Scientific Investigations Report 2007-5192

Effects of Saline-Wastewater Injection on Water 

Quality in the Altamont-Bluebell Oil and Gas Field, 

Duchesne County, Utah, 1990-2005

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Prepared in cooperation with the 

UTAH DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, DIVISION OF OIL, GAS, AND MINING
Cover photo: Top left: Workover rig plugging an oil well in the Altamont-Bluebell oil and gas 

field, June 2007. Photo by Helen Sadik-Macdonald, Utah Department of Natural Resources, 

Division of Oil, Gas, and Mining. Bottom right: Looking west near Talmage, Utah, September 

2007. Photo by Joseph Gardner, U.S. Geological Survey. 
Effects of Saline-Wastewater Injection on 

Water Quality in the Altamont-Bluebell Oil 

and Gas Field, Duchesne County, Utah, 1990-

2005 

By Judy I. Steiger

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey

Prepared in cooperation with the

UTAH DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, DIVISION OF OIL, GAS, AND MINING

Scientific Investigations Report 2007-5192
U.S. Department of the Interior

DIRK KEMPTHORNE, Secretary 

U.S. Geological Survey

Mark D. Myers, Director

Reston, Virginia: 2007

For additional information write to:

U.S. Geological Survey

Director, USGS Utah Water Science Center

2329 W. Orton Circle

Salt Lake City, UT 84119-2047

Email: GS-W-UTpublic-info@usgs.gov 

URL: http://ut.water.usgs.gov/

For more information about the USGS and its products:

Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS

World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/ 

Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the 

U.S. Government.

 Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to 

reproduce any copyrighted materials contained within this report.

Scientific Investigations Report 2007-5192
Contents

Abstract...........................................................................................................................................................1

Introduction.....................................................................................................................................................1

Oil and Gas Production in the Altamont-Bluebell Field ..................................................................3

Purpose and Scope ..............................................................................................................................3

Water Quality..................................................................................................................................................3

Relative Concentrations of Major Chemical Constituents.............................................................8

Bromide and Chloride...........................................................................................................................8

Trends in Chemical Constituents......................................................................................................15

Stable Isotopes....................................................................................................................................15

Summary........................................................................................................................................................18

References Cited..........................................................................................................................................20

Figures

1. Location of the Altamont-Bluebell oil and gas field and surrounding area, 

Duchesne and Uintah Counties, Utah .......................................................................................2

2. Vertical relation and lithologic character of the source of the drinking-water 

supply to zones of oil production and disposal of saline wastewater, AltamontBluebell area, Duchesne and Uintah Counties, Utah ............................................................4

3. Location of saline-wastewater disposal wells and water-quality monitoring wells 

in the Altamont-Bluebell area, Duchesne and Uintah Counties, Utah.................................5

4. Major-ion composition of saline-wastewater samples and of ground-waterquality samples collected from monitoring wells located in the Bluebell oil field 

area, Duchesne County, Utah, 1992-93......................................................................................9

5. Mixing lines constructed between ground water and saline wastewater in 

relation to the weight ratio of bromide to chloride, for water samples collected 

from wells in the Altamont-Bluebell area, Duchesne County, Utah...................................16

6. Relation between δ2H and δ18O values for ground-water samples collected 

during 1992-2005 and saline wastewater samples collected during 1993, 

Altamont-Bluebell area, Duchesne County, Utah..................................................................19

iii
Conversion Factors, Datums, and Abbreviated Water-Quality 

Units

Multiply By To obtain

 Length

foot (ft) 0.3048 meter (m)

mile (mi) 1.609 kilometer (km)

Area

acre 0.4047 hectare (ha)

section (640 acres or 1 square mile) 259 square hectometer (hm2) 

square mile (mi2) 2.590 square kilometer (km2) 

Volume

cubic foot (ft3) 0.02832 cubic meter (m3) 

Temperature in degrees Celsius (°C) may be converted to degrees Fahrenheit (°F) as follows:

°F= (1.8×°C) +32.

Horizontal coordinate information is referenced to the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD 

83). Vertical coordinate information is referenced to the North American Vertical Datum of 1929 

(NGVD 29). Altitude, as used in this report, refers to distance above the vertical datum.

Chemical concentration is reported only in metric units. Chemical concentration is reported in 

milligrams per liter (mg/L) or micrograms per liter (μg/L). Milligrams per liter is a unit expression of 

the solute concentration per unit volume (liter) of water. One thousand micrograms per liter is equivalent to 1 milligram per liter. For concentrations less than 7,000 mg/L, the numerical value is about the 

same as for concentrations in parts per million. Specific conductance is represented in microsiemens 

per centimeter at 25 degrees Celsius (μS/cm).

Note: Spelling of “Uinta” and “Uintah” throughout this report will vary depending upon usage 

and context; the different spellings are intentional.

Tables

1. Records of water-quality monitoring wells and saline-wastewater disposal wells in 

the Altamont-Blueball area, Duchesne County, Utah.............................................................6

2. Physical properties and results of chemical analyses of water samples collected 

from selected water-quality monitoring wells and from saline wastewater in the 

Altamont-Bluebell area, Duchesne County, Utah, with data from 1964-2005...................10

3. Physical properties, bromide and chloride concentration, and isotopic ratios of 

water samples collected from selected water-quality monitoring wells and from 

saline wastewater in the Altamont-Bluebell area, Duchesne County, Utah, with 

data from 1964-2005....................................................................................................................12

iv
Numbering system for hydrologic-data sites in Utah

The system of numbering wells, springs, and other hydrologic-data sites in Utah is based 

on the cadastral land-survey system of the U.S. Government. The number, in addition to designating the site, describes its position in the land net. The land-survey system divides the State 

of Utah into four quadrants by the Salt Lake Base Line and the Salt Lake Meridian—and in the 

Uinta Basin, by the Uintah Base Line and the Uintah Meridian. These quadrants are designated 

by the uppercase letters A, B, C, and D, which indicate, respectively, the northeast, northwest, 

southwest, and southeast quadrants. Numbers that designate the township and range, in that 

order, follow the quadrant letter, and all three are enclosed in parentheses. The number after 

the parentheses indicates the section and is followed by three lowercase letters that indicate 

the quarter section, the quarter-quarter section, and the quarter-quarter-quarter section—generally 10 acres for a regular section1

. The lowercase letters a, b, c, and d indicate, respectively, 

the northeast, northwest, southwest, and southeast quarters of each subdivision. The number 

after the letters is the serial number of the well or spring within the 10-acre tract. Thus, U(C-1-

2)27ddc-1 designates the first well visited in the SW 1⁄4 of the SE 1⁄4 of the SE 1⁄4 of Sec. 27, T. 1 

S, R. 2 W. The capital letter “U” preceding the information in the parentheses indicates that the 

site is referenced to the Uintah Base Line and Meridian and that the site is in the Uinta Basin. 

The capital letter “C” indicates that the township is south of the Uintah Base Line and the range 

is west of the Uintah Meridian.

B T. 1 S., R. 2 W.

C

UTAH

b

c d

a

b

c d

a

a

d

b

6 5 4 3 2 1

7 8 9 10 11 12

18 17 16 15 14 13

19 20 21 22 23 24

30 29 28 27 26 25

31 32 33 34 35 36

R. 2 W. Section 25

T.

1

 S.

Sections within a township Tracts within a section

6 Miles

9.7 Kilometers

1 Mile

1.6 Kilometers

Well

c

SALT LAKE MERIDIAN

C D

B A

SALT LAKE BASE LINE

Salt Lake City

Area included in the

Uintah Special Baseline

and Meridian

U(C-1-2)27ddc-1

D

A

1

Although the basic land unit, the section, is theoretically 1 square mile, many sections are irregular. Such sections 

are subdivided into 10-acre tracts, generally beginning at the southeast corner, and the surplus or shortage is taken up in 

the tracts along the north and west sides of the section.
vi
Abstract

The Altamont-Bluebell oil and gas field in the Uinta 

Basin in northeastern Utah has been an important oil and 

natural gas production area since the 1950s. Saline water 

is produced along with oil during the oil-well drilling and 

pumping process. The saline wastewater is disposed of 

by injection into wells completed in the Duchesne River 

Formation, Uinta Formation, and other underlying formations. 

There are concerns that the injected saline wastewater could 

migrate into the upper part of the Duchesne River and Uinta 

Formations and surficial deposits that are used for drinkingwater supply and degrade the quality of the drinking water. 

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with the Utah 

Department of Natural Resources, Division of Oil, Gas, and 

Mining, began a program in 1990 to monitor water quality 

in five wells in the Altamont-Bluebell oil and gas field. By 

1996, water-quality samples had been collected from 20 wells. 

Ten of the 20 wells were sampled yearly during 1996-2005 

and analyzed for bromide, chloride, and stable isotopes. 

Comparison of major chemical constituents, bromide-tochloride ratios, trend analysis, and isotope ratios were used 

to assess if saline wastewater is migrating into parts of the 

formation that are developed for drinking-water supplies. 

Results of four different analyses all indicate that saline 

wastewater injected into the lower part of the Duchesne 

River and Uinta Formations and underlying formations is not 

migrating upward into the upper parts of the formations that 

are used for drinking-water supplies. 

