6.0 DERM registered water bores

Transcription

1 6.0 DERM registered water bores 6.1 Introduction RPS reviewed the groundwater data available in the DERM GWDB (2010) and identified over 10,400 registered water bores within the Galilee Basin study area. The locations of the DERM GWDB (2010) bores are presented on Plates 1 and 2, which are presented in Appendix A. A detailed summary of the registered water bores is presented in Appendix Table B.1 and a summary of the registered bore statistics is presented in Table 6.1. The DERM registered bore data details and analysis are discussed on a tenement-by-tenement basis and presented in Section 8. There are just more than 3,500 registered water bores on the GBOF tenements. The basic statistics for these water bores are presented in Table 6.1. The analysis that follows focuses on the registered water bores on the GBOF tenements. There is a long history of water bore drilling in the Galilee Basin study area. The first water bores were constructed in the middle 1800s. An analysis of the drilling depth data indicates that there are few very deep water bores in the Galilee Basin study area. The average (mean) water bore has been drilled to a depth of less than 250 m bgl and the median water bore has been drilled to a depth of less than 150 m bgl. The aquifer bore tapped could be easily identified for over 8,000 water bores in the Galilee Basin study area. The aquifer identifications are based on the stratigraphy at the base of the water bore, the stratigraphy at the bottom of the casing for open holes, or the stratigraphy at casing perforation and well screens. RPS filtered the data and found that more than 6,800 water bores were correctly attributed to an aquifer in the Galilee Basin study area. Finally, the aquifer identifications were matched against the water bores in the GBOF tenements. This methodology yielded aquifer attributions for slightly more than 1,000 water bores in the active GBOF tenements. The bore depth data, the depth to groundwater and the aquifer identifications are evidence that the majority of the water bores in the Galilee Basin study area were drilled in shallow alluvium at the surface or in the Eromanga Basin sediments (Table 6.2 and Figure 6.3). The exception, however, is in the east where the older Galilee Basin sequence outcrop or occur at relatively shallow depths (Figure 6.4). 6.2 Groundwater levels Groundwater level data are available at more than 4,400 water bores within the Galilee Basin study area (Table 6.2, Figure 6.1, Figure 6.2, and Appendix D). Only the data that could be attributed to a specific aquifer was included in this assessment. Groundwater levels were evaluated for the entire Galilee Basin study area and on the individual active GBOF tenements. The groundwater level data have been summarised at the tenement level and are presented in Section 8.0. PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 43

2 Table 6.1 Statistics for key DERM data for bores in the Galilee Basin study area Statistic Value Units bores with any DERM records 10,446 (bores) bores on GBOF tenements 3,573 (bores) bores with aquifer unit identified 6,828 (bores) bores with DERM yield records 657 (bores) Lowest recorded yield value (RN 289) 0.01 (L/s) Highest recorded yield value (RN ) 1,000 (L/s) Mean of recorded yield values 8.2 (L/s) Median of recorded yield values 2.1 (L/s) bores noted as flowing 403 (bores) bores with depth DERM records 3,185 (bores) Lowest recorded depth value <6 (m bgl) Highest recorded depth value 4,136.5 (m bgl) Mean of recorded depth value 237 (m bgl) Median of recorded depth values 134 (m bgl) standing groundwater level measurements 8,700 () bores with DERM standing groundwater level data 4,405 (bores) Least recorded depth to standing groundwater levels 89.9 (1) (m agl) Deepest recorded depth to standing groundwater levels 320 (m bgl) Mean of recorded depth to standing groundwater levels 24.9 (m bgl) Median of recorded depth to standing groundwater levels 19.6 (m bgl) bores with DERM flow data 2,205 (bores) bores with DERM discharge data 1,184 (bores) Lowest recorded discharge value 0.01 (L/s) Highest recorded discharge value (L/s) Mean of recorded discharge value 11.1 (L/s) Median of recorded discharge value 7.2 (L/s) bores with DERM SWL data 1,822 (bores) Lowest recorded SWL value (m) Highest recorded SWL value 147 (m) Mean of recorded SWL value 4.2 (m) Median of recorded SWL value 6.44 (m) bores with DERM SWL data 584 (bores) Lowest recorded calculated SWL value (m) Highest recorded calculate SWL value (m) Mean of recorded calculate SWL value 18 (m) Median of recorded calculate SWL value 14.7 (m) (1) Artesian values reported as metres above ground level. PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 44

