DOCSLIB.ORG

No Slide Title

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
No Slide Title OPG’s Deep Geologic Repository for Low and Intermediate Level Waste CNSC Briefing Meeting - Introduction Mark Jensen Manager Geoscience L&ILW Deep Geologic Repository 8 December 2008 managing nuclear waste safely and responsibly Presentation Overview • DGR Geoscientific Program Background • DGR Facilities Engineering - Overview/Update • DGR Geosynthesis (Phase 1) - Regional Geology - Regional Hydrogeochemistry - Regional Geomechanics - Hydrogeologic Modelling • DGR Site Charaterisation Activities - Phase 1 Program (2006-2008) - Phase 2 Program (2008-2010) • Questions Nuclear Waste Management Deep Geologic Repository Concept Surface Infrastructure Key Features • Depth of 680 m in low permeability limestone • Capped by 200 m of shale Typical Emplacement Room 3 Nuclear Waste Management DGR Geoscience Program - At a Glance Site Characterisation Lead Contractor - Intera Engineering Limited Team - Geoscience services (12)/Universities (7)/Site Logistics (1) Schedule Phase I - Summer 2008 (DGR 1-2 Vertical) Phase IIa - Spring 2009 (DGR 3-4 Vertical) Phase IIb - Summer 2010 (DGR 5-6 Inclined) Geosynthesis Lead Contractor - Gartner Lee Limited Team - Specialist/Universities (4)/Peer Review Schedule Phase I - Geosynthesis (Fall 2008) - DGR 1/2 Phase IIab - Geosynthesis (Summer 2010) - DGR 3/4/5/6 Geoscience Review Group Andreas Gautschi (Nagra; Geosynthesis) Jacques Delay (Andra; Site Characterisation) Derek Martin (UofA; Geomechanics) Joe Pearson (Specialist; Geochemistry) 4 Nuclear Waste Management Geosynthesis Work Program – Phase 1 Geosynthesis Phase I Documents (7) • Phase 1 Geosynthesis • Phase 1 Regional Geology • Phase 1 Regional Hydrogeochemistry • Phase 1 Regional Geomechanics • Phase 1 Hydrogeologic Modelling • Long-term Climate Change • Long-term Cavern Stability • Purpose - an interim assessment • State of geoscience knowledge reviews • Regional ‘informed’ by site-specific study • Integrated regional understanding • Multiple lines of reasoning approach • External peer review • Completed under Project Quality Plan Nuclear Waste Management DGR Site Charaterisation – Bruce site Field Studies • Deep borehole drilling/instrumentation (4 sites) • coring/logging/preservation • opportunistic groundwater sampling • borehole geophysics • in-situ hydraulic straddle packer testing • long-term borehole monitoring – instrumentation • 2-Dimensional seismic reflection survey • Shallow bedrock wells US-series (3 installed) • Micro-seismic monitoring borehole seismometer network Laboratory Studies • Groundwater/pore fluid chemistry characterisation • Effective/pore water diffusion coefficients • Core Petrophysics • Hydrocarbon characterisation • Geomechanical properties Nuclear Waste Management OPG’s Deep Geologic Repository for Low and Intermediate Level Waste CNSC Briefing Meeting Frank King Director, Repository Development & Safety 8 December 2008 managing nuclear waste safely and responsibly Presentation Outline Topics: DGR Project Site • Design Changes & Status • Description of L&ILW • Location & Depth • Layout & Design • Construction • Operation • Path Forward Nuclear Waste Management OPG’s Nuclear Waste – LLW • Includes contaminated clothing, rags, plastic, mops, tools, paper, etc. • Low activity • 5,000-6,000 m3 generated per year • Compaction/incineration 3 • 2,000-3,000 m stored per year 3 • Currently 60,000 m in storage 3 Nuclear Waste Management OPG’s Nuclear Waste – ILW • Includes contaminated resins, filters, reactor core components, etc. • Higher activity, longer lived 3 • 200 m generated per year 3 • Currently 8,500 m in storage 4 Nuclear Waste Management OPG’s Western Waste Management Facility 5 Nuclear Waste Management Deep Geologic Repository Concept Surface Infrastructure Key Features • Depth of 680 m in low permeability limestone • Capped by 200 m of shale Typical Emplacement Room 6 Nuclear Waste Management DGR Surface Layout 7 Nuclear Waste Management DGR Underground Layout ● Minimizes excavation per m3 of waste ● Centralized & compact infrastructure ● “Dirty air” fully contained in metal ducts 8 Nuclear Waste Management DGR Ring Tunnel Waste Package Staging Area Refuge Station Lunch Room Waste Rock Dump 9 Nuclear Waste Management 6.5m Main Shaft Possible North Panel 4.5m Vent Shaft South Panel - Mobile Equipment East Panel - Maintenance Shop LLW ILW Typical LLW Emplacement