothermal Exvloration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska RFenublic Geothermal Inc. E-3CAN RESISTIVITY SURVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 PCLE-POLE ARPAY rseuwdosections, looking NOFTH Apparent fesistivity in ohm-meters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 22 22> < 22 156 200 «197 208 219 226 «220 248 = 265-273 tt 9942 254 70 578 482 526 443 ~500 550 7 eg 4 359 7 427 531 -1000 371489 =««510 381 413 488 400 -1500 491 -2000 Ze, “ETERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 tt horizontal scale PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: 22 Plot PT 841120144857 Unalaska Seothermal [xploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Fenublic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCAN PLSISTIVITY SUPVEY, NAKUSHIN VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 PCLE-POLE AFFAY rseudosections, looking KORTH Apvarent fesistivity in ohm-meters, Vertical scale is array effective peretration (ze); Pseudosecton + 23 PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: 23 Plot DT €41120144945 see text. 23> < 23° 19% 198 201 210 237 225 «238 255 264 266 (dt 4371 759 908 794 516 432 au 448 698 soo) 23 824 421 a 782 421 ee R3 821 427 537 -1000 768 435 452° 524 31 ae 47% 475 463 -1500 -2000 Ze, METERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 fet horizontal scale Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, \laska Fepublic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCAY RESISTIVITY SUFVEY, NAKJSHIN VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 PCLE-POLE AFFAY rseudosections, Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters, looking NOrTH Vertical scale is array effective penetration (ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢# 24 24 > 154 183 155 186 1@20 211 231 «4195 202 m9 235 218 2% 250 < 24 25259 Dann a 33087 1se41 442 2455 3249 4804 1155 1069 458 1009 7101 354 m3 3099 496 -500 203 894 741 2159 1062-1578 428 a 375 199M 723 4459 459 714567 547 450 -1000 107 07 (565 486 m3 672 87 334 305 6ce 259 382 452 -1500 594365 aia 664 97 664 «450 742 2000 Ze, METERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CAtADA Plot 2file: 24 Plot DT 841120145114 ——_+—_—__+-—_———_+————_1 horizontal scale Unalaska Geotnermal Exploration Froject Unalaska Island, Alaska Fepuolic Ceotnermal Inc. E-3CAN RESISTIVITY SUFVEY, MAKJSHIN VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 PCLE-POLE AFPAY rseuwosections, looking NOPTH Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-reters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (ze); see text. Pseudosecton # 2s 25> < 25° 149 147 148 181 180 185184 191 192 205 223° 217 «224249 252 258 Ct 1085 10250 4 2207 an 7719 33970 546, os sis 74 558 sha 2263 4876 614, -500 315 530 473 1492 6376 679 369 514 Ge 617 205 107 268 482 2546 a9, 188 494495 - 582 1000 139 209397 an 296 259-38 20 5, 577 657 hos 5 274 979 4l2 404 703 -1500 360 409 251 293 512 B41 427 446 291 651 -2000 383 Ze, ‘ETERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 eH horizontal scale PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: 25 Plot DT 841120145245 Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Republic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCAY RESISTIVITY SURVEY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE ARPAY reeudosections, looking NOPTH Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-reters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton # 26 2% > . < 26 143.140 141 =«:172,s«174-—s«173179 157 187.204 229 239 25% = 256-267-257 acai aa BIg pg 223 6566 1019 10069 19853 28287 13491 3126 222 3558 84% 7609. = 668 1617 128 = 1300 1787 ggg m3. 2212 “% a6 aan 636 10% 666 371 asg 613 158 588 429 rans 1a 6g 48139 439 724 (419 168 22 605 «17 «(157 sis 816 362 7 243 509 1500 237 yg 18 812 203 4 402 2000 ze, METERS 395 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 $$ 4+_—_$§__+—_ horizontal scale PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: 26 Plot DT 841120145414 Unalaska Geothermal Exnloration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Republic Ceothermal Inc, E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUFVEY, MAKJSPIN VOLCANO AREA July, August, 1984 POLI -POLE AFRAY freuwiosections, looking NORTH Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters. Vertical scale is erray effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 27 27> < 27° 125 129 «134 166 167 171170 177 178 206 228 232 227 243 262 269 254 heristisachineaienrsieeiindinttasstliepisnnsh badllerinieerceianinatacatailiarlhaniatlicacsatlenentalanesnnssatannenilineenmcl: 19280 92 203 6716 3990 4253 2% 215 6531 “soo St n 195 935 1355 389 449 380 187 80S 441 ne wl 402 667 3230 345120 43396 212 704 539 187 02 “one 361 5 ft 357271 e29 227-334 649 545 187 2230 427 ¥6 1007 27% 408 187 243 778 -1500 4% 200 339 268 8c 227 -2000 ze, ‘ETEPS METERS 0 5c0 1000 1500 2000 ——_——— horizontal scale PREPIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVEP, CANADA Plot Zfile: 27 Plot D1 €41126145833 Unalaska Geotnermal [xploration Froject Cnalaska Islard, Alaska Fepublic Ceothermal Inc. C-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUPVCY, MAKJSHIN VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 PCLE-PCLE AFFAY reeujosections, locking NCFTH Avperent Tesistivity in chr-reters. Vertical scale is erray effective peretration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 26 28 > < 28 126 128 = 199 163 142 168 175207 212214245 «247, 25k 270 Ss se ee es ee ee ce ee es Sen Se | 5 6 12793 10890 2830 2403 852 soo 140 431 706 «198 1750 208 320 784 217-333 167315 459 -1000 264 410 11 205 330 241 486 3%8 359 389 -1500 563 279 402 299 T1449 509 -2000 Ze , METERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 ee . horizontal scale PrEMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: 26 Plot PT 41120145945 Unalaska Geotnermal Exploration Froject Unalaska Fepublic Island, \laska Ceothernal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUFVEY, NAKUCHLl VOLCANO APLA July, August, 1964 PCLE-POLE AFFAY rseviosections, looking NCITR Avparent Fesistivity in chr-reters. Vertical scale is array effective peretration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 2¢ 29> 120 «8 121 153. 127 136 165 169 < 29 222 244 246 269 2638 271 ln ed 76 = 86 323 1878 2175 344 198 217 139 29 282 686 a1 207 26 -300 179 «177 430 03 . 202 169 99 304 227 220 «185 —" 239 225 -1000 239 = 333 448 254 263 uo 366 402 285 153 201 -1500 35 azo 163 232 245 -2000 Ze, “AELERS METERS 0 500 1000 1506 2000 PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVEP, CANADA Plot 2file: 2 Plot CT 41120150108 tt norizontal scale tnalaska Geothermal Fxoloration Freject Unalaska Island, Alaska Fepublic Ceotnermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUFVEY, MAKJSHIN VCLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 PCLE-POLE AFPAY rseudosections, locking NOFTH Apparent fesistivity in ohm-reters. Vertical scale is array effective reretration (ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 30 > < 30 123, 7 124 151 135 159145164230 188 194 193 263 bt 8s 484 ing 266 2008 121 123 -500 158 217 904 181 228 196 372 44 5124338 519 7 220 578 — 73 169 532 337 219 447 463 288 -1500 2464 193 279 2000 Ze, METERS METERS 0 500 1000 = 1506 = 2000 +i horizontal scale PPOMIER CEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: 20 Plot D1 &4112C€150213 (nalaska Geothermal Exploration Eroject Unalaska Island, \laska Fenublic Ceothernal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUFVLY, MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 FOLE-POLE AFRAY rseudosecticns, looking NOFTH Apparent Fesistivity in chm-reters. vertical scale is erray effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢£ 31 31> < 31° 4% «B32 11S 114113. 9% «19 133 158 139 160 161 176 1€¢ Clelland el lL 303 76 99 494 232 140 2266 242 «336 : 2 222 ~6 139 278 20° 541 600 aad 152 154 159 336 2 fie 2 442 167 165 253 249 151 222 172 ~1000 166 225 176 365 177 33 300 1. 