3 Table 6.2 Summary of groundwater level data by formation for the Galilee Basin study area Depth to groundwater Measurement period (m bgl) Formation name Start End Count Ave Max Min Range Median Alluvium 10-Nov Nov , undifferentiated Tertiary sediments age 26-Nov Apr Glendower Formation (Tertiary age sediments) 01-Jan Aug , Basalt (Tertiary age sediments) 22-Mar Oct , Winton Formation 01-Jan Aug Mackunda Formation 01-Jan Jan Griman Creek Formation 01-Jan Nov Allaru Mudstone 01-Dec Aug Wallumbilla Formation 01-Oct Mar Coreena Member of the Wallumbilla Formation 01-Jan Nov Doncaster Member of the Wallumbilla Formation 01-Jan Oct Rolling Downs Group 18-Jun Oct Wyandra Sandstone Member of the Cadna-owie Fm. 01-Jan Dec Cadna-owie Formation 01-Jan Mar Ronlow beds 01-Jan Jul Gilbert River Formation 24-May Jun Bungil Formation 14-Feb Jun Mooga Sandstone 12-Apr Sep Hooray Sandstone 02-Jan Nov Westbourne Formation 01-Jan Jul Adori Sandstone 01-Jan Sep Injune Creek Group 01-Jan Sep Birkhead Formation 04-Oct Jul Hutton Sandstone 01-Jan Jul Boxvale Sandstone Member of the Evergreen Fm. 20-Nov Nov Evergreen Formation 01-Jan Feb Precipice Sandstone 01-Jan Jun Moolayember Formation 01-Oct Oct Warang Sandstone 03-Nov Jun Clematis Sandstone 01-May Jan Dunda beds 02-Jan Jun Rewan Formation 08-Mar Oct Betts Creek beds 21-Apr Aug Blackwater Group 01-Oct Oct Black Alley Shale 07-Apr Dec Peawaddy Formation 01-Feb Mar Colinlea Sandstone 01-Jan Oct Joe Joe Group 10-Jul Feb Drummond Group 10-Oct Jan Ducabrook Formation 01-Jan Feb PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 45

4 Figure 6.1 DERM GWDB Subartesian and artesian bores within the Galilee Basin study area and surrounding area PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 46

5 Figure 6.2 DERM GWDB Alluvial water bores within the Galilee Basin study area and surrounding area PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 47

6 Figure 6.3 DERM GWDB water bores tapping the Eromanga Basin sequence within the Galilee Basin study and surrounding areas PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 48

7 Figure 6.4 DERM GWDB water bores tapping the Galilee Basin sequence within the Galilee Basin study area and surrounding area PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 49