Room Permanent Ventilation Ducts LLW Packages Resin Liner Shields 10 Nuclear Waste Management Typical ILW Emplacement Room Permanent Ventilation Ducts Resin Liner Shields 11 Nuclear Waste Management DGR Construction - Shaft Sinking ● Two sinking hoists equipped with “Galloways” ● 50,000 m3 of excavation over ~2-yr period by specialized contractor Nickel Rim Project, Sudbury 12 Nuclear Waste Management DGR Construction – Tunnels & Rooms ● Two-year construction period ● Concurrent excavation by two roadheaders ● Waste rock removal by vent shaft 13 Nuclear Waste Management DGR Waste Package Handling ● Mainly diesel-powered forklifts ● Some specialized handling equipment for “T-H-E Liners” Germany’s Konrad WIPP – 40 Tonne Hoist Sweden’s SFR WIPP – Heavy Load Forklift 14 Nuclear Waste Management DGR Shaft Seal System Concrete Cap Aquifer Isolation Seal Asphalt Water-stop Asphalt Shaft Station Monolith DGR [R3] Case 15 Nuclear Waste Management DGR Project Schedule 16 Nuclear Waste Management DGR Geosynthesis Overview Presentation to: CNSC Briefing Meeting December 8, 2008 Agenda 1. Overview of the geosynthesis approach 2. Geosynthesis component studies 3. Geosynthesis tenets 4. Geosynthesis report structure 5. Geosynthesis conclusions and main findings 1 Geosynthesis Approach Geosynthesis: What is it? A geoscientific explanation of the overall understanding of site characteristics, attributes and evolution (past and future) as they relate to demonstrating long-term DGR performance and safety. 2 Objectives of Geosynthesis Program i) to assess and reaffirm the geoscientific suitability for the proposed DGR concept; ii) to yield information to support development of a site- specific repository design/siting; iii) to provide evidence on a geoscientific basis for repository safety at timeframes of 1,000,000 years; iv) to provide a scientifically sound basis for a repository Safety Assessment; and v) to contribute to the development of an integrated repository Safety Case. 3 Phase 1 Geosynthesis Component Studies a) Phase 1 Geosynthesis – Bob Leech & Mark Jensen b) Phase 1 Regional Geology – Rob Frizzell c) Phase 1 Regional Geomechanics – Steve Usher & Tom Lam d) Phase 1 Long-term Cavern Stability – Branco Damjanac e) Phase 1 Regional Hydrogeochemistry - Monique Hobbs f) Phase 1 Hydrogeologic Modelling – Jon Sykes g) Phase 1 Long-Term Climate Change – Richard Peltier Collaboration and integration through workshops and meetings 4 Geosynthesis Geographic Scope 5 Geosynthesis Tenets a) Predictability: horizontally layered, relatively undeformed sedimentary shale and limestone formations of large lateral extent b) Multiple Natural Barriers: multiple low permeability bedrock formations enclose and overlie the DGR c) Contaminant Transport is Diffusion Dominated: deep groundwater regime is ancient showing no evidence of glacial perturbation or cross-formational flow d) Seismically Quiet: comparable to stable Canadian Shield setting e) Natural Resource Potential is Low: commercially viable oil and gas reserves are not present f) Shallow Groundwater Resources are Isolated g) Geomechanically Stable: selected DGR limestone formation will provide stable, virtually dry openings 6 Conceptual Geosphere Model 7 Geosynthesis Report Structure Phase 1 Geosynthesis 1.0 Introduction 2.0 Project Scope 3.0 Regional Geology 4.0 Regional Geomechanics 5.0 Regional Hydrogeochemistry 6.0 Hydrogeologic Modelling 7.0 Main Findings and Conclusions 8 Conclusions and Main Findings Predictable: horizontally layered, relatively undeformed sedimentary shale and limestone formations of large lateral extent: Reconstruction of the regional bedrock stratigraphy using over 300 historical oil and gas well records within a 35,000 km2 Regional Study Area (RSA) surrounding the Bruce site defines a sedimentary sequence with a near horizontally layered relatively undeformed predictable layer cake geometry Coring of Phase 1 deep boreholes DGR-1 and DGR-2 confirms that the Bruce site is underlain by 34 bedrock formations comprised of layered carbonate/shale/evaporite/sandstone units with a total thickness of about 840 m above the Precambrian crystalline basement. This stratigraphy is consistent with the RSA stratigraphic model It is confirmed that there is over 200 m of low permeability formations dominated by shale overlying the Cobourg Formation that is proposed to host the DGR 9 Conclusions and Main Findings Multiple Natural