168 237 2 23 -1506 25h 299 347 303 225 282 fae “416 324 7264 261 375 -2000 we, ACTEPS 0 50¢ METLCRS 1000 1500 20006 —— HH horizontal scale PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVEF, CANADA Plot Zfile: 21 Plot C1 641120150335 (nalaska Geothermal [Explcration Froject Unalaska Island, \laska Fenublic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCAN FESISTIVITY SUFVEY, NAKUSHIN VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 FCLE-PCLE AFPAY preeudosections, lcoking LOFT Apparert Fesistivity in ohm-reters. vertical scale is erray effective renetration (Je); see text. Fsewlosectcn ¢ 32 32 > < 32° 10 2u lk 61 23° «150 95 2 1°60 131 138 152 162 ES SS eS ee es a a Se See | 1 4 1076 1786 189 275 253 119 61 134 140 Meng 232 41s 97 772 598 loo 114 126 165 5 haall 202 198 on 204°" u 242 “ 1000 135 2% 2% 26¢ 219 268 322 262 oo 2 251 228 il 227 219 ag 25 307 348 -2000 2e, IETEPS reTLErs 0 5c0 1000 1500 2000 +++ horizontal scale InEBP GeECPRYCICE THC., FO a, HAo8 lee ufile: 22 Plot ft 41120150441 tnalaska 3eotaermal Fxolccaticn Froject Uaalaska Islani, \laska Frpublic Ceothermal Inc. E-3C\1 PESTETIVITY SIPVEY, ARUSHT! VOLCANO APEA July, Augast, 1934 PCLE-POLF AFFAY reewlosections, looking NOTH Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters. Vertical scale is array effective peretration (ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 33 33> <33% 72 6 73 79 «92 144 34 75 76 102 108-130 ee es ee ee) alt 9 76 624 53) 182 294 154 770 625 224 97 193 1% 500 192 162 183 159 187 212 146 473 178 223 251 204 290 -1000 17 198 202 26C a5 sg 193 26 275-292 4, 0 222 299 264 997 -1500 285 206 314 290 276 294 332 -2000 Ze, MASTERS PPENITER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCJUVEF, CANADA Plot ifile: 33 Plot fT 841120150542 METERS 0 5006 100¢ 1500 2000 e+ tt horizontal scale Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Penublic Geothernal Inc. E-SCAN RCSISTIVITY SUFVEY, \AKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE AFRAY rseuosections, looking NORTH Aoparent Tfesistivity in ohm-meters, Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 34 34> <34° 16 33 17,5 4 137 35 101 109 103 122 Lal lhe, 1065 1618 2732803 1209 : 1183 1375 64) ‘500 a 247 i 509 448 446 195 23 169 2 226 234 192 -1000 baste 198 re 246 200 312 268 292 181 aa 275 -1500 29 0: 266 297 302 292 27 313 315 -2000 Ze, METERS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zf£ile: 34 Plot DT 411201506 36 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 + ———_+——_+—H4 horizontal scale Unalaska Geothermal [xoloration Froject Unalaska Island, \laska Fenublic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCAN PESISTIVITY SUFVEY, NAKUSHIN VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 PCLE-PCLE ARRAY rsewlosections, looking NOFTH Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters, Vertical scale is array effective penetraticn (ze); see text. Pseudosecton # 35 35 > 66 65 43 40 39 97° 45 <195 106 57 63 105 104 248 602 93 70 43 24 42 140 -soo 1 178 1g9 202 i; 27 12 1 22° 22 199 202 6 2 190 235 1000 323 pr 169 202 269 264 264 218 -1500 175 247 207 249 3a -2000 Ze, “ETERS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: 35 Plot DT 41120150740 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 $$ + —__ horizontal scale Unalaska Seotnermnal Exploration Project Jaalaska Islani, Alaska Reoudlic Gzothernal Inc, E-3CAN RESISTIVITY SJRVEY, MAKJSHIN VOLCANO AREA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE ARRAY vsewlosections, looking NORTH ADparent Resistivity in ohm meters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (22); see text. Pseudosecton # 36 36 > < 36° Is (14 100 45 8 47 6450 SL — gd dt 468 al 140 19 231 154 155 151 130 173 -500 261 25 165 2 144 156 126 168 37 157 -1000 203 m1 2 (15 282 -1500 zag 28 331 +314 -2000 Ze , METERS PREMIER GEIPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: 36 Plot DT 841120151247 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 be ef np eet horizontal scale Unalaska Seotnhernal Exoloration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Revxublic Geotnermal Inc. E-3CAN RESISTIVITY SJRVEY, M\KISHIU VOLCAND AREA July, August, 1934 POLE-POLE ARRAY pseudosections, looking NORTH Aoparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters, Vertical scale is array effective venetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton # 37 37> < 37° 54 99 83 44 62 33° «85 SL Lg 149 119 120 142 ae 165 173 ea 223 1% 6 ‘1000 4 = 208 228 199 190 101 195 -1500 86 157 -2000 Ze, METERS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANAJA Plot Zfile: 37 Plot DT 841120151325 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 HE horizontal scale Unalaska Seotnernal Exoloration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Renublic Geothernal Inc. E-SCAN RESISIIVITY SJRVEY, ‘!AKJSHIN VOLCAND AREA July, \ugust, 1984 POLE-POLE ARRAY pseujosections, looking NORTH Apvarent Resistivity in ohm-meters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text, Pseudosecton # 38 33> ¢ 38" 53 48 21 69 82 30 28 71 59 60 86 (ere ener reefs ellen eneeenelreeefleee fain, 86 164 96 161 97 yyy 107 12g 155 sa 14 69 iss 129 14 as 154 -500 82 in 154 158399 145 +” 180 aia 106 182 144 Geka 207 -1000 162 149 190 yg, 9% 5578 103 gq 185 i" 459 139 235 -1500 135 5528 6 Mu. -2000 , “ETERS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., JANCIUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: 38 Plot DT 841120151420 METERS 9 500 1000 1500 2000 +H horizontal scale Unalaska Seotneraal Exnloration Project Unalaska Island, \laska Renuplic Geothernal Inc, E-SCAY RESISI©IVITY SJRVEY, ANKISHIN VOLCAND AREA July, \ugust, 1984 POLE-POLE ARRAY psewlosections, looking NOPTH Ayparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters,. Vertical scale is array effective venetration (22); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 39 39> <39 53 48 2 1 9 274 59 60 86 La | 96 46, WL J, 99 26 79 164 109 15 791585 io 162 177 “iia 153183 50 y93 158 - 12 tu9 42 265 182 $6 4g 4014 175 252 -1000 162 ee 196 5578 103 135 464137 12 235 459 -1500 135 5528 64 M1 -2000 ®, METERS PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: 39 Plot DT 6841120151514 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 ee horizontal scale Unalaska Seotnermal Exploration Project Unalaska Islani, Alaska Republic G2othermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SJRVEY, ‘\KJSHIN VOLCANO AREA July, \ugust, 1934 POLE-POLE ARRAY pseulosections, looking NORTH Aoparent Pesistivity in ohm-neters. Vertical scale is array effective oenetration (Ze); see text, Pseudosecton ¢ 40 40 > < 40 13122581 98 89 24 67 68 Pe 165 6 rT 99 163 1og 6 22 136 (98 - 127 4 50000 139 ue © 139 “uo 121 158 16) -1000 1m 168)7 vay 14 135 161 18 -1500 178 -2000 Ze, METERS PRENIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CAAA Plot Zfile: 40 Plot DT 841120151556 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000. $$ 4 ———_—__ horizontal scale Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Reoublic C2zothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SJRVEY, MAKUSIIIN VOLCANO AREA July, August, 1984 POLE-90LE ARRAY psevdosections, looking NOFTH Aoparent Fesistivity in ohm-meters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton # 41 41> < 41’ 58 13 19 22 52 26 27 Ld 80 69 Lm 84 128 114 og -500 Ls 7 63 133148 161 -1000 122 133 149 137 -1500 44 -2000 Ze , METERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 tt horizontal scale PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: 41 Plot DT 841120151632 Unalaska Seothermal Exnloration Project Unalaska Island, \laska Reoublic Ceothernal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SJRVEY, MAKJSHIN VOLCANO AREA July, August, 1984 POLC-POLE ARRAY pseudosections, lcoking NOFTH Anparent Pesistivity in ohmmeters. Vertical scale is array effective penetration (22); see text, Pseuliosecton # 42 42> < 42° 7% 84 55 29 Lh 143 6e n 69 -500 155 57 93 120 -1000 fe 84 -1500 -2000 Ze, ETERS METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 —$——— $$$ $+} horizontal scale PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC., JANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Zfile: 42 Plot DT 641120151705 Unalaska Geothermal [Exploration Froject Unalaska Island, Alaska Fenublic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUFVEY, MAKUSHIN VCLCANO AFEA July, August, 1984 PCLE-POLE AFPPAY rseudosections, looking NOFTHR Anparent Fesistivity in ohm-reters. Vertical scale is array effective peretratior (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton # 43 43> < 43° 37 49 93 87 93 89 -500 61 -1000 69 82 -2000 Ze, METEPS METERS 0 500 10c0 1500 2000 HE horizontal scale PFENIEF CEOPRYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot Z2file: 42 Plot CT 641120151815 Unalaska Geotnermal Exploration Froject Unalaska Island, Alaska Fenublic Ceothermal Inc. E-SCAN FLSISTIVITY SUFVEY, “AKJSEIN VOLCAL!IO AFEA July, August, 1984 POLE-POLE AFFAY -seudosections, looking NOFTH Apparent Tesistivity in ohm-reters, vertical scale is array effective penetration (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton ¢ 44 44> < 44° 42 80 41 9 88 Lp 59 90 85 67 -500 83 121 85 129 LR -1000 1 ~-1500 ~-2000 Ze , NETERS PIEMLER GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CANADA Plot 2file: 44 Plot CT 641120151847 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 b+ +—_ + horizontal scale Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project Unalaska Island, Alaska Renublic Ceothermal Inc. E-3CAN RESISTIVITY SUFVEY, "AKUSHIL! VOLCANO AFEA July, August, 19384 POLE-POLE AFRAY frewosections, looking NMOFTH Apparent Fesistivity in ohm-reters. Vertical scale is array effective penetraticn (Ze); see text. Pseudosecton # 45 45> < 45 -1000 -1500 Ze , METERS PrEMIEF GEOPHYSICS INC., VANCOUVER, CAWADA Plot Zfile: 4s Plot DI €41120151917 METERS 0 500 1000 1500 2000 eH HH horizontal scale APPENDIX E-2 TWO-DIMENSIONAL MODELING ON SELECTED E-SCAN RESISTIVITY DATA PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. 