8 Groundwater levels range from deep (exceeding 100 m bgl), to groundwater levels indicating significant artesian pressure (Table 6.2 and Table 6.3). The DERM GWDB (2010) indicates artesian bores can be found across the entire Galilee Basin study area (Figure 6.2). The map of the bores with artesian pressure (Figure 6.1) reflects the overall pattern of groundwater recharge and discharge for the Galilee Basin study area. The pattern on Figure 6.1 also reflects the depth of drilling as well. The major groundwater recharge areas in the Galilee Basin study area are located in the north and in the east, where the Galilee Basin aquifers outcrop or subcrop (Figure 3.1 and Figure 6.2). These bores tapping the Galilee Basin aquifers are mainly subartesian. The artesian bores located near Longreach suggest that this may be an area of groundwater discharge. The wide area of artesian bores in the north-west near Richmond also corresponds with an area where groundwater may be discharging across the western Galilee Basin study area boundary Artesian and subartesian bore distribution There are two significant clusters of subartesian bores located outside the limits of the major groundwater recharge areas. There is a broad line of subartesian bores located between ATP 1032 in the north to ATP 667 in the south. These subartesian bores tap the extensive shallow Quaternary alluvium and the Tertiary sediments as well as the upper Rolling Down Group sediments. The second cluster is located in the west between ATP 991 in the central Galilee Basin study area to ATP 999 over the Maneroo Platform. These bores are located in a part of the Galilee Basin study area where the Winton Formation and other Eromanga Basin sediments are thick enough to retain productive volumes of water. This is also a region of the Galilee Basin study area where the Galilee Basin aquifers are found at depth. Figure 6.5 through Figure 6.18 provide location plots showing where water bores tap particular key geological units. Figure 6.5 indicates the locations of water bores interpreted as tapping the basement Drummond Basin sequence. The Late Devonian to early Carboniferous Drummond Basin sequence lies beneath the Koburra Trough and the Maneroo Platform portions of the study area. The Early Carboniferous Natal and Star of Hope Formations are the most frequently logged formations in boreholes that penetrate the Galilee Basin into the Drummond Basin sequence. From Figure 6.5 it can be seen that most of these bores are located to the east of the Galilee Basin study area and are only present on the western section of ATP 668 and on part of ATP The water bores tapping the Galilee Basin aquifers are shown on Figure 6.4. The available data did not allow the bores in the Joe Joe Group to be differentiated into their component formations such as the Aramac Coal Measures or the Jericho Formation. Figure 6.6 indicates the locations of water bores interpreted as tapping the Betts Creek beds and Colinlea Sandstone of the Galilee Basin. From Figure 6.6 it can be seen that most of these bores are located in the far eastern section of the Galilee Basin study area to the south east of ATP 668 although some bores are located within ATP 668 and in the area between ATP 668 and ATP 1044 to the north. PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 50

9 Figure 6.5 Locations of water bores interpreted as tapping basement Drummond Basin sequence PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 51

10 Figure 6.6 Locations of water bores interpreted as tapping Betts Creek beds and Colinlea Sandstone PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 52

11 Figure 6.7 Locations of water bores interpreted as tapping the Rewan Formation / Dunda beds PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 53

12 Figure 6.8 Locations of water bores interpreted as tapping the Moolayember Formation / Clematis Sandstone / Warang Sandstone interval PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 54

13 Figure 6.9 Locations of water bores interpreted as tapping the Precipice Sandstone PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 55

14 Figure 6.10 Locations of water bores interpreted as tapping the Hutton Sandstone PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 56

15 Figure 6.11 Locations of water bores interpreted as tapping the Injune Creek Group / Westbourne Formation / Adori Sandstone / Birkhead Formation interval PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 57

16 Figure 6.12 Locations of water bores interpreted as tapping the Hooray Sandstone / Gilbert River Formation / Mooga Sandstone interval PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 58

17 Figure 6.13 Locations of water bores interpreted as tapping the Cadna-owie Formation / Wyandra Sandstone Member of the Cadna-owie Formation / Bungil Formation interval PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 59

18 Figure 6.14 Locations of water bores interpreted as tapping the Wallumbilla Formation PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 60

19 Figure 6.15 Locations of water bores interpreted as tapping the Allaru Mudstone PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 61

20 Figure 6.16 Locations of water bores interpreted as tapping the Winton Formation / Mackunda Formation interval PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 62

21 Figure 6.17 Locations of water bores interpreted as tapping the Tertiary age formations PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 63

22 Figure 6.18 Locations of water bores interpreted as tapping alluvium PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 64

