Uranium Resource Evaluation, Lubbock Quadrangle, Texas
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
LUI\I\l)CI<. URANIUM RESOUI~CE EVI\LlJl\TION LUBBOCK QU/\DRANGLE TEXAS J. H. McGowen, S. J~ Seni, R. L. Andersen, and J. E. Thurwachter 'jI ,1 !!' Bureau of Economic Geology .'.':i..• ' ... , '. The University of Texas at Austin ."t"~ '~;;: ..•.. J: University Station, ()ox X ~ ~ Austin, Texas 78712 Work performed under Bendix Field Engineering Corporation, Grand Junction Operations, Subcontrdct No. 78-133-E, and Bendix Contract No. DE-AC13-76GJ01664 March 1980 PREPARED FOR THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY GRAND JUNCTION, COLORI\DO 81502 LUl)HOCK FIGURE CAPTIONS Figure 1. Location of Lubbock Quadrangle. Figure 2. Major structural elements, late Paleozoic (after Erxleben, 1975). Figure 3. Stratigraphic column with lithologic descriptions. Figure 4. South to north cross section, Guadalupe and Ochoa Series, western part of Lubbock Quadrangle (after Maher, 1960). Figure 5. Sediment dispersal system (Dockum) during humid climate conditions: meandering streams (A-A' and 5-5'); large distributary channel (C-C'); small distri butary channel, channel mouth bar, and delta front (D-D'); delta front, prodelta, and lacustrine (E-E'); crevasse channel (F-F'); and crevasse splay (G-G') (after McGowen, Granata, and Seni, 1979). Figure 6. Sediment dispersal system (Dockum) during arid climatic conditions: valley fill (A-A')j braided feeder channei (5-B'); delta platform, delta foresets, delta front, and lacustrine (section parailel to sediment transport, (C-C'); and same f.acies as (C-C') except section is perpendicular to sediment transport (D-I),) (after McGowen, Granata, and Seni, 1979). Figure 7. Sedimentary features, Caprock locality. Figure 8. Sedimentary features, Yellow Cub locality. LUI)I)OCK page 2 - figure captions Figure 9. Sedimentary features, Hillside locality. Crevasse splay (splay delta of McGowen, Granata, and Seni, 1979); greenish-gray slightly calcitic finc-grai'ned sand stone with lenses of sandy granule to pebble mud-clast conglomerate;, and trough cross beds, foreset crossbeds, horizontal laminae, and parallel-inclined laminae are the primary sedimentary structures. Figure 10. Sedimentary features, MacArthur locality. Figure 11. Sedimentary features, Red Mud locality. Figure 12. Subsurface sandstone distribution patterns and outcrop directional trends (lower Dockum) {after McGowen, Granata, and Seni, 1979}. J!'igure 13. Depositional systems,' Duncan Sandstone Member, San Angelo Formation (after Smith, 1974). Figure 14. Depositional systems, Flowerpot Member, San Angelo Formation, and lower part of Blaine Formation (after'Smith, 197 If). Figure 15. Structural elements that influenced deposition of the San Angelo For mation (after Smith, 1974). Figure 16. Sand isolith map of the San Angelo Formation (after Smith, 1974). Figure 17. Evaporative pump mechanism operative during San Angelo deposition (after Smith,1974). Figure 18. Influence of Ogallala ground-water system on uranium rnineralization within Permian and Triassic strata. L I This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the United States Government. Neither the United States nor the United States Department of Energy, nor any of their employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors, or their I employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or I responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Llll)l\OCK CONTENTS Abstract Introduction 2 Purpose and scope 2 Acknowledgments 2 Procedures 3 Geologic setting. .. 4 Environments favorable for uranium deposits. 7 Tule Formation . 7 Stratigraphy and structure 8 Lithology 8 Depositional environment <) Uranium mineralization 10 Hydrology • 10 Favorable area 10 Area A 10 Ogallala Formation 11 Stratigraphy and structure 11 Lithology 12 Depositional environment 12 Uraniull1 mineralization 13 Hydrology . 14 iii UJlmOCK favorable arca 15 Area 13 15 Drainage, generalized land status, and culture 16 Dockum Group 17 Stratigraphy and structure 17 Lithology 18 Depositional environments 18 Uranium mineralization 19 Hydrology ° 20 Favorable areas (outcrop) 20 Area C ,0 20 Area D 23 Area E 24 Favorable areas (subsurface) 26 Area F 26 Area G ?J Area H 27 Drainage, generalized land status, and cui ture 28 San Angelo Formation ° 29 Stratigraphy and structure ° '30 Lithology 31 Dcposi til)l)al ('nvironmcnt 11 Uranium mineralization 32 Hydrology ° 12 iv LI JI\I\()CK Favorable area 12 Area I ,2 Drainage, generalized land status, and cultllrc 13 Environments unfavorable for uranium deposits Vt Pleistocene and youngcr uni ts VI Ogallala Formation 35 Dockum Group 35 Permian formations 36 Unevaluated environments ,8 Interpretation of radiometric and geochemical data ,8 Radiometric data ,8 Geochemical data 40 Recommendations to improve evaluation 44 Sele,cted bibliography . 