1184 FORGE WALK, VANCOUVER, B.C., CANADA V6H 3P9 « (604) 732-1618 Report on two-dimensional modeling of some E-SCAN resistivity data from the Makushin Volcano area, Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project. for Republic Geothermal Inc. Greg A. Shore Premier Geophysics Inc. March 10, 1985 CONTENTS 1.@ SUMMARY 2.@ INTRODUCTION 3.@ METHODOLOGY 3. 3. 3. 3. 3. 1 2 3 4 5 Assessing model validity Modeling method and array type Section development sequence Topographic effects Order of section presentation 4.@ MODELED SECTION RESULTS 4. 4. 1 2 8 SECTION 10 SECTION 101 SECTION 28 SECTION 31 SECTION 34 SECTION 38 SECTION 81 SECTION 75-76 S.@ SUMMARY OF RESULTS BY AREA Figure 1 FIGURES Location of interpreted resistivity cross sections Model sections 10, 101, 28, 31, 34, 38, 81 page 10 iW 12 14 1S 16 16 follows text follow figure 1 1.@ SUMMARY. Computer-assisted modeling of selected sections through the Makushin Volcano property has been accomplished. The significant findings are as follows: Main reservoir area: The north and east boundaries suggested by the raw E-SCAN data set are verified by modeling. The conductive core of the reservoir ranges from 2@ to SQ@ ohm-meters, typical of crystalline rock reservoir conditions. The conductive zone extends west and/or south at least 2 kilometers. The significant new information is the description of a sloping lower boundary separating the conductive reservoir rocks from an underlying higher resistivity regime. The distribution of low resistivty values suggests a reservoir heat source lying south and/or west of the survey area, but the possibility of a dry steam zone or hot dry rock causing the underlying high resistivity signature cannot be ruled out on resistivity evidence alone. The sloping boundary between conductive and underlying resistive rock units passes through the production zone of well ST-1, and then passes several hundred meters below the end of TGH E-1. If production permeabilities in well ST-1 are related to thermal and/or mechanical conditions associated with this boundary, then deepening of E-1 by 150 to 450 meters to intercept the boundary area might result in similar production. Fox Canyon Area: No resource is thought to underlie the part of Fox Canyon covered by the E-SCAN survey. Other areas: No other parts of the survey coverage area yield results comparable to those of the known reservoir area. Regarding the specific question of possible resources near Sugarloaf or near the road, no indications of significant geothermal activity have been observed. 2.@ INTRODUCTION In July and August, 1984, Premier Geophysics Inc. of Vancouver, Canada undertook a full-grid E-SCAN DC resistivity survey over a selected portion of the flank of Makushin Volcano, Unalaska Island, Alaska. The survey was undertaken on behalf of Republic Geothermal Inc., of Santa Fe Springs, California, operators of the Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project. The results of this survey were reported to Republic Geothermal in: "Report on E-SCAN electrical resistivity survey at Makushin Volcano, Unalaska Island, Alaska", dated November 30, 1984. The model results presented in the current report are based on the E-SCAN data set and on the general conclusions drawn in the 1984 report. Reference to the “1984 report" will be useful in the course of reviewing these model results. 3.0 HODOLOGY. 3.1 Assessing model validity: The use of one- and two-dimensional computer-assisted modeling of resistivity data has been evolving over the past decade. It's use has been primarily restricted by the limited quantity and unverifiable quality of the raw field data typically available from conventional survey methods. Since the modeling routines require the assumption of a specific earth structure, any lack of confidence in the prediction of such structure reflects directly upon the confidence attributable to the resulting models. This is a paradoxical situation. The end product of the modeling program, which is supposed to be telling the explorationist something he doesn’t already know, depends substantially on the ability of the explorationist to correctly guess in advance a u major component of what the model will reveal. The circumstance is further complicated by the fact that the modeling routines can often be made to yield a model with a good fit to the observed data, even if the assumption of gross earth structure is wrong to begin with. Such a model will be a technical “good fit", but will bear no resemblance to actual earth conditions. The E-SCAN data set provides the means for comprehensive pre-qualification of data so that the possibility of engaging in “good fit, incorrect result" modeling is substantially reduced. An example of the procedures involved is included in the description of section 31, along with a sample of the type of apparently competent (but fundamentally wrong) model results which can be generated from inadequately pre-qualified data. 3.2 Modeling metho nd array type: The present modeling was undertaken with a two-dimensional finite element forward modeling routine using pole-pole array data only. Some verification of near-surface detail was done using pole-dipole data. Pole-dipole array data were assembled from the basic components in the E-SCAN data set. The array is a horizontal derivative of the pole-pole array data; it’s use in the present context was to provide detail of shallower resistivities in joint modeling with the deeper pole-pole array data. Forward modeling involves manual description of a resistivity model, followed by computer generation of the survey data set which would be measured over such an earth. The explorationist adjusts the model description until the computed survey data matches the field observed data. A model "fit" is thus achieved. This differs from inverse modeling methods in which field data and sometimes an initial guess of structure parameters is input, and the computer adjusts and readjusts a starting model until it sees a fit to the field data. The inverse method is faster, but it is arbitrary and inflexible in its approach. It is not possible to test individual model features for acceptable ranges of variation which may significantly affect interpretation and/or assessment of post-modeling exploration options. 3.3 Section development sequence: The survey area is comprised of a combination of one-, two- and three-dimensional electrical resistivity distributions. The modeling routine requires the input of data from a two-dimensional circumstance, that is, resistivity distribution varying in two dimensions only, with the non-varying axis perpendicular to the Proposed section. More simply, the section must cut across a two-dimensional section so that all variation is along the X and Z axes. An earth structure which is two-dimensional to a section of one orientation may not be two-dimensional to a section oriented differently across the same earth (unless the earth varies only one-dimensionally, with depth. A one-dimensional earth is acceptable for two-dimensional modeling in any section orientation.) The first task then is to determine the apparent gross resistivity distribution over the property, so that initial modeling efforts will be undertaken in conditions fully compatible with the requirements of the modeling algorithm. This is done by reviewing the E-SCAN data plots of resistivity variation with depth, and the data pseudosections in sequential sets oriented in various directions across the property. The most obvious cases of one- and two-dimensional conditions are modeled first, using data pseudosections (compiled from the main E-SCAN data set) which are optimally oriented and positioned across the apparent structure. This generates high-confidence true resistivity model sections of these parts of the property. Portions of the property less clearly one- or two-dimensional are then modeled, again with optimally oriented pseudosection data compiled from the E-SCAN data set. Wherever possible, these models use starting parameters drawn from the high-confidence first run of modeling. The model is then processed, and some common sense and intuition is applied as a reasonable fit to the observed data is attempted. The remaining model section requirements may lie in technically improper circumstances, in which no finite element modeling is appropriate. For these sections, a composite of other model information across the section or adjacent to it may be merged in a common-sense way, with the resulting model labelled as such. This method of approaching modeling takes advantage of the full depth of E-SCAN data sets to provide a step-by-step, verifiable route to a model section. The process of developing a three-dimensional picture of the property would be properly described as 2 1/2 dimensional modeling, a term generally referring to the arrival at a 3-D solution by multiple two-dimensional modeling. No three-dimensional modeling routines are presently available, and the developments to date, while not to be discouraged, have no usefulness in economic exploration at present. The difficulties seen in the false model example of section 31 are only the tip of the iceberg encountered when the third dimension is added to a modeling approach. 