Introduction

The Altamont-Bluebell oil and gas field in the Uinta 

Basin in northeastern Utah (fig. 1) has been an important oil 

and natural gas production area since the 1950s. The Altamont 

field is the western portion and Bluebell field is the eastern 

portion of the area. The Altamont-Bluebell oil and gas field 

includes a number of smaller fields within its boundary. To 

the south of the Altamont field is the Duchesne field. In this 

report, “Altamont-Bluebell area” refers to all the inholdings in 

the Altamont-Bluebell fields, and “Altamont area” includes the 

Duchesne field. 

Production of oil and natural gas has varied in the 

Altamont-Bluebell area through the years with the discovery 

of new reservoirs, maturation of development, and the price 

of oil. Saline wastewater is produced along with oil during 

oil-well drilling and oil production. Saline wastewater is 

collected in surface evaporation ponds or tanks at well heads 

and then transported to disposal sites where it is injected back 

into the ground. In 2005, saline wastewater in the AltamontBluebell field was injected at depths of from 3,100 to 10,500 

ft below land surface into the lower part of the Duchesne 

River Formation or underlying Uinta and Green River 

Formations (Utah Division of Oil, Gas, and Mining, written 

commun., 2006). The State of Utah encourages disposal of 

wastewater into zones where the ambient concentration of 

dissolved solids is greater than the concentration of dissolved 

solids of injection water (Freethey, 1994). Injection of water 

into the formation can change hydraulic gradients and the 

direction of ground-water flow (Freethey, 1988). Wells used 

for drinking-water supplies are completed in the surficial 

alluvial deposits and the upper part of the Duchesne River and 

Uinta Formations in the Altamont-Bluebell area. There are 

concerns that the injected saline wastewater could migrate into 

portions of the formations and surficial deposits that are used 

for drinking-water supply and degrade the quality of water. 

In response to these concerns, the U.S. Geological Survey, in 

cooperation with the Utah Department of Natural Resources, 

Division of Oil, Gas, and Mining, developed a water-quality 

monitoring program with the objective of collecting a longterm data set and assessing water-quality trends in the upper 

part of the Duchesne River and Uinta Formations and surficial 

deposits that could be used for drinking water.

The water-quality monitoring program began in phases 

with the collection of water samples from five wells in the 

Bluebell field in 1990. In 1991, an additional five wells in 

the same area were added to the monitoring network. All 10 

monitoring wells in the Bluebell field were completed in the 

Duchesne River Formation. Monitoring expanded again in 

1996 to include 10 wells in the Altamont field along with the 

10 previously sampled water wells in the Bluebell field. The 

monitoring wells in the Altamont area included two wells 

Effects of saline-wastewater injection on water quality in 

the Altamont-Bluebell oil and gas field, Duchesne County, 

Utah, 1990-2005 

By Judy I. Steiger
Figure 1. Location of the Altamont-Bluebell oil and gas field and surrounding area, Duchesne and Uintah Counties, Utah.

Dry

Gulch

Creek

Cottonwood

Uinta

River

Deep

Creek

Montes Creek

Lake Fork River

Duchesne River

121

40

UTAH

Great

Salt

Lake

Lake Powell

UINTA MOUNTAINS

Uintah and

Ouray Indian

Reservation

Colorado

Green River

River

Uinta Basin

Big

SandWash

Reservoir

DUCHESNE COUNTY

UINTAH COUNTY

0

0

4

4

8 MILES

8 KILOMETERS

Lake

Boreham

110°30' 110°00'

40°

22'

30"

40°

07'

30"

2

2

6

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph data, 1:100,000 scale, 1989 6 Universal Transverse Mercator projection, Zone 12

Starvation

Reservoir

Randlett

Bottle Hollow

Reservoir

Fort

Duchesne

Lapoint

Talmage

Duchesne

Roosevelt

Ballard

Whiterocks

Neola

Bluebell

Altamont

Field Boundary

Approximate Altamont–Bluebell

Oil and Gas

Duchesne

field

Bluebell field

Altamont field

Uintah Baseline

Uintah Meridian

R 7 W R 6 W R 5 W R 4 W R 3 W

R 2 W R 1 W

R 15 E R 16 E R 17 E R 18 E R 19 E

R 1 W

R 2 E

T

4

S

T

1

N

T

1

S

T

5

S

T

6

S

T

2

S

T

3

S

T

5

S

T

8

S

Uintah Special Baseline and Meridian

Field boundary from Utah Division of Oil, 

Gas, and Mining, written commun., 2007

   Effects of saline-wastewater injection, Altamont-Bluebell oil and gas field, Duchesne County, Utah, 1990-2005
completed in the Duchesne River Formation, three in surficial 

deposits, and five in the Uinta Formation. From 1996 through 

2004, 10 of the 20 wells were sampled annually on a rotating 

basis. Since 1993, monitoring of water quality focused on two 

constituents, bromide and chloride, and two stable isotopes, 

oxygen-18 (18O) and deuterium (2H).

Oil and Gas Production in the Altamont-Bluebell 

Field

The Altamont-Bluebell oil and natural gas fields are one 

of the most productive in Utah. The Green River and Wasatch 

Formations in the Altamont-Bluebell oil and gas field are the 

preferred production zone for oil and natural gas wells (fig. 

2). About one third of the wells in the fields are completed 

in other formations: the Uinta Formation, Duchesne River 

Formation, Flagstaff Limestone, and North Horn Formation 

(Utah Division of Oil, Gas, and Mining, written commun., 

2006). 

About 123 million barrels of oil was pumped from the 

Altamont-Bluebell oil and gas field during 1984-2005, with a 

peak annual production in 1985 of almost 11 million barrels. 

Production of oil in the area has declined since the mid-1980s 

to an average level during 2002-05 of about 2.6 million barrels 

of oil annually (Utah Division of Oil, Gas, and Mining, written 

commun., 2006).

Natural gas production in the Altamont-Bluebell field 

peaked in 1992 at about 17 million ft3. Production in 2005 was 

6 million ft3 (Utah Division of Oil, Gas, and Mining, written 

commun., 2006).

Saline water is produced along with the extracted 

oil. This wastewater is collected at the production sites in 

tanks or surface evaporation ponds and then transported to 

disposal wells for injection. In 2006, there were 20 active, 

2 inactive, and 12 plugged and abandoned disposal wells in 

the Altamont-Bluebell area. Depth of the 20 active disposal 

wells ranges from 3,150 to 15,597 ft (Utah Division of Oil, 

Gas, and Mining, written commun., 2006). Freethey (1994) 

identified two zones used for disposal of the saline wastewater 

(fig. 2). The lower portion of the Duchesne River Formation 

was referred to as the upper disposal zone and was identified 

in Freethey (1994) as sandstone layers bounded above and 

below by shale layers. Depth to the top of the upper disposal 

zone was defined as the depth to the first shale interval that 

was greater than 40 ft thick that was overlying the sandstone 

layers. Freethey (1994) identified the vertical and lateral 

extent of the upper disposal zone in the Bluebell field by using 

information from well construction data and geophysical 

logs. The vertical relation and lithologic character of geologic 

formations, oil-production zones, and saline-wastewater 

injection zones for the Altamont-Bluebell area are shown in 

figure 2.

A lower disposal zone in the Uinta and Green River 

Formations also was identified by Freethey (1994), but 

determining the extent of the zone was not within the scope 

of that report. The lower disposal zone is of concern in the 

southern part of the Altamont area near Starvation Reservoir 

and the City of Duchesne. The Duchesne River Formation 

thins out north of this area and the Uinta Formation is the 

source of the drinking-water supply (Hood, 1976). Saline 

wastewater in this area is disposed of in wells completed in the 

Uinta, Green River, or underlying formations. 

Purpose and Scope

The purpose of this report is to present water-quality 

data collected in the Altamont-Bluebell area of the Uinta 

Basin in Duchesne County during 1990-2005 and to assess 

if aquifers used to supply drinking water have been affected 

by the injection of saline wastewater into deeper zones of the 

formations. The data include results of water-quality analyses 

for water sampled from wells completed in the upper parts of 

the Duchesne River and Uinta Formations and in the surficial 

deposits. Water-quality data also include results of analyses of 

saline wastewater prior to disposal by injection into the lower 

part of the Duchesne River Formation and Uinta and Green 

River Formations. Bromide-to-chloride ratios, trend analysis, 

and stable isotopes are used to assess if saline wastewater 

is migrating into the portion of the formations and surficial 

deposits that is used to supply drinking water.

Water Quality

Water collected from a network of 20 water wells in the 

Altamont-Bluebell area has been sampled to monitor changes 

in water quality. Monitoring of water quality began in 1990 

in the Bluebell (eastern) portion of the Altamont-Bluebell 

field when water from five wells was analyzed for major ions. 

During 1991-93, water from 10 wells was analyzed for major 

ions. Beginning in 1992, the stable isotopes of 18O and 2H 

also were included in the analysis. In 1993, samples of saline 

wastewater were collected before injection at five disposal 

well sites (fig. 3) and also were analyzed for major ions and 

stable isotopes. Ten water wells in the Altamont portion of 

the area were added to the ground-water sampling network in 

1996. During 1996-2005, samples from the water wells were 

analyzed only for bromide, chloride, 18O, and 2H.