Barriers: multiple low permeability bedrock formations enclose and overlie the DGR The DGR repository horizon is under- and overlain by multiple low permeability bedrock formations of Silurian and Ordovician age. Within the deep groundwater regime there is over 200 m of low permeability shale directly overlying limestone of the host Cobourg Formation and 150 m of low permeability carbonates below The intermediate groundwater regime comprised of Silurian age sediments contains laterally extensive low permeability, carbonate, shale and anhydrite layers Observed vertical hydraulic head gradients indicate that transmissive vertical or sub-vertical faulting does not exist in the deep or intermediate groundwater regimes Evidence based on rock core retrieved during drilling and in
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cambrian Ordovician
    Open File Report LXXVI the shale is also variously colored. Glauconite is generally abundant in the formation. The Eau Claire A Summary of the Stratigraphy of the increases in thickness southward in the Southern Peninsula of Michigan where it becomes much more Southern Peninsula of Michigan * dolomitic. by: The Dresbach sandstone is a fine to medium grained E. J. Baltrusaites, C. K. Clark, G. V. Cohee, R. P. Grant sandstone with well rounded and angular quartz grains. W. A. Kelly, K. K. Landes, G. D. Lindberg and R. B. Thin beds of argillaceous dolomite may occur locally in Newcombe of the Michigan Geological Society * the sandstone. It is about 100 feet thick in the Southern Peninsula of Michigan but is absent in Northern Indiana. The Franconia sandstone is a fine to medium grained Cambrian glauconitic and dolomitic sandstone. It is from 10 to 20 Cambrian rocks in the Southern Peninsula of Michigan feet thick where present in the Southern Peninsula. consist of sandstone, dolomite, and some shale. These * See last page rocks, Lake Superior sandstone, which are of Upper Cambrian age overlie pre-Cambrian rocks and are The Trempealeau is predominantly a buff to light brown divided into the Jacobsville sandstone overlain by the dolomite with a minor amount of sandy, glauconitic Munising. The Munising sandstone at the north is dolomite and dolomitic shale in the basal part. Zones of divided southward into the following formations in sandy dolomite are in the Trempealeau in addition to the ascending order: Mount Simon, Eau Claire, Dresbach basal part. A small amount of chert may be found in and Franconia sandstones overlain by the Trampealeau various places in the formation.
    [Show full text]
  • (Medina, Clinton, and Lockport Groups) in the Type Area of Western New York
    Revised Stratigraphy and Correlations of the Niagaran Provincial Series (Medina, Clinton, and Lockport Groups) in the Type Area of Western New York By Carlton E. Brett, Dorothy H. Tepper, William M. Goodman, Steven T. LoDuca, and Bea-Yeh Eckert U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 2086 Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences of the University of Rochester UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON: 1995 10 REVISED STRATIGRAPHY AND CORRELATIONS OF THE NIAGARAN PROVINCIAL SERIES been made in accordance with the NASC. Because the The history of nomenclature of what is now termed the NASC does not allow use of the "submember" category, Medina Group, beginning with Conrad ( 1837) and ending units that would be of this rank are treated as informal units with Bolton (1953), is presented in Fisher (1954); Bolton and have been given alphanumeric designations. Informal (1957, table 2) presents a detailed summary of this nomen- units are discussed under the appropriate "member" clature for 1910-53. A historical summary of nomenclature categories. of the Medina Group in the Niagara region is shown in fig- The use of quotes for stratigraphic nomenclature in this ure 7. Early investigators of the Medina include Conrad report is restricted to units that have been misidentified or (1837); Vanuxem (1840, first usage of Medina; 1842); Hall abandoned. If stratigraphic nomenclature for a unit has (1840, 1843); Gilbert (1899); Luther (1899); Fairchild changed over time, the term for the unit is shown, with cap- (1901); Grabau (1901, 1905, 1908, 1909, 1913); Kindle and italization, as given in whatever reference is cited rather Taylor (1913); Kindle (1914); Schuchert (1914); Chadwick than according to the most recent nomenclature.