46 Appendix A. Uranium occurrences .A-I A-I. Uranium occurrences visited .A-I A-2. Uranium occurrences searched for but not found A..-2 A-3. Uranium occurrences not located • . .A-3 Appendix B. Chemical analyses of rock samples 13-1 Appendix C. Uranium-occurr~nce reports (microfiche) In pocket Appendix D. Quaternary geochemical rock samplcs n-I v Uml\OCK ILLUSTRA TIONS Figure 1. Lubbock Quadrangle location map. 2. Major structural elements. 3. Geologic column. 4. South to north cross section, Guadalupe and Ochoa Series. 5. Sediment dispersal system (Dockum), humid climate. 6. Sediment dispersal system (Dockum), arid climate .. 7. Sedimentary features, Caprock locality. 8. Sedimentary features, Yellow Cub 10cali ty. 9. Sedimentary features, Hillside locality. 10. Sedimentary features, MacArthur locality. 11. Sedimentary features, Red Mud locality. 12. Deposi tional trends, lower Dockum Sandstone. D. Depositional systems, Duncan Sandstone Member, San Angelo Formation. 14. Depositional systems, Flowerpot Member, San Angelo rormation. 15. Structural elements that influenced deposition of the San Angelo Forma tion. 16. Sand isoli th, Duncan Sandstone Member. 17. Evaporative pump mechanism operative during San Angelo deposition. 18. influcllC(, of Ogallala ground-\VLlt(~r syst0.1Tl 011 lIr<lniUIIl fIlilll'r ..lIi!.atil)n II) PcrrniJ.n and Triassic strata. VI LUI,>I)uCK Plate 1A. Areas favorable for uranium dcposi ts in the Tule and Ogallala Formations. lB. Areas favorable for uranium deposits in the Dockum Group and San Angclo Formation. 2. Uranium occurrences. 3. Interpretation of aerial radiometric data. 4. Interpretation of data from hydrogcochemical and stream-sediment rc connaissance. 5. Location map of geochemical samplcs. 6. Drainage. 7. Geologic map. 8. Geologic-map index. 9. Generalized land status map. lO. Culture. l1. Southwest-northeast cross section, Tule Formation. 12. Results of detailed geochemical samples .in the Tule Formation--rock samples. 13. Distribution of uranium values, Quaternaryrocks. 14. Thickness of Ogallala Forrnation. 15. Structure on base of Ogallala Formation. 16. Southwest-northcast cross section, Ogallala Fc)rrnation. 17. Northwest-southeast cross section, Ogallala Forma tion. i8. Distribution of uranium values, Ogallala Formation. 19. Percent sand and gravel in Ogallala Formation. vii LI JI\I\\.)CK 20. Thickness of Dockum Group. 21. Percent sand in the Dockum Group. 22. Distribution of uranium values, Dockum Group. 23. Subsurface radiometric anomalies, Dockum Group. 24. Distribution of uranium values, Choza and San Angelo Formations. 25. Index to dip and strike cross-section wells. 26. West-east dip section (A-A'). 27. West-east dip section (I3-B'). 28. North-south strike section (C-C'). 29. North-south strike section (D-D'). 30. North-south strike section (E-E'). 31. Distribution of uranium' values, Blaine and Quartermaster Forrnations. 32. Distribution of uranium values, Whitehorse - Cloud Chief Formation. 33. Northwest-southeast stra tigraphic cross section and gamma-ray anomalies, Dockum Group. viii LUI\I~UCK AI3STR/\CT Uranium resources of the Lubbock Quadrangle, Texas, were evaluated to a depth of 1500 m u,sing available surface and subsurface geological information. Uraniulll occurrences reported in the literature and in reports of the Atomic Energy Com mis- sion were located, sampled, and described. /\reas of' anomalous radioactivity, interpreted from aerial radiometric survey, and geochernical anomalies, interpreted from hydrogeochemical and stream-sediment reconnaissance, were also investigated. Areas of uranium favorabili ty in the subsurface were evaluated using gamma-ray well logs and driller's logs. Nine areas of uranium favorability were delineated within the quadrangle. Delineation was based on both surface and subsurface data. Several occurrences are present within some of these areas. Five subsurface areas are considered to be favorable for uranium deposits: one area in the San Allgelo Formation (a delta system),. three areas in the Dockum Group (consisting of fluvial, delta, and lacustrine systems), and one area in the Ogallala Formation (a wet alluvial fan system). Favorable areas in outcrop are lacustrine facies of the Tule Formation and fluvial-deltaic facies of the Dockum Group. Geologic L1ni ts considered to be unfavorable include Recent and Pleistocene deposits that blanket the I-ligh Plains, parts of the Ogallala Formation, Cretaceous strata, parts of the Dockum Group, and most of the' Permian units, except the deltaic deposits within the San /\ngelo Forlllation. I~CCOlnrncndiltiolls for improving the evaluation of