23 Figure 6.7 indicates the locations of water bores interpreted as tapping the Rewan Formation / Dunda Beds of the Galilee Basin sequence. From Figure 6.7 it can be seen that most of these bores are, not surprisingly, located in the eastern section of the Galilee Basin study area where the Rewan Formation / Dunda Beds occur at a shallow depth. The majority of these bores are located within ATP 668, ATP 744 and to the south-east of ATP 668. Only a few of these bores are located further to the east. Figure 6.8 indicates the locations of water bores interpreted as tapping the Moolayember Formation / Clematis Sandstone / Warang Sandstone interval of the Galilee Basin sequence. From Figure 6.8 it can be seen that most of these bores are, again not surprisingly, located in the eastern section of the Galilee Basin study area where the Moolayember Formation / Clematis Sandstone / Warang Sandstone occur at a shallow depth. The majority of these bores are located within ATP 667 and ATP 744 and to the south of ATP 667 and to the south and south-east of ATP 668. Only a few of these bores are located further to the east. Figure 6.9 indicates the locations of water bores interpreted as tapping the Precipice Sandstone of the lower Surat Basin / Eromanga Basin interval. Figure 6.9 shows that most of the bores tapping the Precipice Sandstone are located in the eastern / south-eastern section of the Galilee Basin study area. The majority of these bores are located to the south of the GBOF tenements. However, one bore is located close to the southern boundary of ATP 780. This is not surprising, since the Precipice Sandstone and its lateral equivalents are not broadly distributed across the Eromanga Basin. The locations of water bores interpreted as tapping the Hutton Sandstone of the Surat Basin / Eromanga Basin in the Galilee Basin study area are shown on Figure The numerous bores that tap this formation are located in a broad north-west to south-east trending belt that traverses the majority of the GBOF tenements, excluding ATP 668, ATP 743, ATP 744, ATP 1010, ATP 1015 and ATP The belt of bores tapping the Hutton Sandstone also extends to the south east across the Blackall, Tambo and Augathella areas. The densest bores are located where the Hutton Sandstone occurs at a shallow depth. Figure 6.11 shows the locations of water bores interpreted as tapping the Injune Creek Group (i.e. Westbourne Formation / Adori Sandstone / Birkhead Formation) interval of the Eromanga Basin. Fewer bores tap this interval than do the Hutton Sandstone. The bores tapping the Injune Creek Group form a broad north-west to south-east trending belt that traverses the GBOF tenements. However, most of these bores lie to the north of ATP 974 and to the south of ATP 780, although a few other bores are located on other tenements. Figure 6.12 shows the locations of water bores interpreted as tapping the Hooray Sandstone / Gilbert River Formation / Mooga Sandstone interval of the Eromanga Basin / Carpentaria Basin (located to the north) / Surat Basin (located to the south). More bores tap these aquifers than tap the Injune Creek Group. The bores tapping the Hooray Sandstone / Gilbert River Formation / Mooga Sandstone interval form a broad north-west to south-east trending belt that traverses the GBOF tenements, excluding ATP 668, ATP 743, ATP 744, ATP 1010, ATP 1015 and ATP These bores also extend south-east of the GBOF tenements across the Blackall, Tambo, Augathella and Charleville PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 65