    [Show full text]
  • Stratigraphic Succession in Lower Peninsula of Michigan
    STRATIGRAPHIC DOMINANT LITHOLOGY ERA PERIOD EPOCHNORTHSTAGES AMERICANBasin Margin Basin Center MEMBER FORMATIONGROUP SUCCESSION IN LOWER Quaternary Pleistocene Glacial Drift PENINSULA Cenozoic Pleistocene OF MICHIGAN Mesozoic Jurassic ?Kimmeridgian? Ionia Sandstone Late Michigan Dept. of Environmental Quality Conemaugh Grand River Formation Geological Survey Division Late Harold Fitch, State Geologist Pennsylvanian and Saginaw Formation ?Pottsville? Michigan Basin Geological Society Early GEOL IN OG S IC A A B L N Parma Sandstone S A O G C I I H E C T I Y Bayport Limestone M Meramecian Grand Rapids Group 1936 Late Michigan Formation Stratigraphic Nomenclature Project Committee: Mississippian Dr. Paul A. Catacosinos, Co-chairman Mark S. Wollensak, Co-chairman Osagian Marshall Sandstone Principal Authors: Dr. Paul A. Catacosinos Early Kinderhookian Coldwater Shale Dr. William Harrison III Robert Reynolds Sunbury Shale Dr. Dave B.Westjohn Mark S. Wollensak Berea Sandstone Chautauquan Bedford Shale 2000 Late Antrim Shale Senecan Traverse Formation Traverse Limestone Traverse Group Erian Devonian Bell Shale Dundee Limestone Middle Lucas Formation Detroit River Group Amherstburg Form. Ulsterian Sylvania Sandstone Bois Blanc Formation Garden Island Formation Early Bass Islands Dolomite Sand Salina G Unit Paleozoic Glacial Clay or Silt Late Cayugan Salina F Unit Till/Gravel Salina E Unit Salina D Unit Limestone Salina C Shale Salina Group Salina B Unit Sandy Limestone Salina A-2 Carbonate Silurian Salina A-2 Evaporite Shaley Limestone Ruff Formation
    [Show full text]
  • Paleozoic Geology
    Map 2339 ORANG EVILLE Paleozoic Geology ONTARIO DIVISION OF MINES HONOURABLE LEO EERNIER, Minister of Natural Resources DR .l. K REYNOLDS, Deputy Minister ofNaluraI Resources G A Jewett, Executive Director. Division of Mines E, G Pye, Director, Geological Branch The Niagara Escarpment trends north-south through the extreme eastern part of the map-area though it is largely obscured by relatively thick deposits oi Pleistocene glacial driit. Silurian strata upon the dip Adjniris Map 2340 slope of the Escarpment form the bedrock of most of the area. In the 30°30’ east the glacial deposits overlying the plateau of Silurian strata have M°m’ generated an irregular hummocky topography with relief of 200 to 300 feet. Amount of relief decreases westwards and the physiography of the western half of the map-area is dominated by the drainage system oi the southward ilowing Grand River Older (Ordovician) rocks are exposed only in the northeastern and southeastern corners of the area \ where the Nottawasaga and Credit Ftivers have cut re-entrants into the Escarpment. 'n;WhiDri.gtoriQ STRATIGRAPHY ‘{ Oueenston Formation (Upper Ordovician-Richmondian) Beds oi this unit are exposed only in the deeply incised river valleys at the eastern i W=t='l°°~imci.en.r edge oi the map-area. The lower boundary of the unit is not exposed ‘Cambridge although outcrops in the Nottawasaga River at Glen Cross may be close to the gradational boundary with the underlying Georgian Bay Forma- tion The lithology of the Oueenston Formation is consistent throughout -Wimdslvck 'BrzritIord M 2343 Niagara F"a 5 the area Dark red, hematitic.blocky, non-iissile calcareous shale seams "' Map 234 up to B leet in thickness typify the formation; thin to medium beds of .
    [Show full text]
  • Xerox University Microfilms
    information t o u s e r s This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original submitted. The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction. 1.The sign or "target” for pages apparently lacking from the document photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you complete continuity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a good image of the page in the adjacent frame. 3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being photographed the photographer followed a definite method in "sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is continued again - beginning below the first row and continuing on until complete. 4. The majority of usefs indicate that the textual content is of greatest value, however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation.