Water from 10 of the 20 water wells was scheduled to 

be sampled each year. Over time, three of the water-quality 

monitoring wells have been removed from the network 

because of well closures and (or) because the owner switched 

to municipal supply. Saline wastewater was sampled before 

injection in 1993 at the five designated saline-wastewater 

disposal wells. Well-construction data and depth of the 

water-quality monitoring wells and the five saline-wastewater 

disposal wells have been compiled and summarized in table 1, 

and the location of each well is shown in figure 3. 

Water Quality 
Figure 2. Vertical relation and lithologic character of the source of the drinking-water supply to zones of oil production and 

disposal of saline wastewater, Altamont-Bluebell area, Duchesne and Uintah Counties, Utah (reprinted from Freethey, 1994).

Upper

disposal

zone

Primary lithologic character

Approximate

maximum

thickness

Geologic unit (feet)

Drinking-water

supply

Oil-production

zones

Salinewastewater

disposal zones

Coarse sandstone, sandy

 conglomerate, sandy siltstone,

 fractured

Claystone, siltstone,

 sandstone, and shale

Shale, limestone, siltstone,

 and sandstone

Shale, sandstone,

and limestone

Shale, sandstone, and coal

300

3,000

4,000

5,000

10,000

4,000

Duchesne

River

Formation

Uinta

Formation

Green

River

Formation

Wasatch

Formation,

Flagstaff

Limestone,

and the

North Horn

Formation

Mesa Verde

Group

Condensed from Hood, 1976; Clem, 1985; and G.L. Hunt,

Utah Division of Oil, Gas, and Mining, written commun., 1983

Age

Quaternary Clay, silt, sand, gravel, and boulders

Tertiary

Cretaceous

Stream alluvium,

terrace deposits,

talus and glacial

deposits

Lower

disposal

zone

 Effects of saline-wastewater injection, Altamont-Bluebell oil and gas field, Duchesne County, Utah, 1990-2005
Figure 3. Location of saline-wastewater disposal wells and water-quality monitoring wells in the Altamont-Bluebell area, 

Duchesne and Uintah Counties, Utah.

Uintah Meridian

R 7 W R 6 W R 5 W R 4 W R 3 W

R 2 W R 1 W

R 15 E R 16 E R 17 E R 18 E R 19 E

R 1 W

R 2 E

T

5

S

T

8

S

Uintah Special Baseline and Meridian

T

4

S

T

1

N

T

1

S

T

5

S

T

6

S

T

2

S

T

3

S

Uintah Baseline

Dry

Gulch

Creek

Cottonwood

Uinta

River

Deep

Creek

Montes

Creek

Lake

Fork

River

Duchesne

River

121

40

U(C-1-1)5bda-1

U(C-1-1)33bcc-1

U(C-1-2)3ddd-1

U(C-1-2)13cca-1

U(C-1-2)22cbb-1 U(C-1-2)24aaa-1

U(C-1-2)27ddc-1

U(C-1-2)28dba-1 U(C-1-4)31bbb-1 U(C-1-2)36adc-1

U(C-1-4)33bdb-1

U(C-1-5)36caa-1

U(C-2-1)7bbd-1 U(C-2-1)9dad-1

U(C-2-1)10bbb-1

U(C-2-1)15cac-1

U(C-2-2)11bab-1

U(C-2-2)14ddb-3

U(C-2-4)6ccb-1

U(C-2-5)3bdd-1

U(C-2-5)34abb-1

U(C-2-5)35bab-1

U(C-3-4)31cab-1

U(C-3-5)31dcd-1, 2

(C- 3- 6)25cab- 1

Field boundary from Utah Division of Oil,

Gas, and Mining, written commun., 2007

EXPLANATION

Water-quality monitoring well

Saline-wastewater disposal well—Active

Saline-wastewater disposal well (Inactive)

Saline-wastewater disposal well (Plugged and abandoned)

Big Sand

Wash

Reservoir

DUCHESNE COUNTY

UINTAH COUNTY

0

0

4

4

8 MILES

8 KILOMETERS

Lake

Boreham

110°30' 110°00'

40°

22'

30"

40°

07'

30"

2

2

6

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital line graph data, 1:100,000 scale, 1989 6 Universal Transverse Mercator projection, Zone 12

Starvation

Reservoir

Randlett

Bottle Hollow

Reservoir

Fort

Duchesne

Lapoint

Talmage

Duchesne

Roosevelt

Ballard

Whiterocks

Neola

Altamont Bluebell

Field Boundary

Approximate Altamont–Bluebell

Oil and Gas

Duchesne

field

Bluebell field

Altamont field

Water Quality   
Table 1. Records of water-quality monitoring wells and saline-wastewater disposal wells in the Altamont-Blueball area, Duchesne 

County, Utah.

[Site name: for saline wastewater the name refers to the disposal well where the saline wastewater is injected into the ground; see report text for an explanation 

of the numbering system for hydologic-data sites; Site number: a unique number identifying a site in the U.S. Geological Survey database, originally based 

upon latitude and longitude; Primary use of water or site in 2005: H, domestic supply; I, irrigation; S, stock; U, unknown; D, saline-wastewater disposal well; 

Geohydrologic unit: GRRV, Green River Formation; DCRV, Duchesne River Formation; UINT, Uinta Formation; GRRV-WS, Green River and Wasatch Formations; ALVM, stream deposits, glacial deposits, and terrace deposits; Depth of well casing: R, reported depth; Type of well opening: P, perforated, X, open hole; 

—, no data]

Site name Site number 

Year

 constructed

Primary 

use of 

water or 

site

Altitude of 

land 

surface 

(feet)

Depth drilled 

(feet below 

land 

surface)

Depth of 

well casing 

(feet)

Diameter of 

well casing 

(inches)

Type of 

well 

opening

Bluebell field 

U(C-1-1)33bcc-1 402114110003301 1973 H 5,260 220 220 6,4 P 

U(C-1-2)22cbb-1 402246110061501 1961 I 5,705 810 60 8 X 

U(C-1-2)24aaa-1 402319110025601 1972 H 5,615 260 220 6,4 P, X 

U(C-1-2)27ddc-1 402135110051901 1972 H 5,610 420 320 6,4 X 

U(C-1-2)36adc-1 402116110030801 1970 S 5,394 170 40 6 X 

U(C-2-1)7bbd-1 401940110023601 1960; 1984 H 5,270 895 895 8,6 P 

U(C-2-1)9dad-1 401919109593201 1969 H 5,136 740 207 6 X 

U(C-2-1)15cac-1 401823109590401 1940 H 5,081 600 200 8,2 X 

U(C-2-2)11bab-1 401946110044601 1975 H 5,420 666 105 6 X 

U(C-2-2)14ddb-3 401820110041901 1928-29 H 5,270 — 500 R 6 — 

Altamont field 

U(C-1-4)31bbb-1 402130110231301 1978 H 6,690 100 55 6,5 P, X 

U(C-1-4)33bdb-1 402119110204201 1948 S 6,440 30 30 7 — 

U(C-1-5)36caa-1 402103110235601 1985 U 6,680 157 157 6 P 

U(C-2-4)6ccb-1 401957110231701 — H 6,650 29 29 6 — 

U(C-2-5)3bdd-1 402011110260901 1971 H 6,880 32 32 6 — 

U(C-2-5)34abb- 2 401613110260702 1973 H 5,852 200 200 6 P 

U(C-2-5)35bab-1 401611110251502 1972 H 5,870 120 120 6,4 P 

U(C-3-4)31cab-1 401030110225701 1946 H 5,640 70 70 6 P 

U(C-3-5)31dcd-1 401012110292101 1969 H 5,790 200 42 8,6 X 

U(C-3-5)31dcd- 2 401012110291901 1975 I 5,785 200 200 10,6 P 

U(C-3-6)25cab-1 401124110305501 1978 H 5,260 120 120 6 X 

Saline-wastewater disposal wells 

U(C-1-1)5bda-1 402541110011901 1984 D 5,960 15,645 15,560 

9,500

10,7,3 — 

U(C-1-2)3ddd-1 402507110051301 1969 D 5,900 3,150 3,108 13.5,10 — 

U(C-1-2)13cca-1 402326110034401 1970 D 5,620 12,530 12,520 10.75,7,4.5 — 

U(C-1-2)28dba-1 402157110063501 1974 D 5,720 3,500 3,450 13.5,9,3 — 

U(C-2-1)10bbb-1 401950109592501 1979 D 5,150 2,513 2,461 5,2.5 — 

 Effects of saline-wastewater injection, Altamont-Bluebell oil and gas field, Duchesne County, Utah, 1990-2005
Table 1. Records of water-quality monitoring wells and saline-wastewater disposal wells in the Altamont-Blueball area, Duchesne 

County, Utah—Continued.