24 and north and north-west of the GBOF tenements. There is a high concentration of bores near Julia Creek and Richmond. Figure 6.13 shows the locations of water bores interpreted as tapping the Cadna-owie Formation / Wyandra Sandstone Member of the Cadna-owie Formation / Bungil Formation sediments of the Eromanga Basin / Surat Basin. Fewer bores tap this aquifer than the Hooray Sandstone. The bores tapping the Cadna-owie Formation / Wyandra Sandstone Member of the Cadna-owie Formation / Bungil Formation sediments form a poorly defined, broad north-west to south-east trending belt that traverses the GBOF tenements. However, very few of these bores are located in the GBOF tenements. The majority of these bores are located south-east near Blackall, Tambo, Augathella and Charleville. Figure 6.14 shows the locations of water bores interpreted as tapping the Wallumbilla Formation of the Eromanga Basin / Surat Basin. More bores tap this aquifer than the Cadna-owie Formation. The bores tapping the Wallumbilla Formation form a broad north-northwest to south-south-east trending belt that traverses the GBOF tenements, excluding ATP 668, ATP 744, ATP 991, ATP 999, ATP 1005, ATP 1010, and ATP This belt of bores tapping this aquifer also extends to the southeast to Blackall, Tambo, Augathella and Charleville. Figure 6.15 shows the locations of water bores interpreted as tapping the Allaru Mudstone of the Eromanga Basin. More bores tap this interval than do the Wallumbilla Formation. Only a few bores appear to tap this aquifer within ATP 666, ATP 799, ATP 996, ATP 999 and ATP A belt of bores tapping this aquifer extends to the south-south-east of the GBOF tenements to east of Tambo, Augathella and Charleville. Figure 6.16 shows the locations of water bores interpreted as tapping the Winton Formation / Mackunda Formation sediments of the Eromanga Basin. Numerous bores tap this aquifer. The bores tapping the Winton Formation / Mackunda Formation sediments form a broad north-west to south-east trending belt that traverses mainly ATP 989, ATP 991, ATP 999, and ATP A large concentration of bores is located to the south of the GBOF tenements between Windorah in the west and Blackall and Augathella in the east. Figure 6.17 shows the locations of water bores interpreted as tapping the Tertiary age formations. The bores tapping Tertiary sediments are largely restricted to the eastern section of the study area within ATP 667, ATP 668, ATP 744, ATP 780 and ATP However, additional bores tapping Tertiary sediments are located within ATP While Figure 6.17 shows bores tapping Tertiary sediments located in the eastern section of the GBOF tenements, a more detailed examination of the available data may reveal additional bores located in the central section of the Galilee Basin study area. Figure 6.18 shows the locations of water bores interpreted as tapping Quaternary alluvium. The bores tapping alluvium are largely restricted to ATP 668 and to its east; ATP 1010, particularly its northeastern section; ATP 1032 and ATP 666 near Hughenden. While Figure 6.18 shows relatively few bores tapping alluvium in the GBOF tenements, a more detailed examination may reveal the location of additional alluvial bores. PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 66

25 6.2.2 Groundwater elevation contours There are sufficient groundwater level observations in Table 6.2 to contour the piezometric surfaces for three intervals in the Eromanga Basin sequence, comprising undifferentiated Rolling Downs Group, Cadna-owie Formation / Hooray Sandstone and Hutton Sandstone. Data for the Galilee Basin aquifers could not be contoured because there are too few data for water bores associated with a given formation to contour. Additionally, the bores with more observations tended to cluster near formation outcrop and subcrop areas, so the contours do not reflect the piezometric surfaces for the parts of the Galilee Basin study area that underlie all the GBOF tenements Rolling Downs Group The piezometric surface for the Rolling Downs Groups aquifer is presented on Figure The distribution of the bores tapping the Rolling Downs Groups aquifer is presented on Figure 6.2. The major groundwater high regions for the Rolling Downs Groups aquifer are located north-east of Hughenden to south near Lake Galilee. The second groundwater high is located over the Springsure Shelf. There is an isolated groundwater high in the Rolling Downs Groups aquifer over the Maneroo Platform south of Winton. The groundwater highs located in the north and over the Springsure shelf are associated with the major groundwater intake beds for the Rolling Downs Group. The groundwater high and possible recharge area south of Winton is near the Forsyth Range (Figure 1.1). This groundwater high also corresponds to an area of Quaternary alluvium and Tertiary sediments. Groundwater may be recharging in this area because the shallow surface materials are retaining water long enough to allow it recharge the Rolling Downs Group. Confirmation of the association between the Quaternary alluvium and Tertiary sediments and groundwater recharge at the Forsyth Range would require additional assessment. The major feature of the Rolling Downs Group groundwater contours are the two large groundwater lows; one over the Maneroo Platform and one at the southern end of the Lovelle Depression in the west. Both of these groundwater lows parallel the major river systems. The groundwater low over the Maneroo Platform parallels the Thomson River south-west of Longreach. The western groundwater low parallels the Diamantina River. The association between the groundwater elevation lows and the rivers suggests that these river systems are fed, in part, by groundwater discharging from the Rolling Downs Group aquifers. There is a similar, but much less pronounced, groundwater low paralleling the Blackwater Creek in the south-east. The data density in the south-west is low, so a single control point was added along the Diamantina River, south of the Galilee Basin study area boundary. This control point had the effect of shifting the western groundwater contours closer to the river. The control point, however, did not influence the overall trend of groundwater flow to the west across the Galilee Basin study area boundary south of Julia Creek and west of Winton Cadna-owie / Hooray Sandstone aquifer systems Groundwater elevation data from the Cadna-owie / Hooray Sandstone aquifers were compiled into the single groundwater contour map presented on Figure 6.20 to achieve sufficient data distribution for conturing. PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 67