3.4 Topographic effects: Digitized topography has been incorporated in each section model, so that topographic effects on data are fully compensated for. In tests of topographic effects alone, data distortions of less than 30% were seen throughout the property, well within manageable limits. 3.5 Order of section presentation: The sections are presented roughly in order of modeling execution. Some factors which have been heavily modeled and described in one section are applied to successive models, and the reader is referred back to the originating section for details of those aspects. 4.@ MODELED SECTION RESULTS: The following table lists the sections that were requested by Republic for modeling, the sections that were actually modeled, and the title assigned to each section. Requested Modeled Title 10 10 10 28 28 28 31 31 31 34 34 34 38 38 38 51 51/52 101 75/76 75/76 no result 81 81 81 oa Figure 1 shows the location of the modeled sections, plotted over the Figure 2 summary map from the 1984 report. This figure and the plan plots of apparent resistivity at various depths (1984 report) will be most useful for reference while reviewing the model results. The model sections are appended to this report in the order discussed, together with a same-scale reduction of the Figure 1 location key. 4.1 SECTION 10 Location: Section 1@ is oriented roughly southwest to northeast, with the viewer facing northwest. The section passes through the main resistivity anomaly at the southwest, and along the valley toward the northeast, terminating east of the switchbacks. Model construction: The southwest part of the resistivity section was constructed from intensive two-dimensional finite element modeling, on the observation that the section’s entry into the main resistivity anomaly constitutes an approximate two-dimensional resistivity regime. The central and northeast parts of the model deal with simpler one- and two-dimensional conditions. In these areas, the section was constructed from less intensive two-dimensional modeling, conducted on several of the reported sections crossing the area. Some modeling was done on a supplementary section which was better oriented to allow proper two-dimenional earth evaluation and topographic compensation. Mod confidence: This model is regarded as the best available two-dimensional representation of the main reservoir area. Accordingly, its development was given a fuller range of tests and checks than was given some of the models obtained in less significant areas. In the area of the main resistivity anomaly, the model presented is both unique, and of sufficient reliability to serve as a basis for further development planning. Observations: This section provides the most reliable view of reservoir boundary geometry. The projection of the boundary to surface is required to be within 5@ meters of the position shown on the plot, to maintain reasonable data fit. Deeper down-dip, the location of the boundary becomes less constrained by the data. The projected boundary passes several hundred meters below the bottom of TGH E-!. The plotted position is nominal: the boundary would be encountered anywhere between 150 and 450 meters below present bottom hole elevation, with 250 meters the best guess. The limit of reasonable model fit is reached as the boundary is straightened out to a 45 degree slope from surface; anything approaching vertical is unacceptable in the extreme. The distinct layering shown within the reservoir will in reality be a more gradational distribution. However, the sequence and resistivities shown will be approximately correct. (Subjective adjustments to this model to compensate for its imperfect two-dimensionality would have the effect of lowering further the reported resistivities and/or steepening the lower boundary 15 or 20 degrees. ) Immediately to the northeast of the reservoir, a zone of moderate (100 ohm-meters) resistivity about 500 meters thick overlies the areally pervasive 500 ohm-meter unit. Within the shallow zone, a near-surface volume of 5Q@ ohm-meter material exists. This could be a different rock type, or different degree of weathering or alteration (as seen in several mapped outcroppings of Unalaska unit “Tu"). The zone also has the appearance of an outflow plume, perhaps a concentration of fluids from the warm springs located just up the hydraulic gradient along the lower edge of the Fox Canyon flows. Further northeast, a change in general mode from 500 to 720 ohm-meters occurs, the southwest boundary (between electrodes 2 and 198) lying within the major fault zone suggested in the 1984 report. The 1080 and 2000 ohm-meter units are samples of the volcanic flow rocks. - 7 = Between electrodes 206 and 224, the 50Q ohm-meter rocks are mapped as gabbronorite intrusive. This is perhaps a verification that the 5@Q ohm-meter unit underlying most of the sections is a gabbronorite of the approximate degree of alteration and/or fracturing that is seen in this outcrop. Local variations in temperature, fracture density and alteration in the gabbronorite throughout the property will affect its resistivity signature, lowering the resistivity with each increment in the intensity of these factors, in saturated conditions. An extreme combination of these factors provides the 20 and 50 ohm-meter signatures within the main reservoir. However, in non-saturated conditions such as hot dry rock or a steam-dominated zone, factors of high temperature, extreme fracturing and strong alteration may still present a relatively high resistivity signature (in the absence of connected water conductive paths). The 500 ohm-meter rock under the reservoir could, therefore, be hot dry rock, or a steam-dominated zone overlying hot dry rock, yielding a net resistivity effect of 500 ohm-meters. The adjacent unit may be cooler, less fractured, less altered, but saturated with water in its pore spaces and also presenting a net 500 ohm-meter effect. Resistivity measurements do not provide for discrimination of cause, only for determination of net resistivity. The possibility of a major heat source lying directly under the reservoir zone therefore must be assessed from other data. A model observation which supports a source of reservoir heat to the south and southwest is not reported on the drawing. In developing the reported model, it was necessary to extend the 22 and 50 ohm-meter zones to the south and southwest for at least 2 kilometers, beyond which there was no effect either way on the central model. If the conductive zone as drawn was cut off by a resistive boundary immediately to the south and southwest, the model fit was destroyed. 