Site name

Depth of open 

interval

(feet below 

land surface)

Geohydrologic 

unit Remarks

Bluebell field

U(C-1-1)33bcc-1 180-220 DCRV

U(C-1-2)22cbb-1 60-180 DCRV

U(C-1-2)24aaa-1 216-220; 220-260 DCRV

U(C-1-2)27ddc-1 320-420 DCRV

U(C-1-2)36adc-1 40-170 DCRV

U(C-2-1)7bbd-1 120-140; 160-180; 

200-240; 300-780;

DCRV Originally constructed in 1960; cleaned out and repaired in 1984

U(C-2-1)9dad-1 207-740 DCRV

U(C-2-1)15cac-1 200-600 DCRV Well dry in 2002

U(C-2-2)11bab-1 105-666 DCRV

U(C-2-2)14ddb-3 — DCRV

Altamont field

U(C-1-4)31bbb-1 40-55; 55-100 DCRV

U(C-1-4)33bdb-1 — ALVM

U(C-1-5)36caa-1 110-157 DCRV Well reported caved in sometime between 1996-99

U(C-2-4)6ccb-1 — ALVM Hand dug well

U(C-2-5)3bdd-1 — ALVM Owner said well went dry in August 2003

U(C-2-5)34abb- 2 140-160; 170-190 UINT

U(C-2-5)35bab-1 90-120 UINT

U(C-3-4)31cab-1 41-70 UINT

U(C-3-5)31dcd-1 42-200 UINT Sampled in 1974, alternate sample site for U(C-3-5)31dcd-2

U(C-3-5)31dcd- 2 140-200 UINT Well out of service since 1999

U(C-3-6)25cab-1 140-201 UINT

Saline-wastewater disposal wells

U(C-1-1)5bda-1 — GRRV Drilled as an oil production well in 1984, converted to disposal well in 1991 

and plugged to 9,500 feet depth; later plugged and abondoned

U(C-1-2)3ddd-1 — UINT

U(C-1-2)13cca-1 — GRRV-WS

U(C-1-2)28dba-1 — DCRV

U(C-2-1)10bbb-1 — DCRV Well plugged and abandoned in 2001

Water Quality   
Relative Concentrations of Major Chemical 

Constituents

Water quality in the Bluebell portion of the field varies 

spatially and was evaluated graphically with Stiff diagrams 

(fig. 4). A Stiff diagram is a simple way to show the relative 

concentration of major chemical constituents in water: 

positively charged ions (cations) appear to the left of the center 

line and negatively charged ions (anions) appear to the right. 

The distance of a vertex from the center line is proportional to 

the concentration of the chemical constituent. Stiff diagrams 

with similar shapes indicate that the respective water samples 

contain similar proportions of major ions. Concentrations 

of alkalinity used to determine bicarbonate and carbonate 

concentrations for the Stiff diagrams were calculated from the 

residual between the measured anion-cation balances. Water 

samples collected from the Altamont portion of the field 

during this study were not analyzed for all of the major ions 

necessary to construct Stiff diagrams. 

Each Stiff diagram represents a single water sample 

collected in 1993 except for one sample collected in 1992. 

The five samples of saline wastewater collected in 1993 are 

associated with the disposal wells into which the water was 

injected (fig. 4). These Stiff diagrams do not represent the 

water quality of the water contained within the formations 

in which these disposal wells are completed, but rather 

a composite of the waters from multiple formations and 

oil wells. Analyses of water samples collected from four 

water wells near Roosevelt (fig. 4, table 2) indicate that the 

dominant cation is sodium/potassium and the dominant anion 

is bicarbonate/carbonate. To the north and west of Roosevelt 

in water sampled from five water wells, the dominant cation is 

calcium, but the dominant anion is still bicarbonate/carbonate. 

All of the saline-wastewater samples contain much higher 

concentrations of dissolved ions than do the water samples 

collected from the monitoring wells and are of a consistent 

water type: the dominant cation is sodium/potassium and the 

dominant anion is chloride.

The Stiff diagrams of the saline wastewater and water 

collected from the water-quality monitoring wells have 

distinctive and very different shapes (fig. 4). If mixing of the 

saline wastewater and water from the monitoring wells were 

occurring, then the shape of each Stiff diagram would be either 

similar to that of the saline wastewater or would be a shape 

that was intermediate between that of the water sampled from 

the monitoring wells and the saline wastewater, depending 

on the degree of mixing. As mixing of the types of water 

occurred, the dominant cation for the mixed water would be 

expected to be sodium/potassium and the dominant anion 

would be chloride. Comparison of the relative concentration of 

major constituents shows a distinct and consistent difference 

for saline wastewater and water collected from water-quality 

monitoring wells, indicating a lack of mixing of the waters.

Bromide and Chloride

Beginning in 1994, monitoring for changes in water 

quality that could be caused by mixing of waters focused 

on two constituents, bromide and chloride, and two stable 

isotopes, 18O and 2H. These constituents were selected because 

differences in concentration or isotope ratios between water 

samples collected from the ground-water monitoring wells and 

samples of saline wastewater are large and the constituents 

are chemically conservative. Physical properties, bromide 

and chloride concentration, and isotopic ratios measured in 

samples of ground water and saline wastewater are listed in 

table 3. 

Chloride concentration in water samples collected from 

the monitoring wells ranged from 0.1 to 205 mg/L (table 3). 

Saline wastewater had concentrations of chloride ranging from 

2,500 to 5,500 mg/L (table 3).

Bromide concentration in water samples collected from 

the monitoring wells ranged from less than 0.01 to 0.82 mg/L 

(table 3). Seventy percent of the water samples collected from 

the monitoring wells had a bromide concentration of 0.03 

mg/L or less (table 3). Only five samples, all collected from 

monitoring wells U(C-1-4)33bdb-1 and U(C-1-5)36caa-1 in 

the Altamont area, had a bromide concentration greater than 

0.10 mg/L. Bromide concentration in saline wastewater ranged 

from 14 to 22 mg/L (table 3).

Because of the large differences in the concentration of 

bromide and chloride between water samples collected from 

the monitoring wells and saline wastewater, any increase in 

concentration of either of these two constituents in the water 

collected from the monitoring wells over time might indicate 

a mixing of the two waters. A plot of the ratio of bromide 

to chloride with chloride for water from the monitoring 

wells against a calculated mixing line of the two waters can 

show if ground water is mixing with saline wastewater. The 

calculated mixing line is the estimated chemical composition 

of water derived from mixing water of two different chemical 

compositions in various proportions. Calculated mixing 

lines were compared with bromide-to-chloride ratios for 41 

water samples from 6 selected monitoring wells. The end 

member representing water from each monitoring well shown 

in figure 5 is the mean chloride concentration and median 

bromide concentration for samples collected from the well 

during 1990-2005. The end member representing the saline 

wastewater is the mean chloride concentration (3,780 mg/L) 

and the mean bromide concentration (18.4 mg/L) of the five 

samples collected in 1993. If mixing occurred between the two 

types of water during this time, the concentrations and ratios 

would change. As a result, the data points on the graphs should 

plot on or near the corresponding calculated mixing line for 

each well if the assumptions made about the end members are 

correct. None of the data from the six monitoring wells plots 

along the calculated mixing line, which indicates that mixing 

with saline wastewater is unlikely at these wells. 

 Effects of saline-wastewater injection, Altamont-Bluebell oil and gas field, Duchesne County, Utah, 1990-2005
Figure 4. Major-ion composition of saline-wastewater samples and of ground-water-quality samples collected from 

monitoring wells located in the Bluebell oil field area, Duchesne County, Utah, 1992-93.

121

40

DUCHESNE COUNT

Y

UINTAH COUNT

Y

Base from U.S. Geological Survey digital data, 1:100,000 scale, 1989

Universal Transverse Mercator projection, Zone 12

Neola

0 2 4 6 8 KILOMETERS

0 2 4 6 8 MILES

Roosevelt

Cottonwood

Creek

Whiterocks

Gulch Dry

10 8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 10

U(C-1-1)33bcc- 1

07/10/92

5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5

U(C-1-2)22cbb-1

08/04/93

U(C-1-2)24aaa-1

08/04/93

3 2 1 0 1 2 3

U(C-1-2)27ddc-1

08/03/93

4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4

U(C-1-2)36adc-1

08/03/93

3 2 1 0 1 2 3

U(C-2-1)7bbd-1

08/03/93

MILLIEQUIVALENTS

4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4

U(C-2-1)9dad-1

08/05/93

8 6 4 2 0 2 4 6 8

U(C-2-1)15cac-1

08/04/93

6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

U(C-2-2)11bab-1

08/03/93

3 2 1 0 1 2 3

U(C-2-2)14ddb-3

08/04/93

4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4

U(C-1-1)5bda-1

07/29/93

150 100 50 0 50 100 150

U(C-1-2)3ddd-1

07/29/93

120 80 40 0 40 80 120

U(C-1-2)13cca-1

07/29/93

120 80 40 0 40 80 120

U(C-1-2)28dba-1

07/29/93

150 100 50 0 50 100 150

U(C-2-1)10bbb-1

07/29/93

160 120 80 40 0 40 80 120 160

Na+K

Mg

Ca

U(C-1-2)36adc-1

08/03/93

3 2 1 0 1 2 3

Cl+F

SO4

HCO3+CO3

Sodium and Potassium

Magnesium

Calcium

Chloride and Fluoride

Sulfate

Bicarbonate and Carbonate

Graph scales are variable

Sample site

Sample date

EXPLANATION

Saline-wastewater disposal well— Water-quality samples 

were collected prior to injecton into designated wells

110°30' 110°05'

40°22'30"

40°07'30"

Water-quality monitoring well

Water Quality   
Table 2. Physical properties and results of chemical analyses of water samples collected from selected water-quality monitoring 

wells and from saline wastewater in the Altamont-Bluebell area, Duchesne County, Utah, with data from 1964-2005.