26 Figure 6.19 Groundwater elevation contours for the Galilee Basin study area undifferentiated Rolling Downs Group aquifers PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 68

27 Figure 6.20 Groundwater elevation contours for the Cadna-owie Formation / Hooray Sandstone aquifers PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 69

28 The distribution of the bores tapping the Cadna-owie Formation and Hooray Sandstone aquifers is presented on Figure 6.12 and Figure The overall groundwater flow trends in the Cadna-owie Formation and Hooray Sandstone are very similar to the groundwater flow trends in the overlying Rolling Downs Group, however, the focus of the groundwater recharge is slightly different. The groundwater recharge areas are located in the north, east and over the Springsure Shelf (Figure 6.20). There is a notable groundwater high north of Hughenden and east of Aramac. There is no groundwater high under the Forsyth Range in the Cadna-owie Formation and Hooray Sandstone aquifers. The groundwater flow pattern for the Cadna-owie Formation and Hooray Sandstone aquifers is dominantly to the west. However, there is a significant north-ward component to the flow. This component appears to be associated with the Flinders River system. The groundwater flow pattern in the Cadna-owie Formation and Hooray Sandstone aquifers suggests that the groundwater discharge areas for these aquifers lie to the west and north-west of the Galilee Basin study area. This local pattern differs from the overall southward groundwater flow pattern identified in Radke et al., (2000), most likely because the Galilee Basin study area is located near the recharge areas and contains a small area of Cadna-owie Formation and Hooray Sandstone aquifers that drain north-ward into the Carpentaria Basin. In detail, the Cadna-owie Formation and Hooray Sandstone aquifers are draining westward from the Springsure Shelf and the western side of the Great Dividing Range towards the Diamantina River. There are several bores with what appears to be anomalously high groundwater levels in the south-western portion of study area. These groundwater levels impart a north-ward flow direction to the groundwater in the Cadna-owie Formation and Hooray Sandstone aquifers. This high is likely the result of bores attributed to Cadnaowie Formation and Hooray Sandstone aquifers that cross connect with other aquifers. However, the groundwater flow in the Flinders River catchment suggests that a portion of the groundwater in Cadna-owie Formation and Hooray Sandstone aquifers is discharging to the north and into the Carpentaria Basin Hutton Sandstone aquifer The piezometric surface elevations for the Hutton Sandstone aquifer, an Eromanga Basin aquifer, have been compiled and plotted on Figure The distribution of the bores tapping the Hutton Sandstone aquifer is presented on Figure The groundwater elevation contours for the Hutton Sandstone aquifer are the highest over the Springsure shelf. The pronounced groundwater highs north of Hughenden and east of Aramac present in the overlying aquifers (i.e. Cadna-owie and Hooray Sandstone aquifers) are absent in the Hutton Sandstone aquifer. Although the groundwater flow pattern for the Hutton Sandstone aquifer differs from the Cadna-owie and Hooray Sandstone aquifers, the groundwater recharge areas for the Cadna-owie / Hooray Sandstone and Hutton Sandstone aquifers are located in the same area. This is likely because groundwater flow pattern in the Hutton Sandstone aquifer over the Springsure Shelf is directly to the west and is not oriented to recharge the Hutton Sandstone underlying the northern and western portions of the Galilee Basin study area. PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 70