4.2 SECTION 191 Location: Section 101 is oriented south to north, with the viewer facing west. The section passes through the main resistivity anomaly near section 10. It passes north along the east slope of the Fox Canyon flows, passing through TGH A-1 and continuing north toward Driftwood Bay. Model construction: The portion of the model through the reservoir was adapted from section 10, with little modification. The rest of the section was modeled with the two-dimensional finite element routine. Model confidence: The part of the model through the reservoir is taken from section 1@ results, and shares the high level of confidence accorded section 10. The central and northern parts of the model pass through non-two-dimensional conditions, and the results are treated accordingly in the observations below. Observations: The part of the section passing through the reservoir is taken from section 1@ findings, to which the reader is referred for details. North of the reservoir, the 100 ohm-meter block coincides with similar findings on section 1@, and probably includes an averaging of the shallow 5@ ohm-meter zone seen in the section 10 model. This 100 ohm-meter zone is known not to extend west under Fox Canyon, where extensive modeling work allows no unit lower than 200 to 300 ohm-meters beneath the flow rocks. The 1000 ohm-meter zone is a partial sampling of Fox Canyon flow rocks, which are very resistive. Further north, nested SQ and 100 ohm-meter layers are the zone seen north of TGH A-1! in the raw data plan plots (1984 report). This section and perpendicular section 28 agree that this is a shallow flat-lying zone. If this is a geothermal manifestation, then it may be an accumulation of outflow leakage or an alteration zone. A source for the former may be suggested by the shallow conductive path that lies along the north edge of Fox Canyon, leading toward this zone. A geothermal system located west of the northwest corner of Fox Canyon E-SCAN coverage would not be unreasonable in terms of distance of outflow travel. An alternate source would be a vent associated with the apparent thermal regime almost underneath the zone, evidenced by the vent between the anomaly and Sugarloaf. Apart from the mapping of this conductive “trail” from the northwest corner of Fox Canyon survey coverage, there is no resistivity evidence to suggest a possible large-scale geothermal source for the anomaly in the immediate vicinity. It is noted that the anomaly is spatially associated with a mapped Unalaska volcanic "Tu" which is also measured as very conductive in occurrences near the main reservoir. I have suggested that all Tu units west of the postulated central north-south fault zone have been altered in the past and are not necessarily associated with present geothermal activity. Existing geologic and geochemical data might be reviewed to determine is there is any supporting evidence for the notion that the conductor lying along the north edge of Fox Canyon and possibly connected to the section 101 anomaly may be an outflow plume from a geothermal system in or near upper Fox Canyon. 4.3 SECTION 28 on: Section 28 is oriented west to east, with the viewer facing north. The section passes through the shallow anomaly west of Sugarloaf, through Sugarloaf itself, across the flow rocks and down into the lower Makushin River valley near the switchbacks. Model construction: The section was constructed by modeling with the two-dimensional finite element routine, correlating results in the shallow anomaly area with those of section 101 to satisfy both models. Model confidence: This model covers reasonably straightforward terrain and is a reliable indicator certainly of the lack of significant resistivity responses. Observations: The shallow conductive zone at the west end of the madel is described and its implications discussed in detail under section 101, to which the reader is referred. -10- In the lower valley area, moderately conductive values are related to valley debris and/or possible basement structure aligned in the valley. Neither possibility appears to have exploration significance. The rest of the section is significantly devoid of anomalous resistivity manifestations. These results together with those of northeast section 12 confirm the lack of major past or present hydrothermal activity in the vicinity of the gabbronorite intrusion exposed near the switchbacks. 4.4 SECTION 31 Location: Section 31 is oriented west to east, with the viewer facing north. The section follows the north edge of Fox Canyon, passes through TGH A-1, crosses the Makushin River and goes over the hill to the east. ° truction: The section was constructed from a two-dimensional finite element model obtained independently of any other model results. Model confidence: Reasonable confidence is ascribed to the eastern two-thirds of this model. West of TGH A-1, the model is a technical “good-fit" to the raw section data, but reference to the context of these data (plan and section plots of raw data, 1984 report) clearly shows that the resistivity regime in the area is not two-dimensional. The model represents a valid two-dimensional earth distribution which would generate precisely the raw data which we have, and if we were fairly sure that the earth in this area was two-dimensional with its structural axis perpendicular to this section, then we would believe this model and perhaps even drill it. However, we know from irrefutable and overlapping evidence in the E-SCAN data set that the situation here is one of a linear conductor of unknown depth extent lying parallel to and partly underneath the data section. We therefore know that the data are not of the form or context demanded by the two-dimensional modeling routine, and therefore that any model generated, regardless of quality of fit, will be completely erroneous. This example illustrates a source of error common to all modeling efforts, and shows how the E-SCAN data set has been used to recognize these potential errors throughout the Makushin interpretation. The example shows: 1. the potential danger of guessing or assuming that modeling pre-conditions are properly met, and, 2. the usefulness of E-SCAN data in making reliable judgments of the degree of data compliance with model pre-conditions. Two intensively modeled north-south sections across Fox Canyon (47 and 49, not reported here) further verify that the raw data judgment of a linear conductor is correct: neither section permits even a hint of the major conductive zone suggested by the discredited section 31 model. Observations: With the non-validity of the western part of the section explained above, there is little else of interest in section 31. The area near A-1 is unreliable due to proximity to the distortion reported above. In the eastern part of the section resistive flow rocks are seen overlying more conductive units, which in turn yield to a very resistive underlying rock type, perhaps a minimally altered and fractured zone of the gabbronorite. The vertical break between 200 and higher resistivities near electrodes 119 and 133 is again a manifestatiion of the postulated major fault zone extending south from Sugarloaf. 4.5 SECTION 34 Location: Section 34 is oriented west to east, with the viewer facing north. The section cuts through the central area of Fox Canyon, through TGH 0-1, across the valley, and up the hill to the east. - 17? = Model construction: The section was constructed on the basis of two-dimensional finite element modeling. Prior model data from sections 10 and 101 was integrated into the starting model, as was the detailed assessment of the Fox Canyon structure provided by supplementary sections 47 and 49. Model confidence: The vertical resistivity distribution through Fox Canyon is compatible with the findings of supplementary sections 47 and 49, and fits the section 34 data as well. This adds up to reasonably high confidence that the layering presented is a valid model. No resistivity lower than 200 ohm-meters is tolerated by section 34, 47, or 49 data, and a value of 30@ ohm-meters appears to fit best. The rest of the section fits the data reasonably and agrees with other sections (101 and 1@) through the area. Observations: The layering of the Fox Canyon flows was modeled without reference to TGH D-! geology and suggests a transition between resistive flow rocks and a 300 ohm-meter unit at about 45@ meters depth. The close coincidence between this depth and the depth of first penetration of hole D-1 into granitic rocks under the flows Qives more credit to modeling expertise than is due. At this depth, and under these conditions of extreme resistivities grading downward, the model-predicted interface with a more conductive granitic rock would be cited as 450 meters +/- 100 meters at best. The significant aspect of the model is the inability of the measured data, on three sections criss-crossing Fox Canyon, to tolerate a deep resistivity of less than 200 ohm-meters. This indicates that the resistivity regime which characterizes the reservoir area adjacent to the south does not extend under Fox Canyon. It is considered unlikely that any geothermal resource exists directly under the survey area in Fox Canyon. The central portion of the section again measures the 1200 ohm-meter zone seen in sections 10 and 101. The resistivity change from 100 to 300 ohm-meter mode near electrode 101 lies in the area of the postulated major fault zone extending south from Sugarloaf. The whole section is underlain by rocks of a 500 ohm-meter - 1% = characteristic. 