[Site name: for saline wastewater the name refers to the disposal well where the saline wastewater is injected into the ground; see report text for an explanation of the numbering system for hydologic-data sites; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter; Alkalinity method: C, calculated from anion-cation balance; UL, 

unfiltered sample, lab analysis; UF, unfiltered sample, field analysis; FF, filtered sample, field analysis; <, less than; E, estimated value; —, no data]

Site 

name Date

pH, 

unfiltered, 

field

(standard 

units)

Specific 

conductance, 

field

 (μS/cm at 

25 degrees 

Celsius)

Temperature 

(degrees 

Celsius)

Calcium 

(mg/L)

Magnesium 

(mg/L)

Potassium 

(mg/L)

Sodium 

(mg/L)

Alkalinity, 

total 

(mg/L as 

CaCO3)

Alkalinity 

method

Bromide 

(mg/L)

Bluebell field 

U(C-1-1)33bcc-1 08/16/91 8.4 780 12 40 16 2 110 138 UL <0.01 

07/10/92 8.3 900 12.5 66 30 2.4 120 — — <.01 

08/04/93 8.6 495 12 8.3 3 1.4 100 192 C .01 

06/25/96 7.8 1,630 12.5 200 46 3.2 100 113 UL — 

08/31/05 7.6 1,620 14 202 54.4 3.47 117 102 UL — 

U(C-1-2)22cbb-1 10/06/64 7.6 383 12 47 18 — — 174 UF — 

08/15/91 7.7 450 13.5 49 20 3.5 11 200 UL .06 

07/08/92 7.8 410 13.5 48 20 3.2 12 192 FF .04 

08/04/93 7.6 440 13 51 20 3.3 12 248 C .05 

U(C-1-2)24aaa-1 08/01/90 7.5 365 12 50 11 4.2 4.8 137 UL .02 

08/18/91 7.7 355 12 51 11 4.1 4.6 139 UL .02 

07/10/92 8.1 350 12 50 11 3.8 4.6 133 FF .01 

08/04/93 7.6 365 12.5 53 12 3.8 4.7 175 C .02 

U(C-1-2)27ddc-1 08/16/91 7.7 355 15.5 50 11 3.6 4.4 148 UL .01 

07/09/92 8 340 12 49 12 3.5 4 142 FF .01 

08/03/93 7.7 360 13 51 12 3.1 4.3 180 C .03 

U(C-1-2)36adc-1 08/01/90 7.6 330 11.5 46 11 3.9 4.1 137 UL .02 

08/14/91 7.7 345 11.5 46 13 4 4 137 UL .01 

07/09/92 8 335 12.5 45 13 3.7 3.9 130 FF <.01 

08/03/93 7.8 340 12 48 12 3.5 4.1 171 C .02 

U(C-2-1)7bbd-1 08/14/91 8.1 530 14 18 4.9 2.4 98 216 UL .03 

07/09/92 8.3 415 16.5 17 4.8 2.5 72 172 FF .01 

08/03/93 8.1 445 14.5 18 4.9 2.3 85 228 C .04 

U(C-2-1)9dad-1 06/03/72 8.8 873 14.5 2.3 .9 1 190 258 UF — 

08/14/91 9.3 760 13.5 1.1 .43 .7 170 267 UL .01 

07/10/92 9.2 750 14.5 .98 .31 .7 170 250 FF .02 

08/05/93 9.2 750 15 .91 .32 .7 170 304 C .03 

U(C-2-1)15cac-1 03/22/73 9.1 549 14.5 1.9 .4 .9 130 192 UF — 

07/31/90 9 560 14 1.6 .51 .7 130 185 UL .02 

08/13/91 9.1 570 13 1.5 .56 .7 120 188 UL .02 

07/10/92 9 550 14 1.9 .42 .7 120 180 FF <.01 

08/04/93 9.2 570 17 1.5 .41 .7 120 218 C .02 

U(C-2-2)11bab-1 08/03/90 7.8 350 14 43 15 3.7 6.8 135 UL .02 

08/15/91 7.8 330 13.5 44 13 3.5 5.7 137 UL .01 

07/09/92 7.9 350 16 43 14 3.4 5.9 130 FF <.01 

08/03/93 7.9 365 14 45 15 3.2 8 171 C .02 

08/13/05 7.2 360 14.5 43.5 15.8 3.5 9.2 126 UL — 

U(C-2-2)14ddb-3 08/03/90 7.9 410 13.5 33 11 2.9 38 159 UL .02 

08/14/91 7.9 400 13 34 11 2.7 34 162 UL .02 

07/09/92 8 395 13.5 33 11 2.4 36 157 FF .01 

08/04/93 7.7 420 14 34 11 2.5 38 194 C .03 

Altamont field 

U(C-3-5)31dcd-1 03/30/72 8.9 1,950 10 4.6 6.4 1.4 450 493 UF — 

Saline wastewater1 

U(C-1-1)5bda-1 07/29/93 8.1 20,100 — 72 10 56 3,900 2,577 C 14 

U(C-1-2)3ddd-1 07/29/93 7.8 11,500 — 83 9.4 34 2,600 1,585 C 21 

U(C-1-2)13cca-1 07/29/93 7.9 12,300 — 180 15 30 2,500 2,010 C 22 

U(C-1-2)28dba-1 07/29/93 7.7 17,900 — 280 57 41 3,900 1,404 C 18 

U(C-2-1)10bbb-1 07/29/93 7.9 15,000 — 150 15 31 3,400 2,900 C 17 

1

Water-quality samples were collected prior to injection into designated wells.

10 Effects of saline-wastewater injection, Altamont-Bluebell oil and gas field, Duchesne County, Utah, 1990-2005
Table 2. Physical properties and results of chemical analyses of water samples collected from selected water-quality monitoring 

wells and saline wastewater in the Altamont-Bluebell area, Duchesne County, Utah, with data from 1964-2005—Continued.

Site 

name

Chloride 

(mg/L)

Fluoride 

(mg/L)

Iodide 

(mg/L)

Silica 

(mg/L)

Sulfate 

(mg/L)

Residue, 

sum of 

constituents 

(mg/L)

Barium 

(μg/L)

Boron 

(μg/L)

Iron 

(μg/L)

Lithium 

(μg/L)

Manganese 

(μg/L)

Strontium 

(μg/L)

Bluebell field

U(C-1-1)33bcc-1 0.1 1.3 — — 260 513 — — — — — 1,100

16 1.1 .024 7.4 430 751 23 120 550 82 20 2,100

.7 1.7 .016 7.3 86 — 12 110 220 53 3 210

.6 1.5 — 7.5 840 1,270 — 116 1,400 — 45 —

E.7 1.4 — 8.67 784 — — — 1,960 — 40.4 —

U(C-1-2)22cbb-1 1.9 — — 8.6 41 234 — — — — — —

4.4 .4 — — 30 239 — — — — — 380

3 .5 .008 8 37 253 70 60 1,100 36 16 400

2.9 .5 .008 8.2 30 — 63 60 1,200 38 15 400

U(C-1-2)24aaa-1 1.7 — — — 49 203 — — — — — 380

.2 .6 — — 50 205 — — — — — 360

.8 .7 .002 7.8 47 207 47 20 570 27 21 370

.8 .7 .002 8 48 — 40 30 460 29 20 370

U(C-1-2)27ddc-1 3.1 .6 — — 45 207 — — — — — 290

.6 .6 .003 8.4 41 207 55 20 760 23 20 280

.6 .5 .002 8.7 39 — 48 20 730 26 14 290

U(C-1-2)36adc-1 1.4 — — — 39 188 — — — — — 390

.2 .8 — — 44 195 — — — — — 530

.9 .8 .002 7.7 42 196 45 30 170 27 26 540

.6 .7 .002 8 38 — 43 30 200 26 22 390

U(C-2-1)7bbd-1 28 1.5 — — 47 329 — — — — — 150

7.2 1.1 .003 9.2 39 257 55 120 310 27 11 150

12 1.2 .002 9.5 44 — 47 120 440 29 9 150

U(C-2-1)9dad-1 33 1.2 — 9.8 120 513 — 230 40 — 0 —

39 1.4 — — 83 456 — — — — — 25

38 1.2 .009 8 71 440 15 50 88 41 5 15

32 1.2 .009 9 74 — 8 70 53 43 6 17

U(C-2-1)15cac-1 25 .6 — 9.4 70 354 — 50 50 — <10 —

26 — — — 57 327 — — — — — 23

24 .7 — — 59 319 — — — — — 21

28 .7 .003 8.9 57 326 16 50 32 33 4 15

23 .7 .003 9.1 52 — 18 60 30 33 3 14

U(C-2-2)11bab-1 1.5 — — — 49 200 — — — — — 400

.3 .5 — — 51 201 — — — — — 380

.7 .6 .002 9.4 52 208 46 40 170 14 22 380

1.6 .5 .002 9.5 50 — 40 50 95 15 15 410

1.3 .6 — 10.5 49 210 — — 222 — 11.9 —

U(C-2-2)14ddb-3 3.1 — — — 49 233 — — — — — 290

3.9 .6 — — 52 236 — — — — — 300

1.2 .6 .003 9.3 50 238 48 150 150 22 14 280

2.3 .6 .003 9.4 50 — 42 140 170 22 10 290

Altamont field

U(C-3-5)31dcd-1 140 1.2 — 18 310 1,230 — 2700 20 — — —

Saline wastewater1

U(C-1-1)5bda-1 4,400 — 5.7 18 440 — 300 60,000 310 8,700 170 5,900

U(C-1-2)3ddd-1 2,500 58 14 58 930 — 700 10,000 220 1,700 160 7,600

U(C-1-2)13cca-1 2,900 — 12 78 240 — — 9,100 60 1,600 260 8,400

U(C-1-2)28dba-1 5,500 — 15 52 540 — 1,200 11,000 180 2,800 310 11,000

U(C-2-1)10bbb-1 3,600 28 9.6 73 330 — 400 23,000 330 6,700 360 8,800 

Water Quality 11
Table 3. Physical properties, bromide and chloride concentration, and isotopic ratios of water samples collected from selected 

water-quality monitoring wells and from saline wastewater in the Altamont-Bluebell area, Duchesne County, Utah, with data from 

1964-2005—Continued.