    [Show full text]
  • Geology of Michigan and the Great Lakes
    35133_Geo_Michigan_Cover.qxd 11/13/07 10:26 AM Page 1 “The Geology of Michigan and the Great Lakes” is written to augment any introductory earth science, environmental geology, geologic, or geographic course offering, and is designed to introduce students in Michigan and the Great Lakes to important regional geologic concepts and events. Although Michigan’s geologic past spans the Precambrian through the Holocene, much of the rock record, Pennsylvanian through Pliocene, is miss- ing. Glacial events during the Pleistocene removed these rocks. However, these same glacial events left behind a rich legacy of surficial deposits, various landscape features, lakes, and rivers. Michigan is one of the most scenic states in the nation, providing numerous recre- ational opportunities to inhabitants and visitors alike. Geology of the region has also played an important, and often controlling, role in the pattern of settlement and ongoing economic development of the state. Vital resources such as iron ore, copper, gypsum, salt, oil, and gas have greatly contributed to Michigan’s growth and industrial might. Ample supplies of high-quality water support a vibrant population and strong industrial base throughout the Great Lakes region. These water supplies are now becoming increasingly important in light of modern economic growth and population demands. This text introduces the student to the geology of Michigan and the Great Lakes region. It begins with the Precambrian basement terrains as they relate to plate tectonic events. It describes Paleozoic clastic and carbonate rocks, restricted basin salts, and Niagaran pinnacle reefs. Quaternary glacial events and the development of today’s modern landscapes are also discussed.
    [Show full text]
  • Phase I Hydrogeologic Modelling
    Supporting Technical Report Phase I Hydrogeologic Modelling November 30, 2008 Prepared by: J.F. Sykes, E.A. Sykes, S.D. Normani, Y. Yin and Y.-J. Park University of Waterloo OPG 00216-REP-01300-00009-R00 OPG’s DEEP GEOLOGIC REPOSITORY FOR LOW & INTERMEDIATE LEVEL WASTE Supporting Technical Report Phase I Hydrogeologic Modelling November 30, 2008 Prepared by: J.F. Sykes, E.A. Sykes, S.D. Normani, Y. Yin and Y.-J. Park University of Waterloo OPG 00216-REP-01300-00009-R00 Phase I Hydrogeologic Modelling - iii - November 30, 2008 DOCUMENT HISTORY /trunk/doc/report.tex 2008-11-27 11:56 SVN:R114 Phase I Hydrogeologic Modelling - v - November 30, 2008 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A Deep Geologic Repository (DGR) for Low and Intermediate Level (L&IL) Radioactive Waste has been proposed by Ontario Power Generation (OPG) for the Bruce site near Tiverton, Ontario Canada. This report presents hydrogeologic modelling and analyses at the regional-scale and site-scale that were completed as part of the Phase 1 Geosynthesis DGR work program. As envisioned, the DGR is to be constructed at a depth of about 680 m below ground surface within the argillaceous Ordovician limestone of the Cobourg Formation. The objective of this report is to develop a geologic conceptual model for the DGR site and to describe modelling using FRAC3DVS-OPG and analyses that illustrate the influence of conceptual model, parameter and scenario uncertainty on predicted long-term geosphere barrier performance. The modelling also provides a framework for hydrogeologic and geochemical investigations of the DGR. It serves as a basis for exploring potential anthropogenic and natural perturbations of the sedimentary sequence beneath and in the vicinity of the Bruce site.