4.6 SECTION 38 Location: Section 38 is oriented west to east, with the viewer facing north. The section passes through the main reservoir, and east up the hill. Model _ construction: The section is based on a fully modeled (two-dimensional finite element) section 40, located south of section 38. Section 38 itself is too close to the corner of the reservoir to allow two-dimensional modeling directly. The section 4@ model was modified to accomodate the shallower position of the reservoir lower boundary at section 38, but is otherwise unchanged. Section 1@ was modeled before section 40, and section 10 reservoir details were installed in the first section 40 model, providing an acceptable if not perfect fit. Model confidence: Plan and section data (1984 report) support in general the transportability of section 4@ results to the section 38 location. The new information of importance, the vertical east boundary of the reservoir, was firmly indicated in the section 4@ model and is probably reliably extrapolated to section 38. Observations: This section passes through well ST-1; the model shows the well penetrating the lower boundary of the conductive zone. TGH E-1 is projected onto this plot as well, but actually lies toward the viewer. The lower boundary dips deeper toward the viewer, Passing below the bottom of E-1t. The new information from this section is the vertical or near-vertical boundary on the east side of the reservoir. The shallow conductive zone east of the reservoir models almost exactly as one would expect from the raw data plots. There is mo apparent explanation for this anomaly, but in view of its - 14 - position close to the main reservoir, the rocks in the area could have been substantially altered by the same heat source. It is interesting to note that the increase in upper layer resistivity occurring near electrode 86 corresponds with the projection of the postulated north-south fault zone extending from Sugarloaf. The resistivity change can not be seen in the raw data because the data end at this point. However, the conditions in the two- to three-kilometer zone immediately adjacent to the data section significantly influence the resistivity measurements. In this case, the adjacent rocks need to be of the 500 ohm-meter type to allow the model to fit the data. 4.7 SECTION 81 Location: Section 81 is oriented southeast to northwest, with the viewer facing southwest. The section comes down the hill from the southeast, across the valley and up through TGH A-t. Model construction: The section was constructed using the two-dimensional finite element routine, referring to other sections crossing the area for starting parameters. Model confidence: This model presented some difficulty in execution, apparently refusing to give a reasonable fit to the data in the central portion. We have opinions on this area from other sections; the lack of success in this section orientation may be due to a three-dimensional aspect most affecting this orientation, or due to some deficiency in the data or modeler. Possibly all of the above. The shallow fit to the northwest is good, but knowledge of non-two-dimensionality of that area for sections even partially westward oriented demands cautious use of this section. Observations: As indicated above, this section has some technical difficulty in its central portion and deficient two-dimensionality - 16 - in its northwest area. I would suggest that the information suggested by this model be disregarded in favor of that seen in other, less compromised sections. 4.8 SECTION 75-76 Section 75-76 was to have been oriented southeast to northwest, with the viewer facing southwest. The section crosses so many corners of features and boundaries obliquely that there appears to be no merit in attempting to test by finite element analysis any constructed starting section. This is clearly not a two-dimensional case. With extensive and competent sections already developed for the area covered by proposed section 75-76, further work on this section was declined in favor of more productive efforts elsewhere. 5.0 SUMMARY OF RESULTS BY AREA Main reservoir area: The north and east boundaries of the reservoir as suggested by the raw E-SCAN data set are verified by modeling. The conductive core of the reservoir ranges from 2@ to 50 ohm-meters. The conductive zone extends west and/or south at least 2 kilometers, beyond which the section cannot resolve conditions. The significant new information is the description of a sloping lower boundary separating the conductive reservoir rocks from an underlying higher resistivity regime. The distribution of low resistivty values suggests a reservoir heat source lying south and/or west of the survey area, but the possibility of a dry steam zone or hot dry rock causing the underlying high resistivity signature cannot be ruled out on resistivity evidence alone. - 16 - The sloping boundary between conductive and underlying resistive rock units passes through the production zone of well ST-1, and then passes several hundred meters below the end of TGH E-1. If production permeabilities in well ST-! are related to thermal and/or mechanical conditions associated with this boundary, then deepening of E-1 to intercept the boundary area might result in similar production. The model uncertainties beneath E-! indicate that the boundary zone would be encountered anywhere between 150 and 45@ meters beyond the present bottomhole elevation of TGH E-1. Eox Canyon Area: No resource is thought to underlie the part of Fox Canyon covered by the E-SCAN survey. A linear conductive zone lying along the north edge of Fox Canyon may connect with the broad, shallow conductive zone north of TGH A-1. There may be a simple geologic explanation for this feature, such as the presence of the conductive (west of the major fault zone) Unalaska volcanic unit Tu along the anomaly’s length. On the other hand, the anomaly sequence could mark an outflow plume from a geothermal system located west or northwest of the limit of E-SCAN coverage in Fox Canyon. The distance involved, the narrowness of the conductor in the steeper western portion, and the broadening of the "plume" north of TGH A-1t in flatter topography all have the character and dimensions of an outflow plume. In the absence of substantial supporting evidence for a possible active geothermal source for the anomaly, I would be inclined to write it off as probably marking a bed of conductive Unalaska volcanics (Tu), exposed near A-! and probably near-surface along the western length of section 31. Other areas: No other parts of the survey coverage area yield results comparable to those of the known reservoir area. Regarding the specific question of possible resources near Sugarloaf or near the road, no indications of significant geothermal activity have been observed. Major fault zone south from Sugarloaf: -17- The major fault zone extending south from Sugarloaf was initially observed in almost every data pseudosection crossing the area in southeast-northwest, east-west, and northeast-southwest orientations. The near-unanimous demand for a major resistivity break, linear and independent of observed surface geology, appears to be supported by the models generated on sections 10, 31, 34, 38 and 81. The contact appears to be vertical or near-vertical; other details are not discernable from the data or modeling. The character of this resistivity contact is not known, but it would be a reasonable inference to suggest that it is a fault or fault zone. It possibly predates the exposed volcanic regime and therefore may carry no surface linears to support its local presence. Perhaps the most significant visible indication of the zone is Sugarloaf itself. There are insufficient data to determine whether or not the fault zone continues north or south of the presently plotted extent. In the 1984 report, it was observed that the differing rock resistivity signatures on either side of this zone suggest that the structure may have played a significant role in controlling an earlier phase of hydrothermal activity. The rocks west of the zone may have been altered en masse, while the eastern rock suite remained relatively unaltered, and substantially more resistive, type for type. This general observation remains in place following the modeling. Respectfully submitted, Greg A. Shore, Premier Geophysics Inc. Vancouver, B.C., Canada March 1@, 1985 - 18 - REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL INC. . UNALASKA -#SEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION PROJECT SCAN RESISTIVITY SURVEY SMAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA JULY, AUGUST, 1984 LOCATION OF INTERPRETED |RESISTIVITY CROSS SECTIONS {SHOWN ON UNALTERED SUMMARY +IGURE 2 OF THE 1984 REPORT SECTION LOCATION, # RESISTIVITY CONTACT OR . FAULT IMPLICATION DERIVED FROM SHALLOW (<700 METERS) DATA ONLY. NO STRUCTURAL INFERENCES FROM DEEPER DATA ARE SHOWN. (1984 Report) + SURVEY ELECTRODE SITE e DRILL HOLE SITE KILOMETERS 0 0.5 1 4.5 THOUSAND FEET 0 4 2 3 = 5 PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. VANCOUVER, CANADA Figure #1 Reduced from 1:24000 original plot. Scale of this plot: 1:37500 (approx.) WN PR AVA A, <I REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL INC. lige . Slee Me, As | ee \ UNALASKA yi Posgians Latter sive F S.