Site name Date

pH, 

unfiltered, 

field 

(standard 

units)

Specific 

conductance 

(μS/cm at 

25 degrees 

Celsius)

Temperature 

(degrees 

Celsius)

Bromide 

(mg/L)

Chloride 

(mg/L)

δ2H 

(per mil)

δ18O

(per mil) 

Bluebell field

U(C-1-1)33bcc-1 08/16/91 8.4 780 12 <0.01 0.1 — —

07/10/92 8.3 900 12.5 <.01 16 -127 -17.10

08/04/93 8.6 495 12 .01 .7 -125 -17.01

06/21/94 7.8 1,670 13 <.01 .9 — -16.95

06/19/95 8.3 770 16 <.01 .7 — -16.87

06/25/96 7.8 1,630 12.5 — .6 — —

07/22/98 7.4 1,540 14.5 .03 .77 -125 -16.80

08/04/00 7.8 1,730 16 — — -125 -16.94

09/06/00 7.5 1,860 15.5 .04 1.07 — —

08/29/02 7.3 1,700 13.5 E.02 .82 -126 -16.98

08/31/05 7.6 1,620 14 — E.72 — —

U(C-1-2)22cbb-1 10/06/64 7.6 385 12 — 1.9 — —

08/15/91 7.7 450 13.5 .06 4.4 — —

07/08/92 7.8 410 13.5 .04 3 -138 -17.90

08/04/93 7.6 440 13 .05 2.9 -136 -18.04

06/21/94 7.5 450 13.5 .04 2.5 — -17.85

06/19/95 7.5 415 13 .04 2.5 — -17.81

08/04/00 7.4 395 24 — — -137 -18.00

09/06/00 7.7 385 20.5 .04 1.68 — —

08/29/02 7.6 390 20.5 E.02 1.87 -138 -18.11

08/31/05 7.5 380 17.5 — 1.19 -139 -18.33

U(C-1-2)24aaa-1 08/01/90 7.5 365 12 .02 1.7 — —

08/18/91 7.7 355 12 .02 .2 — —

07/10/92 8.1 350 12 .01 .8 -135 -18.10

08/04/93 7.6 365 12.5 .02 .8 -135 -18.13

06/21/94 7.5 390 13.5 .01 1 — -17.96

06/19/95 7.8 355 15 .02 .9 — -17.94

07/22/98 7.4 360 14 .03 1.02 -134 -17.90

08/04/00 7.7 350 16.5 — — -134 -17.92

09/06/00 7.7 350 15.5 .02 1.09 — —

08/29/02 7.7 345 13.5 <.03 1.3 -136 -17.95

U(C-1-2)27ddc-1 08/16/91 7.7 355 15.5 .01 3.1 — —

07/09/92 8 340 12 .01 .6 -139 -18.55

08/03/93 7.7 360 13 .03 .6 -137 -18.59

06/21/94 7.6 380 13.5 .02 .7 — -18.40

06/19/95 7.6 350 13 .02 .6 — -18.35

07/22/98 7.6 335 14 .03 .74 -138 -18.36

08/04/00 7.6 340 22 — — -138 -18.38

09/06/00 7.5 340 17 .05 .79 — —

08/29/02 7.6 345 14 <.03 1.21 -138 -18.36

U(C-1-2)36adc-1 08/01/90 7.6 330 11.5 .02 1.4 — —

08/14/91 7.7 345 11.5 .01 .2 — —

07/09/92 8 335 12.5 <.01 .9 -137 -18.35

08/03/93 7.8 340 12 .02 .6 -138 -18.61

06/21/94 7.8 385 13 .01 .8 — -18.26

06/19/95 7.8 335 14 .02 1 — -18.22

07/23/98 7.5 360 14 .03 1.05 -136 -18.14

08/03/00 7.8 335 18 — — -136 -18.24

Table 3. Physical properties, bromide and chloride concentration, and isotopic ratios of water samples collected from selected waterquality monitoring wells and from saline wastewater in the Altamont-Bluebell area, Duchesne County, Utah, with data from 1964-2005.

[Site name: for saline wastewater the name refers to the disposal well where the saline wastewater is injected into the ground; see report text for an explanation of 

the numbering system for hydologic-data sites; μS/cm, microsiemens per centimeter; <, less than; E, estimated value; —, no data]

12 Effects of saline-wastewater injection, Altamont-Bluebell oil and gas field, Duchesne County, Utah, 1990-2005
Table 3. Physical properties, bromide and chloride concentration, and isotopic ratios of water samples collected from selected 

water-quality monitoring wells and from saline wastewater in the Altamont-Bluebell area, Duchesne County, Utah, with data from 

1964-2005—Continued.

Site name Date

pH, 

unfiltered, 

field 

(standard 

units)

Specific 

conductance 

(μS/cm at 

25 degrees 

Celsius)

Temperature 

(degrees 

Celsius)

Bromide 

(mg/L)

Chloride 

(mg/L)

δ2H 

(per mil)

δ18O

(per mil) 

Bluebell field—Continued

 U(C-1- 2)36adc-1 

—Continued

09/07/00 7.8 340 12 0.04 1.17 — —

08/28/02 7.7 340 14 <.03 1.22 -137 -18.21

09/03/03 7.3 335 13.5 .02 .95 -138 -18.25

U(C-2-1)7bbd-1 08/14/91 8.1 530 14 .03 28 — —

07/09/92 8.3 415 16.5 .01 7.2 -128 -17.30

08/03/93 8.1 445 14.5 .04 12 -127 -17.33

06/21/94 8 920 15 .04 95 — -17.17

06/19/95 8.1 415 15 .02 4.8 — -17.14

07/22/98 7.9 730 16 .05 56.4 -128 -17.13

08/03/00 8.1 420 15.5 — — -130 -17.18

09/07/00 8.1 430 14.5 .04 5.78 — —

08/29/02 8 510 17 <.03 19.8 -127 -17.20

U(C-2-1)9dad-1 06/03/72 8.8 873 14.5 — 33 — —

08/14/91 9.3 760 13.5 .01 39 — —

07/10/92 9.2 750 14.5 .02 38 -129 -17.45

08/05/93 9.2 750 15 .03 32 -128 -17.58

08/05/97 9.1 770 13 .01 33.9 — -17.27

07/14/99 9.4 740 15.5 — — -127 -17.20

06/28/01 — 900 17 .03 30.4 -128 -17.15

U(C-2-1)15cac-1 03/22/73 9.1 549 14.5 — 25 — —

07/31/90 9 560 14 .02 26 — —

08/13/91 9.1 570 13 .02 24 — —

07/10/92 9 550 14 <.01 28 -128 -17.40

08/04/93 9.2 570 17 .02 23 -128 -17.39

06/21/94 9 550 15 .02 25 — -17.29

06/20/95 9.1 540 17 .02 24 — -17.19

07/23/98 9 560 14.5 .02 24.6 -127 -17.20

08/04/00 9 550 15.5 — — -129 -17.24

09/06/00 9 550 17 .03 23.3 — —

U(C-2-2)11bab-1 08/03/90 7.8 350 14 .02 1.5 — —

08/15/91 7.8 330 13.5 .01 .3 — —

07/09/92 7.9 350 16 <.01 .7 -137 -18.30

08/03/93 7.9 365 14 .02 1.6 -136 -18.32

06/21/94 7.6 430 14.5 .02 1.8 — -18.18

06/19/95 7.7 365 16 .02 1.5 — -18.11

07/22/98 7.4 375 14 .02 1.63 -136 -18.09

06/26/01 7.7 360 16.5 .02 2.41 -136 -18.11

09/03/03 7.6 350 13.5 .02 1.5 -136 -18.13

08/13/05 7.2 360 14.5 — 1.34 — —

U(C-2-2)14ddb-3 08/03/90 7.9 410 13.5 .02 3.1 — —

08/14/91 7.9 400 13 .02 3.9 — —

07/09/92 8 395 13.5 .01 1.2 -137 -18.20

08/04/93 7.7 420 14 .03 2.3 -128 -18.25

06/21/94 7.7 425 17 .01 1 — -18.06

06/19/95 7.7 330 14 .02 1 — -18.05

08/05/97 7.9 415 13 .01 2.68 — -18.08

07/14/99 8.1 400 16.5 — — -135 -18.04

08/03/00 7.9 400 16 — — -139 -18.02

09/07/00 7.9 400 15.5 .04 2.86 — —

08/28/02 7.7 360 22 <.03 1.33 -138 -18.14

Water Quality 13
Table 3. Physical properties, bromide and chloride concentration, and isotopic ratios of water samples collected from selected 

water-quality monitoring wells and from saline wastewater in the Altamont-Bluebell area, Duchesne County, Utah, with data from 

1964-2005—Continued.