    [Show full text]
  • The Silurian of Central Kentucky, U.S.A.: Stratigraphy, Palaeoenvironments and Palaeoecology
    The Silurian of central Kentucky, U.S.A.: Stratigraphy, palaeoenvironments and palaeoecology FRANK R. ETTENSOHN, R. THOMAS LIERMAN, CHARLES E. MASON, WILLIAM M. ANDREWS, R. TODD HENDRICKS, DANIEL J. PHELPS & LAWRENCE A. GORDON ETTENSOHN, F.R., LIERMAN, R.T., MASON, C.E., ANDREWS, W.M., HENDRICKS, R.T., PHELPS, D.J. & GORDON, L.A., 2013:04:26. The Silurian of central Kentucky, U.S.A.: Stratigraphy, palaeoenvironments and palaeoecology. Memoirs of the Association of Australasian Palaeontologists 44, 159-189. ISSN 0810-8889. Silurian rocks in Kentucky are exposed on the eastern and western flanks of the Cincinnati Arch, a large-wavelength cratonic structure separating the Appalachian foreland basin from the intracratonic Illinois Basin. The Cincinnati Arch area experienced uplift during latest Ordovician-early Silurian time, so that the exposed Silurian section is relatively thin due to onlap and post- Silurian erosional truncation on the arch. On both flanks of the arch, dolomitic carbonates predominate, but the section on the eastern side reflects a more shale-rich ramp that faced eastern Appalachian source areas. In the Silurian section on the western side of the arch, which apparently developed across a platform-like isolation-accommodation zone, shales are rare except dur- ing some highstand episodes, and rocks in the area reflect deposition across a broad, low-gradient shelf area, interrupted by structurally controlled topographic breaks. Using the progression of interpreted depositional environments and nearshore faunal communities, a relative sea-level curve, which parallels those of previous workers, was generated for the section in Kentucky. While the curve clearly shows the influence of glacial eustasy, distinct indications of the far-field, flexural influence of Taconian and Salinic tectonism are also present.
    [Show full text]
  • Bedrock Maps
    1987 BEDROCK GEOLOGY OF MICHIGAN BEDROCK GEOLOGY OF EASTERN UPPER PENINSULA MACKINAC BRECCIA BOIS BLANC FORMATION GARDEN ISLAND FORMATION BASS ISLAND GROUP SALINA GROUP SAINT IGNACE DOLOMITE POINT AUX CHENES SHALE ENGADINE GROUP MANISTIQUE GROUP BURNT BLUFF GROUP KEWEENAW CABOT HEAD SHALE MANITOULIN DOLOMITE QUEENSTON SHALE BIG HILL DOLOMITE HOUGHTON STONINGTON FORMATION UTICA SHALE MEMBER COLLINGWOOD SHALE MEMBER TRENTON GROUP BLACK RIVER GROUP ONTONAGON BARAGA PRAIRIE DU CHIEN GROUP TREMPEALEAU FORMATION MUNISING FORMATION GOGEBIC LU CE MARQUETTE ALGER CHIPPEWA IRON MACKINAC SCHOOLC RAF T DELT A DICKIN SON BEDROCK GEOLOGY OF WESTERN UPPER PENINSULA MACKINAC BRECCIA JACOBSVILLE SANDSTONE EMMET MENOMINEE FREDA SANDSTONE CHEBOYGAN NONESUCH FORMATION PRESQUE ISLE COPPER HARBOR CONGLOMERATE OAK BLUFF FORMATION CHAR LEVOIX PORTAGE LAKE VOLCANICS MONTMORENCY SIEMENS CREEK FORMATION ANT RIM ALPENA INTRUSIVE OTSEGO QUINNESEC FORMATION LEELANAU PAINT RIVER GROUP RIVERTON IRON FORMATION BIJIKI IRON FORMATION GRAND TR AVERSE ALCONA KALKASKA CRAW FOR D OSCOD A NEGAUNEE IRON FORMATION BENZIE IRONWOOD IRON FORMATION DUNN CREEK FORMATION BADWATER GREENSTONE MICHIGAMME FORMATION MANISTEE WEXFORD MISSAUKEE ROSCOMMON OGEMAW IOSCO GOODRICH QUARTZITE HEMLOCK FORMATION BEDROCK GEOLOGY OF ARENAC MENOMINEE & CHOCOLAY GROUPS LOWER PENINSULA EMPEROR VULCANIC COMPLEX MASON LAKE OSCEOLA CLARE GLADWIN SIAMO SLATE & AJIBIK QUARTZITE RED BEDS HURON PALMS FORMATION GRAND RIVER FORMATION CHOCOLAY GROUP SAGINAW FORMATION BAY RANDVILLE DOLOMITE BAYPORT LIMESTONE MICHIGAN
    [Show full text]
  • Niagara Escarpment
    THESE TERMS GOVERN YOUR USE OF THIS DOCUMENT Your use of this Ontario Geological Survey document (the “Content”) is governed by the terms set out on this page (“Terms of Use”). By downloading this Content, you (the “User”) have accepted, and have agreed to be bound by, the Terms of Use. Content: This Content is offered by the Province of Ontario’s Ministry of Northern Development and Mines (MNDM) as a public service, on an “as-is” basis. Recommendations and statements of opinion expressed in the Content are those of the author or authors and are not to be construed as statement of government policy. You are solely responsible for your use of the Content. You should not rely on the Content for legal advice nor as authoritative in your particular circumstances. Users should verify the accuracy and applicability of any Content before acting on it. MNDM does not guarantee, or make any warranty express or implied, that the Content is current, accurate, complete or reliable. MNDM is not responsible for any damage however caused, which results, directly or indirectly, from your use of the Content. MNDM assumes no legal liability or responsibility for the Content whatsoever. Links to Other Web Sites: This Content may contain links, to Web sites that are not operated by MNDM. Linked Web sites may not be available in French. MNDM neither endorses nor assumes any responsibility for the safety, accuracy or availability of linked Web sites or the information contained on them. The linked Web sites, their operation and content are the responsibility of the person or entity for which they were created or maintained (the “Owner”).