-.\ GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION Ye oN : PROJECT yy UNALASKA ISLAND, ALASKA E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SURVEY MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA JULY, AUGUST, 1984 on LOCATION OF INTERPRETED RESISTIVITY CROSS SECTIONS SHOWN ON UNALTERED SUMMARY FIGURE 2 OF THE 1984 REPORT SECTION LOCATION, # as oo) (aR “+ IFTWOOD ) RESISTIVITY CONTACT OAR FAULT IMPLICATION DERIVED FROM SHALLOW (<700 METERS) DATA ONLY. NO STRUCTURAL INFERENCES FROM DEEPER DATA ARE SHOWN. (1984 Report) + SURVEY ELECTRODE SITE e DAILL HOLE SITE KILOMETERS ° 0.5 1 1.5 THOUSAND FEET ° 1 2 3 4 5 —— PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. VANCOUVER, CANADA Figure # 1 Reduced from 1:24000 original plot. Scale of this plot; 1:37500 (approx.) SECTION 10 SECTIONS CROSS: REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL INC. UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION PROJECT UNALASKA ISLAND, ALASKA JULY, AUGUST, 1984 E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SURVEY -2000 MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA INTERPRETED TRUE RESISTIVITY SECTION SECTION # 10 RESISTIVITIES: OHM-METERS PLOT SCALE UNITS: METERS ORIGINAL DWG SCALE: 1: 24000 LIMIT OF MODEL CONFIDENCE: ..... -3000 PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. VANCOUVER, CANADA Reduced from 1:24000 original plot. Scale of this plot: 1:37500 (approx.) SECTION 101 nominal topo (not digitized) MEAN SEA 0 LEVEL REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL INC. UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL, EXPLORATION PROJECT UNALASKA ISLAND, ALASKA JULY, AUGUST, 1984 . E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SURVEY -2000 MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA INTERPRETED TAUE RESISTIVITY SECTION SECTION # 104 RESISTIVITIES: OHM-METERS PLOT SCALE UNITS: METERS ORIGINAL DWG SCALE: 4: 24000 LIMIT OF MODEL CONFIDENCE: PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. VANCOUVER, CANADA Reduced from 1:24000 original plot. ; Scale of this plot: 1:37500 (approx.) ° ° ° n SECTION 28 SECTIONS CROSS: nominal topo ” REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL INC. UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION PROJECT UNALASKA ISLAND, ALASKA JULY, AUGUST, 1884 E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SURVEY -2000 MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA INTERPRETED TAUE RESISTIVITY SECTION SECTION # 26 RESISTIVITIES: OHM-METERS PLOT SCALE UNITS: METERS ORIGINAL OWG SCALE: 1: 24000 LIMIT OF MODEL CONFIDENCE: ..... -3000 PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. VANCOUVER, CANADA Reduced from 1:24000 original plot. Scale of this plot: 1:37500 (approx.) ° ° ° KR SECTION 31 nominal topo (not digitized) REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL INC. UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION PROJECT UNALASKA ISLAND, ALASKA JULY, AUGUST, 1984 E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SURVEY -2000 MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA INTERPRETED TAUE RESISTIVITY SECTION SECTION # 31 RESISTIVITIES: OHM-METERS PLOT SCALE UNITS: METERS rave ORIGINAL DWG SCALE: 4: 24000 LIMIT OF MODEL CONFIDENCE: ..... PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. VANCOUVER, CANADA Reduced from 1:24000 original plot. Scale of this plot: 1:37500 (approx.) SECTION 34 10 nominal topo (mot digitized) REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL INC. UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION PROJECT UNALASKA ISLAND, ALASKA JULY, AUGUST, 1984 E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SUAVEY -2000 MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA INTERPRETED TRUE RESISTIVITY SECTION SECTION # 34 RESISTIVITIES: OHM-METERS PLOT SCALE UNITS: METERS ORIGINAL DWG SCALE: 41: 24000 LIMIT OF MODEL CONFIDENCE: ..... -3000 PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. VANCOUVER, CANADA l t i ‘ A el. i « nominal topo (not digitized) Reduced from 1:24000 original plot. Scale of this plot; 1:37500 (approx.) SECTION 38 SECTION CROSSES: 104 (projected) E-4 ort REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL INC. UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION PROJECT UNALASKA ISLAND, ALASKA JULY, AUGUST, 1984 E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SURVEY -2000 MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA INTERPRETED TRUE RESISTIVITY SECTION SECTION # 38 RESISTIVITIES: OHM-METERS PLOT SCALE UNITS: METERS ORIGINAL DWG SCALE: 4: 24000 LIMIT OF MODEL CONFIDENCE: PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. VANCOUVER, CANADA Reduced from 1:24000 original plot. Scale of this plot; SECTIONS CROSS: 1:37500 (approx.) POOR FIT nominal topo (not digitized) SECTION 614 REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL INC. UNALASKA GEOTHERMAL EXPLORATION PROJECT UNALASKA ISLAND, ALASKA JULY, AUGUST, 1984 E-SCAN RESISTIVITY SURVEY -2000 MAKUSHIN VOLCANO AREA INTERPRETED TAUE RESISTIVITY SECTION SECTION #@ 61 RESISTIVITIES: OHM-METERS PLOT SCALE UNITS: METERS ORIGINAL DWG SCALE: 1: 24000 LIMIT OF MODEL CONFIDENCE: ..... PREMIER GEOPHYSICS INC. VANCOUVER, CANADA APPENDIX F INVENTORY AND DEMOBILIZATION REPORTS APPENDIX F-1 INVENTORY OF EQUIPMENT OWNED BY ALASKA POWER AUTHORITY APA OWNED EQUIPMENT STORED IN ALEUT CORP YARD & WAREHOUSE FOLLOWING DEMOBILIZATION OF OPERATIONS IN SEPT. 1984 APA# ITEM & DESCRIPTION 12504 3"-600 RTJ FLOW TEE VALVE 12508 0-100psi WALLACE-TIERNAN PRESS GUAGE FOR JAMES TUBE LIP PRESS 12509 VICTOR INERT GAS PRESS REGULATOR 12510 HOKE 5-VALVE MANIFOLD 12512 HAICO 5-WAY VALVE 3000 psi 12513 BARTON MODEL 202A 2 PEN FLOW RECORDER & MANIFOLD 12514 MAYES 6' LEVEL 12515 VULCAN CHAIN TONGS 12516 VULCAN CHAIN TONGS 12517 96 CU. FT. STEEL MUD/WATER TANK 12518 96 CU. FT. STEEL MUD/WATER TANK 12519 96 CU.. FT. STEEL MUD/WATER TANK 2 JTS 7" 23#/Ft R-1l K-55 CSG. (new) 1 JTS 54%" 15.5#/F R-1 K-55 CSG (8 jts used-cond. good) 13 JTS 15" R-1 SMLS A-106 TBG W/API CPLES (new) 2" JAMES TUBE FLOW NOZZLE W/4" RF FLG & &" PRESS TAP 4" AS ABOVE 4 ea - 4" §.S. ORIFICE FLOW PLATES W/BORE SIZES 1.375", 1.750", 2,600", 3.400" MISC RANDOM PIPE FTGS (ELBOWS, TEES, UNIONS, NIPPLES, VALVES, ETC.) RANGING %" - 1" SIZES. ArA YUWNLY GYWVLIrvows Page 2 SUBS & X-OVERS APA # ITEM & DESCRIPTION 12220 2 3/8" REG BOX X 2" MACHINE THD BOX 12221 1%" NPT PIN X NQ BOX 12222 2 3/8" IF BOX X 6 5/8" API REG BOX 12523 2 7/8" API REG BOX X NW BOX 12524 . void 12525 3" API REG BOX X NW BOX 12526 2 7/8" IF BOX X 4%" API REG BOX 12527 43" API REG PIN X HQ BOX 12528 2 7/8"IF PIN X NQ PIN 12529 2 3/8" API REG BOX X HQ BOX 12530 34" API REG BOX X NQ BOX 12531 4%" API REG PIN X 3%"API REG BOX 12532 2 7/8" IF BOX X 4%" API REG BOX 12533 HQ BOX X 3" BLANK 12534 SUB - 2 7/8" IF BOX X 2 7/8" IF PIN X 4 FT 12535 SUB - 2 7/8" IF BOX X 2 7/8" IF PIN X 15 FT 12536 SUB - 2 7/8" IF BOX X 2 7/8" IF PIN X 15 FT a Page 3 ITEM & DESCRIPTION - l/ea 5%" 600 CSG HEAD W/2" SIDE OUTLETS lfea 4" X 4" X 3" 600 FLG'D FLOW TEE MISC. ADAPTER FLGS, STUDS, NUTS, GASKETS & API RINGS FOR WELLHEAD ASSY. : lfea 2 SECTION 2 3/8" 0.D. X 18' O/A LENGTH STEEL LUBRICATOR ASSY W/UNIONS 2" X 3" SWAGES (TOP & BTM), " FPT PRESS BLEED TAPS, ADAPTER FLGS & FTGS. l/fea 2 SECTION 3%" X 30' O/A LENGTH STEEL RUNGED LUBRICATOR GIN POLE ASSY W/HELICOPTER LIFTING BALE, WELLHEAD MOUNTING BRACKETS, WINCH & BLOCK. DRILLING FLUID & CMTG SUPPLIES & MTLS DESCRIPTION QUANTITY SSA HALLIBURTON SILICA FLOUR 29 SKS HALLIBURTON 20-40 FRAC SAND 38 SKS BARZAN POLYMER (50# SKS) 2% SKS BARITE 100 SKS Cacl2 +6 SKS QUICK SEAL (LCM) 20 SKS GEL (QUIK-GEL) 76 SKS CLEAR MUD 5 GAL CANS 10/ea CFR - 2 5 GAL CANS 8/ea HR6-L 5 GAL CANS 3/ea TORQUE TRIM 5 GAL CANS 2/ea APA OWNED EQUIPMENT Page 4 MISC. INSTRUMENTS (PRESS & TEMP) 2/ea - 50/300°F BIMETAL DIAL THERMS l/ea - 50/400°F BIMETAL DIAL THERMS 2/ea - 0/60 psi LIQ FILLED PRESS GA l/ea - 0/100 psi LIQ FILLED PRESS GA USED TUBULARS* 419' - HW CASING 499' - HQ CORE PIPE 220' - NQ CORE PIPE NQ CORE BARREL * - UNFIT FOR DRILLING SERVICE USED BITS l/fea - 3" MILL TOOTH * 2/ea - 4 3/4" MILL TOOTH * l/ea - 6" MILL TOOTH * l/ea - 6" CARBIDE INSERT l/fea - 7 3/8" MILL TOOTH 2/ea - 8%" MILL TOOTH (1)* l/ea - 9 5/8" MILL TOOTH * ~ * THE ABOVE BITS ARE IN GOOD CONDITION AND MAY BE RERUN. APPENDIX F-2 REGULATORY COMPLIANCE CORRESPONDENCE AFTER COMPLETION OF OPERATIONS TWX - 910-585-1626 REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL. INC. $3823 EAST SLAUSON AVENUE, SUITE ONE SANTA FE S=EINGS, CALIFORNIA 90670 (2135) tment of Natural Resources Alaska 99516 Dear Mr. Bond: Enclosed please find the September Monthly Report of Drilling Operations pursuant to 11 AAC 87.110 (e) for Sugarloaf A-l on Unalaska Island, which was drilled under Geothermal Permit 84-2. If you have any questions or concerns about this information, please give me a call. Sincerely, CLAGE Chris Joseph Environmental Affairs Specialist CAJ:cl 45-5561 MONTHLY REPORT OF DRILLING OPERATIONS PURSUANT TO 11 AAC 87.110 (e) SUBMITTED TO THE ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Geothermal Drilling Permit No: 84-2 Well Name: Sugarloaf A-1l Well Location: * Unalaska Island, Alaska Reporting Period: September, 1984 Operator: 9/1 “9/2 9/3 9/4 9/5 9/6 9/7/84 Republic Geothermal, Inc. 11823 E. Slauson Ave. Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670 (213) 945-3661 Completed slinging all drilling contractor's equipment off drill site to airport and warehouse Weather conditions severe at drill site, moved remaining drilling equipment from airport to inside warehouse. Removed part of timber substructure from drill site. Suspended sling operations because of weather. (No activity, weather delay.) (No activity, slinging out camp equipment.) Completed removal of timbers from drill site. Completed final clean-up of all materials and trash from drill site. Drilling and completion operations satisfactorily finished. eo ee INC. pith Vice’ Presiden , tna & Contracts REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL. INC. 11823 EAST SLAUSON AVENUE, SUITE ONE SANTA FE SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 90670 TWX - 910-586-1696 (213) 945-363 October ¢, 1984 Mr. Ted Bona Alaska Department of Natural Resources Pouch. 7-034 Anchorage, Alaska 99510 Dear Mr. Bond: Enclosed please find the August Monthly Report of Drilling Operations pursuant to 11 AAC 87.110 (e) for Sugarloaf A-l on Unalaska Island, which was drilled under Geothermal Permit 84-2. If you have any questions or concerns about this information, please give me a call. Sincerely, er Chris({A. Joseph Environmental Affairs Specialist CAI:cl MONTHLY REPORT OF DRILLING OPERATIONS PURSUANT TO 11 AAC 87.110 (e) SUBMITTED. TO THE ALASKA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Geothermal Drilling Permit No: 84-2 Well Name: Sugarloaf A-1l Well Location: Unalaska Island, Alaska Reporting Period: August, 1984 Operator: 8/1 8/2 8/3 8/4 8/5 Republic Geothermal, Inc. 11823 E. Slauson Ave. Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670 (213) 945-3661 Completed disassembly of rig power drive, replacement transmission arrived, installed new transmission, reassembled rig power drive and waited on extremely high winds to sufficiently subside to again raise mast and resume operations. Wind sufficiently subsided at 1000 hrs for ERA helicopter to bring in drilling crew. Helicopter had Starter troubles, ordered parts. Called out Maritime Helicopter, which soon developed engine problems when bringing in crew. Waited on helicopter parts. Replacement parts for ERA helicopter arrived and were installed. Assembly and raising of derrick completed. Conditioned mud, opened hole with 8-1/2" bit from surface to 40 ft. Opened hole with 8-1/2" bit from 40 ft to 160 ft. Opened hole with 8-1/2" bit from 160 ft to 162 ft. Formation considered too soft for casing shoe. Drilled 8-1/2" hole from 162 ft to 210 ft. Pulled out of hole. Ran 209 ft of 5-1/2" casing (15-1/2#/ft., 5" I.D.). Mixed and pumped 60 saxs class "G" cmt with 2% CaCl2, displaced with 35 cu.ft. water. Waited on cement. DRILLING HISTORY OF "SUGARLOAF" A-l TEMPERATURE HOLE Page 2 8/6 8/7 8/8 8/9 8/10 8/11 8/12 8/13 RIH with 4-1/2" bit to tag cmt. No cmt at shoe, pulled out bit. Pressure tested casing to 300#, had fluid returns around annulus. Purchased 60 saxs of "high early" portland cement. Waited on weather to move cmt to drillsite. Recemented 5-1/2" casing with 60 saxs of. portland emt, displaced with 13 cu.ft. of water. Waited on cement. Mixed and used 5 saxs of cmt around 5-1/2" casing at surface. RIH with 4-1/2" bit and tagged emt at 100 ft. Drilled out cmt to 210 ft. Helicopter rotor blade accidentalIy damaged (punctured) during a scheduled maintenance and inspection operation; unable to change out drilling crew. Drilled 4-1/2" hole to 220 ft. Day crew walked to rig. Ran HQ pipe (3.16" I.D.) to bottom (220 ft.), rigged up NQ (2.75" O.D.) core barrel and tools, cored NQ hole from 220 ft to 260 ft in altered diorite. Helicopter became fully operative. Cored NQ hole from 260 ft to 275 ft, POH and installed master valve on drilling spool, RIH and cored from 275 ft to 369 ft. Total loss circulation occurred at 346 ft in fractured diorite. Cored NQ hole from 369 ft to 419 ft. POH to change core bit and grease drill pipe, RIH. Cored from 419 ft to 425 ft, during which drill string became stuck and soon freed. Total loss circulation continued. Cored NQ hole from 425 ft to 487 ft with severe loss circulation in fractured diorite. Adding LCM to mud. Tripped to grease drill pipe. Cored from 487 ft to 538 ft. Formation reported to have changed from diorite to Unalaska Fm at 533 ft. POH to check core barrel. RIH with same core bit, cored NQ hole from 538 ft to 696 ft. Water level in the well is standing at about 500 ft. DRILLING HISTORY OF “SUGARLOAF" A-l1 TEMPERATURE HOLE Page 3 8/14 8/15 8/16 8/17 8/18 8/19 8/20 8/21 8/22 8/23 8/24 8/25 Cored NQ hole from 696 ft to 877 ft. Starting at about 775 £t the core was noticeably warm upon retrieval at the surface. Fluid level in the well remains at a depth of about 500 ft, consequently no fluid returns. Cored NQ hole from 877 ft to 967 ft. Tripped to change core bit. Cored NQ hole from 967 ft to 973 ft, experiencing problems with new bit. Tripped again and changed to another new bit. Ready to resume coring. Cored NQ hole from 973 ft to 1135 ft. Pulled up 200 ft off bottom, repaired break, returned to bottom to resume coring. Repaired hydraulic chuck of rig, cored NQ hole from 1135 ft to 1257 ft. Cored NQ hole from 1257 ft to 1277 ft. Nippled up BOPE. Cored from 1277 ft to 1317 ft. Worked on hydraulic chuck. Cored from 1317 ft to 1357 ft. POH to change core bit and work on rig. Tore down hydraulic chuck, waiting on replacement parts. Received and installed new chuck parts. RIH, cleaning out bridge at 1250 ft and reamed to bottom. Cored NQ hole 1357 ft to 1359 ft. POH to repair core barrel inner tube. RIH, cored NQ hole from 1359 ft to 1481 ft. Cored NQ hole from 1481 ft to 1537 ft, tripped to change bit, cored from 1537 ft to 1567 ft. POH to change bit. RIH, cored NQ hole from 1567 ft to 1638 ft, POH to change core bit. Reported to be coring in intrusive rock starting at a depth of 1603 ft. RIH, cored NQ hole 1638 ft to 1677 ft, pulled up 100 ft off bottom and shut down to wait for extremely strong winds to subside. Cleaned up site after storm passed. Ran to bottom and cored NQ hole from 1677 ft to 1739 ft. POH to change core barrel and bit. DRILLING HISTORY OF "SUGARLOAF" A-1 TEMPERATURE HOLE Page 4 8/26 8/27 8/28 8/29 8/30 8/31 RIH with new bit, cored NQ from 1739 ft to 1763 ft. Tripped to change out crooked drill pipe causing excessive vibrations. Cored from 1763 ft to 1795 ft. Cored NQ hole from 1795 ft to 1857 ft, tripped to change bit and repair core barrel, cored from 1857 ft to 1860 ft. Cored NQ hole from 1860 ft to 1867 ft. Twisted off core pipe at 1500 ft while attempting to core ahead with severe vibrations in drill string. Recovered all of fish and laid down crooked drill pipe. Greased pipe. RIH and had trouble cleaning out sloughing fill with core barrel. POH. RIH with NQ reaming shell, cleaned out hole to bottom. Ran 1867 ft of 1-1/2 inch tubing, inside NQ pipe, to bottom. Pulled out NQ pipe. Tore down BOPE. Laid down drill pipe, cut off 5-1/2 inch casing, filled 1-1/2 inch tubing with water. Packed off hole and tubing with cement to 20 ft below surface. Rigged down drilling equipment for removal to Dutch Harbor by helicopter. Began slinging equipment off drill site. REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL, INC. By: L TEXT Ao Timothy M. ans’ Vice Presideéat} Land and Contracts * oe REPUBLIC GEOTHERMAL. INC. 11823 EAST SLAUSON AVENUE, SUITE ONE SANTA FE SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 90670 7 Twx - 910-586-1696 . , (213) 945-3661 November 12, 1984 Mr. Fred Zeillemaker Refuge Manager Aleutian Islands Unit Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge P. QO. Box 5251, Naval Air Station /FPO Seattle, Washington 98791 Dear Mr. Zeillemaker: In accordance with Special Use Permit No. AI-84-017, Condition 11, this letter is Republic Geothermal, Inc.'s formal notification that all field work has been completed at our j e Unalaska Geothermal Exploration Project. All materials were 4 removed from the drilling sites and the field camp on September 7. If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to give me a call. Sincerely, CLL-2— Chri nl, Joseph Environmental Affairs Specialist / CAdind