Site name Date

pH, 

unfiltered, 

field 

(standard 

units)

Specific 

conductance 

(μS/cm at 

25 degrees 

Celsius)

Temperature 

(degrees 

Celsius)

Bromide 

(mg/L)

Chloride 

(mg/L)

δ2H 

(per mil)

δ18O

(per mil) 

Altamont field

U(C-1- 4)31bbb-1 08/08/96 7.5 730 13 .06 14 — -15.86

07/25/97 7.2 820 13 .09 15.8 — -15.71

07/14/99 7.7 840 11.5 — — -117 -15.74

08/03/00 7.2 850 22.5 — — -118 -15.62

09/07/00 7.3 830 12.5 .05 13.4 — —

08/28/02 7.1 820 18 .03 11 -116 -15.40

U(C-1-4)33bdb-1 08/08/96 6.9 3,090 12 .51 86 — -15.01

07/27/97 6.9 3,100 12 .50 114 — -14.98

07/14/99 6.8 3,990 14.5 — — -108 -13.72

06/26/01 6.7 4,310 11.5 .76 200 -108 -13.37

09/02/03 6.7 3,890 13 .75 205 -103 -12.87

U(C-1-5)36caa-1 08/08/96 7.2 1,760 13 .82 160 — -14.99

U(C-2- 4)6ccb-1 06/27/96 7.7 830 11.5 .09 19 -115 -15.34

08/12/98 7.5 890 15 .10 20.3 -114 -14.92

U(C-2-5)3bdd-1 08/08/96 8 270 10 <.01 .70 — -16.13

07/25/97 7.8 310 14 <.01 .97 — -16.62

07/14/99 7.9 435 16 — — -118 -15.81

06/26/01 7.8 510 10.5 .02 2.78 -115 -15.49

U(C-2-5)34abb-1 06/28/96 8.9 970 12 .03 2 -139 -18.33

07/23/98 9.5 710 11.5 .04 3.35 -137 -18.16

09/07/00 9.5 670 12 .04 2.34 — —

08/28/02 9.4 680 18.5 E.02 2.11 -138 -18.31

U(C-2-5)35bab-1 06/26/96 8.9 970 12 .04 11 -132 -17.39

08/05/97 8.9 920 13 .02 10.5 — —

07/14/99 9.3 980 13.5 — — -131 -17.55

06/26/01 8.7 1,010 13 .03 19.7 -132 -17.37

09/02/03 8 1,000 16 .04 19.9 -126 -16.83

U(C-3-4)31cab-1 08/08/96 7.4 680 14.5 .05 7.59 — -17.08

07/25/97 7.3 730 19 .03 8.16 — -17.16

07/13/99 7.5 730 16.5 — — -120 -16.20

06/26/01 7.3 820 17.5 .04 13.6 -121 -16.21

09/02/03 7.3 580 17.5 .03 8.46 -120 -15.73

08/31/05 7.5 820 16 — 11.6 -122 -16.30

U(C-3-5)31dcd-1 03/30/72 8.9 1,950 10 — 140 — —

U(C-3-5)31dcd-2 06/26/96 9.3 1,860 13.5 .05 150 -137 -17.83

U(C-3-6)25cab-1 06/27/96 9.4 900 11 .04 2.4 — —

08/08/96 9.4 910 13 .04 2.7 — -18.68

07/25/97 9.4 920 19 .03 2.54 — -18.66

07/13/99 9.5 880 15 — — -141 -18.72

06/28/01 — 910 12 .04 2.78 -142 -18.68

Saline wastewater1

U(C-1-1)5bda-1 07/29/93 8.1 20,100 — 14 4,400 -66.3 -2.39

U(C-1-2)3ddd-1 07/29/93 7.8 11,500 — 21 2,500 -52.3 .40

U(C-1-2)13cca-1 07/29/93 7.9 12,300 — 22 2,900 -49.7 .78

U(C-1-2)28dba-1 07/29/93 7.7 17,900 — 18 5,500 -53.5 .60

U(C-2-1)10bbb-1 07/29/93 7.9 15,000 — 17 3,600 -54.3 .41 1

Water-quality samples were collected prior to injection into designated wells. 

14  Effects of saline-wastewater injection, Altamont-Bluebell oil and gas field, Duchesne County, Utah, 1990-2005
Trends in Chemical Constituents

Another way to assess if injected saline wastewater is 

migrating into drinking-water production zones is to examine 

changes over time or trends in chemical constituents. Trends in 

the concentration of bromide and chloride were analyzed for 

water samples collected during 1990-2005 from 17 monitoring 

wells with the Sen slope statistical method. Three sites with 

two or fewer analyses were not included (U(C-1-5)36caa-1, 

U(C-2-4)6ccb-1, and U(C-3-5)31dcd-1). The Sen method 

calculates the slope as a change in measurement per change 

in time (Sen, 1968). No statistically significant trends at the 

90-percent confidence level for the concentration of bromide 

in water samples collected from the wells were determined 

from the results of this analysis. For chloride concentration, 

the analysis of water samples collected from two wells (U(C1-2)22cbb-1 and U(C-2-1)9dad-1) showed a downward trend 

and that from one well (U(C-1-4)33bdb-1) showed an upward 

trend at the 90-percent confidence level. Little change in 

bromide and chloride concentration has occurred in water 

samples collected from most of the monitoring wells during 

the monitoring period, indicating that, in general, injected 

saline wastewater is not moving into the upper part of the 

Duchesne River Formation, Uinta Formation, or surficial 

deposits that are used as drinking-water sources. 

The analysis of water samples collected from wells U(C1-2)22cbb-1 and U(C-2-1)9dad-1 showed decreasing trends in 

chloride concentration during 1991-2005. Both of the wells 

are in the eastern portion of the study area near Roosevelt and 

have completion depths of 810 and 740 ft, respectively. The 

chloride concentration (table 3) of water from well U(C-1-

2)22cbb-1 decreased from 4.4 mg/L in 1991 to 1.19 mg/L in 

2005. The chloride concentration for water from well U(C2-1)9dad-1 decreased from 39 mg/L in 1991 to 30.4 mg/L 

in 2001. Because the Sen method requires a time series of 

equally spaced data, the pre-1991 data were not used in the 

statistics. 

The decreasing trend for water from wells U(C-1-

2)22cbb-1 and U(C-2-1)9dad-1 is for 1991-2005 only. Water 

from well U(C-1-2)22cbb-1 had a chloride concentration of 

1.9 mg/L in 1964 and water from well U(C-2-1)9dad-1 had 

a chloride concentration of 33 mg/L in 1972. These earlier 

data indicate that the trends may not be statistically significant 

and may be the result of natural long-term fluctuations in 

precipitation and recharge. 

Chloride concentration in water from well U(C-1-

4)33bdb-1, about 6 mi west of Altamont, increased steadily 

from 86 mg/L in 1996 to 205 mg/L in 2003. Bromide 

concentration for water from this well showed no trend with 

the Sen method at the 90-percent confidence level; however, 

bromide concentration did increase from 0.51 mg/L in 1996 

to 0.75 mg/L in 2003. These concentrations are more than 

five times higher than bromide concentrations measured in all 

but one of the other monitoring wells in the area (water from 

monitoring well U(C-1-5)36caa-1 had a bromide concentration 

of 0.82 mg/L in 1996). 

Well U(C-1-4)33bdb-1 was drilled into surficial deposits 

in 1948 and is 30 ft deep. During sample collection from this 

well in 2003 it was noted that the water had a brown color, 

was slow to filter, and had a rotten egg smell (Paul Downhour, 

U.S. Geological Survey, written commun., 2003). Water from 

this well has a higher specific-conductance and lower pH value 

than water from the other monitoring wells (table 3). The 

pH value varied from 6.7 to 6.9 and the specific-conductance 

value, a measure of the electrical conductivity of water that 

is related to the concentration of dissolved solids in water, 

varied from 3,090 to 4,310 μS/cm. The specific-conductance 

value for water from the nearest observation well, U(C-1-

4)31bbb-1 (about 2 1⁄2 mi west) completed at a depth of 55 ft 

in the Duchesne River Formation, was about 830 μS/cm. This 

difference in specific conductance may indicate that water 

quality in well U(C-1-4)33bdb-1 is affected by activities on 

the land surface rather than from mixing with injected saline 

wastewater. However, the water from this well is not suitable 

for domestic use or irrigation because of the high specificconductance value. 

Stable Isotopes

The stable isotopes of oxygen (18O) and hydrogen (2H 

or deuterium) occur naturally in water and can be used to 

determine sources of recharge and the extent of mixing in a 

ground-water system (Thiros, 1995). Water samples collected 

from 1992 to 2005 from the 20 water-quality monitoring 

wells were analyzed for isotopes and the results are reported 

as isotopic ratios (δ18O and δ2H, table 3). Samples of saline 

wastewater for injection at five sites were collected in 1993 

and analyzed for isotopes. Isotopic ratios of oxygen for water 

from the monitoring wells ranged from -18.72 to -12.87 per 

mil and for saline wastewater ranged from -2.39 to 0.78 per 

mil (table 3). Isotopic ratios of hydrogen for water from the 

monitoring wells ranged from -142 to -103 per mil and for 

saline wastewater ranged from -66.3 to -49.7 per mil (table 3). 