    [Show full text]
  • Silurian Rocks in the Subsurface of Northwestern Ohio
    STATE OF OHIO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF GEOLOGICAL SURVEY Horace R. Coli ins, Chief LIBRARJ BUREAU OF GEOLOGY TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA Report of Investigations No. 100 SILURIAN ROCKS IN THE SUBSURFACE OF NORTHWESTERN OHIO by Adriaan Janssens Columbus 1977 SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL STAFF 8DNRDEPARTMENT OF OF THE NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION OF GEOLOGICAL SURVEY ADMINISTRATION Horace R. Collins, MS, State Geologist and Division Chief Richard A. Struble, PhD, Geologist and Assistant Chief William J. Buschman, Jr., BS, Administrative Geologist Barbara J. Adams, Office Manager REGIONAL GEOLOGY SUBSURFACE GEOLOGY Robert G. Van Horn, MS, Geologist and Section Head Adriaan Janssens, PhD, Geologist and Section Head Richard W. Carlton, PhD, Geologist Charles R. Grapes II, BS, Geologist Michael L. Couchot, MS, Geologist Frank L. Majchszak, MS, Geologist Douglas L. Crowell, MS, Geologist James Wooten, Geology Technician Richard M. DeLong, MS, Geologist Garry E. Yates, Geology Technician Michael C. Hansen, MS, Geologist Linda C. Gearheart, Clerk Dennis N. Hull, MS, Geologist Brenda L. Rinderle, Office Machine Operator Michele L. Risser, BA , Geologist Joel D. Vormelker, MS, Geologist LAKE ERIE GEOCHEMISTRY LABORATORY Charles H. Carter, PhD, Geologist and Section Head D. Joe Benson, PhD, Geologist David A. Stith, MS, Geologist and Section Head Donald E. Guy, Jr., BA, Geologist George Botoman, MS, Geologist Dale L. Liebenthal, Boat Captain Norman F. Knapp, PhD, Chemist Thomas J. Feldkamp, BS, Geology Technician E. Lorraine Thomas, Laboratory Technician Marjorie L. VanVooren, Typist TECHNICAL PUBLICATIONS Jean Simmons Brown, MS, Geologist/Editor and Section Head Cartography Philip J. Celnar, BFA, Cartography Supervisor R. Anne Berry, BFA, Cartographer James A. Brown, Cartographer Donald R.
    [Show full text]
  • Report of Investigation 15 SUBSURFACE GEOLOGY of BARRY COUNTY, MICHIGAN
    Geological Survey Ordovician System .......................................................10 Report of Investigation 15 Cincinnatian Series...................................................10 Trenton Group ..........................................................10 SUBSURFACE GEOLOGY OF BARRY COUNTY, Black River Group ....................................................10 MICHIGAN St. Peter Sandstone .................................................11 by Prairie du Chien Group.............................................11 Richard T. Lilienthal Cambrian System.........................................................11 Illustrations by Author Trempealeau Formation ...........................................11 Lansing Munising Formation ..................................................12 1974 STRUCTURAL GEOLOGY .............................................12 POROUS INTERVALS....................................................12 Contents REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING ...................16 FOREWORD......................................................................2 ABSTRACT .......................................................................2 Illustrations INTRODUCTION ...............................................................3 GEOLOGIC SETTING.......................................................3 Figures MINERAL RESOURCES...................................................3 Index map ...................................................................................2 Surface Minerals ............................................................3
    [Show full text]