Thus, water from the monitoring wells and saline wastewater 

have distinctively different isotopic signatures that can be used 

to assess mixing.

The relation between δ18O and δ2H generally is expressed 

by the equation δ2H = 8 δ18O + 10, known as the global 

meteoric water line (Craig, 1961). Isotopic data from saline 

wastewater sampled in 1993, water from the monitoring 

wells grouped by area (Altamont and Bluebell) and by year 

collected (1992-2005), and the global meteoric water line are 

shown in figure 6. The isotope data for the saline wastewater 

deviates from the global meteoric water line, indicating that 

the water has been enriched in δ18O relative to δ2H. Because 

the saline wastewater is first collected in evaporation ponds 

before being disposed of, the enrichment in δ18O relative to 

δ2H likely is a result of evaporation (Coplen and others, 1999). 

The isotope data for the Bluebell area are clustered around 

the global meteoric water line, and the isotope data for the 

Altamont area are shifted slightly. However, if mixing were 

Water Quality 15
Figure 5. Mixing lines constructed between ground water and saline wastewater in relation to the weight ratio of bromide 

to chloride, for water samples collected from wells in the Altamont-Bluebell area, Duchesne County, Utah.

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Well U(C-2-2)11bab-1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Well U(C-1-4)33bdb-1

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

0

5

10

15

20

25

Well U(C-1-2)22cbb-1

Ground-water sample

Mixing line

CHLORIDE CONCENTRATION, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

BROMIDE - TO - CHLORIDE RATIO, TIMES 1,000

16  Effects of saline-wastewater injection, Altamont-Bluebell oil and gas field, Duchesne County, Utah, 1990-2005
Figure 5. Mixing lines constructed between ground water and saline wastewater in relation to the weight ratio of bromide to chloride, 

for water samples collected from wells in the Altamont-Bluebell area, Duchesne County, Utah—Continued.

Water Quality 17

Figure 6.

Well U(C-1-1)33bcc-1

0 20 40 60 80 100

Well U(C-3-4)31cab-1

Well U(C-2-1)15cac-1

0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

CHLORIDE CONCENTRATION, IN MILLIGRAMS PER LITER

BROMIDE - TO - CHLORIDE RATIO, TIMES 1,000

Ground-water sample

Mixing line
occurring between the saline wastewater and the water from 

the monitoring wells, the isotope data for the water from the 

monitoring wells would increasingly deviate from the global 

meteoric water line over time and trend toward that of the 

saline wastewater. Isotope data for water from monitoring 

wells generally do not deviate from the global meteoric water 

line over time, indicating that the sampled ground water is not 

mixing with saline wastewater. However, water from one well, 

U(C-1-4)33bdb-1, did show an increasing trend in δ18O from 

-15.01 in 1996 to -12.87 in 2003. Water from this well, which 

is drilled into the surficial deposits, also showed an increasing 

trend in bromide and chloride concentration. Because this well 

is drilled to only 30 ft, it is possible that the changes in water 

quality may result from sources related to activities on the land 

surface rather than from mixing with saline wastewater.

Summary

In the process of drilling and pumping oil from the 

Altamont-Bluebell oil field in the Uinta Basin of northeastern 

Utah, saline water is produced along with the extraction 

of oil. This saline wastewater is disposed of in surface 

evaporation ponds and then injected into disposal wells 

completed at depths greater than 3,000 ft below land surface 

in the Duchesne River and underlying formations. The upper 

part of the Duchesne River Formation also is developed for 

drinking-water supply. Because of a potential for injected 

saline wastewater to migrate and mix with water contained 

within drinking-water aquifers, the U.S. Geological Survey, in 

cooperation with the Utah Department of Natural Resources, 

Division of Oil, Gas, and Mining, began to monitor water 

quality in five wells in the Altamont-Bluebell area in 1990. 

The number of wells sampled increased to 20 by 1996. The 

objective of the monitoring program was to collect a longterm data set that could be assessed to determine if saline 

wastewater was migrating into aquifers used for drinkingwater supply. Water samples collected from the monitoring 

wells and samples of the saline wastewater were analyzed for 

chloride and bromide concentration and for the ratio of stable 

isotopes. 

Four methods, including comparison of major chemical 

constituents, bromide-to-chloride ratios, trend analysis, 

and stable isotope ratios, were used to assess the data set 

to determine if saline wastewater was affecting drinkingwater aquifers. Chemical constituents were plotted on Stiff 

diagrams, and comparison of the water samples collected 

from monitoring wells with the samples of saline wastewater 

indicates a distinct chemical composition for each water 

source, which indicates a lack of mixing of water. Plots of 

bromide-to-chloride ratios with chloride concentrations for 

water samples collected from monitoring wells and for saline 

wastewater end members did not fall along a calculated 

mixing line. This indicates that no mixing occurs between the 

two types of water. Analysis of temporal trends in bromide 

and chloride concentrations using the Sen slope method 

determined no statistically significant increasing trends 

with one exception, which indicates little or no change in 

concentrations and no indication of mixing between the two 

types of water. The one exception was anomalous results for 

water from one well with a total depth of 30 feet that was 

drilled into and completed in surficial deposits, thus making it 

possible that the water quality could be affected by activities 

occurring on the land surface. 

Analysis of stable isotope data determined that water 

samples collected from monitoring wells plotted on the global 

meteoric water line, and data for saline-wastewater samples 

were shifted, probably as a result of evaporation occurring 

while the water was stored in evaporation ponds. If saline 

wastewater were mixing with water from the monitoring 

wells, the stable isotope data for these samples should have 

been shifted away from the global meteoric water line. That 

this is not the case provides additional evidence that the two 

types of water are not mixing. The three different analyses all 

indicate that the saline wastewater injected into the lower part 

of the Duchesne River, Uinta, Green River, and underlying 

formations is not migrating upward into the upper part of the 

Duchesne River and Uinta Formations or surficial deposits that 

are used for drinking-water supplies. Continued monitoring of 

ground-water quality in the Altamont-Bluebell area would be 

useful because oil and gas development in the Uinta Basin has 

been accelerating in recent years and the injection of saline 

wastewater will continue. 

18  Effects of saline-wastewater injection, Altamont-Bluebell oil and gas field, Duchesne County, Utah, 1990-2005
Figure 6. Relation between δ2

H and δ18O values for ground-water samples collected during 1992-2005 and saline-wastewater 

samples collected during 1993, Altamont-Bluebell area, Duchesne County, Utah.

Global meteoric water line

Global meteoric water line

Saline wastewater

Ground water

1992

1993

1996

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2005

D18O, IN PER MIL

D2H, IN PER MI

L

-160

-140

-120

-100

-80

-60

-40

Bluebell area

-160

-140

-120

-100

-80

-60

-40

-20.00 -15.00 -10.00 -5.00 0 5.00

Altamont area

Summary 19
References Cited

Clem, Keith, 1985, Oil and gas production summary of the 

Uinta Basin, in Picard, M.D., ed., Geology and energy 

resources, Uinta Basin of Utah: Utah Geological Association Publication 12, p. 159-167.

Coplen, T.B., Herczeg, A.L., and Barnes, C.J., 1999, Isotope 

engineering—Using stable isotopes of the water molecule itself to solve practical problems, in Cook, P.G., and 

Herczeg, A.L., eds., Environmental Tracers in Subsurface 

Hydrology: Boston, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 

p. 79-110.

Craig, H., 1961, Isotopic variations in meteoric waters: Science, v. 133, p. 1702-1703.

Freethey, G.W., 1988, Models, data available, and data 

requirements for estimating the effects of injecting saltwater into disposal wells in the greater Altamont-Bluebell oil 

and gas field, northern Uinta Basin, Utah: U.S. Geological 

Survey Open-File Report 88-475, 30 p.

Freethey, G.W., 1994, Maps summarizing geohydrologic 

information in an area of salt-water disposal, eastern 

Altamont-Bluebell Petroleum Field, Uinta Basin, Utah: U.S. 

Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 

92-4043, 2 sheets.

Hood, J.W., 1976, Characteristics of aquifers in the northern 

Uinta Basin area, Utah and Colorado: Utah Department of 

Natural Resources Technical Publication No. 53, 71 p.

Sen, P.K., 1968, Estimates of the regression coefficient based 

on Kendall’s tau: Journal of the American Statistical Association, v. 63, p. 1379-1389.

Thiros, S.A., 1995, Chemical composition of ground water, 

hydrologic properties of basin-fill material, and groundwater movement in Salt Lake Valley, Utah: Utah Department of Natural Resources Technical Publication No. 

110-A, 59 p.

20 Effects of saline-wastewater injection, Altamont-Bluebell oil and gas field, Duchesne County, Utah, 1990-2005
J.I. Steiger—Effects of saline-wastewater injection on water quality in the Altamont-Bluebell oil and gas field, Duchesne County, 

Utah, 1990-2005—SIR 2007-5192