29 Figure 6.21 Groundwater elevation contours for the Hutton Sandstone aquifer PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 71

30 Groundwater entering the Hutton Sandstone in the northern and western Galilee Basin study area likely enters the sandstone along the zero formation edge between Hughenden and Lake Galilee. Due to a lack of data over the Maneroo Platform, the groundwater discharge pattern from the Hutton Sandstone is not as well defined as it for the other aquifers overlying the Maneroo Platform (Figure 6.21). Groundwater flow over the Springsure Shelf suggests that the Hutton Sandstone aquifer discharge area is located to the south and south-west. There is some groundwater flow into to the north-west towards Barcaldine. This study did not process groundwater-elevation data beyond the Galilee Basin study area boundary, so it is not practical to identify the Hutton Sandstone aquifer discharge area south of the Springsure Shelf. Groundwater flow in the Hutton Sandstone north of Longreach is towards a groundwater elevation low located just north of the Hulton-Rand structure. This groundwater low is located in an area where the Hutton Sandstone unconformably overlies the Permian coal measures. This is also a region where the Hutton Sandstone appears to thin considerably as it passes over the crest of the Maranthona Monocline (Figure 1.3 and Figure 3.4). Additional groundwater elevation data are required to develop a better understanding of this groundwater low. Groundwater flow in the Hutton Sandstone west of Richmond and Winton is to the west. This westward groundwater flow pattern is very similar to the groundwater flow pattern in the overlying Cadna-owie and Hooray Sandstone aquifers, the exception being that the northern groundwater flow component is weaker. The groundwater flow pattern in the northern and western Eromanga Basin overlying the Galilee Basin, suggests that the Hutton Sandstone aquifer discharge area lies to the west and north-west of the study area. There are insufficient data available to determine if the location of the groundwater discharge area west of the Galilee Basin study area is associated with groundwater use or groundwater discharge to the surface or other groundwater basin Summary of standard DERM GWDB search A standard DERM GWDB search was conducted to develop an understanding of aquifer productive capacity. The results of this analysis are presented in Table 6.3. Data were available for most of the major Eromanga and Galilee Basin aquifers. However, in several instances DERM reported a test but did not report an observation (e.g. for a bore tapping the Doncaster Member of the Wallumbilla Formation). DERM reports more than 500 flow observations but only recorded just over 300 usable results. Yields were measured in water bores attributed to the Hutton Sandstone aquifer more than 100 times. The recorded yield measurements for the Hutton Sandstone aquifer ranged from 0.2 to 50.0 L/s per bore and had a median value of 8.25 L/s. The highest yield of L/s was measured at bore RN 334 (Table 6.3). The data in the DERM GWDB (2010) suggest that this bore taps the Wallumbilla Formation. RN 334 was drilled in August 1899, so this yield value likely dates from that time. The yield measurement data has not been recorded. The highest median water yield was calculated at 35.9 L/s for bores attributed to Boxvale Sandstone Member of the Evergreen Formation. PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 72

31 Basin Surficial deposits Eromanga Basin sequence Galilee Basin sequence Table 6.3 Galilee Basin study area aquifer yield summary observations observations with yield data Yield (L/s) Formation Mean or (1) Median Min Max Range Value undifferentiated Tertiary age Basalt (Tertiary age) Mackunda Formation Doncaster Member of the Wallumbilla Formation Wyandra Sandstone Member of the Cadna-owie Formation Ronlow beds Gilbert River Formation Bungil Formation Hooray Sandstone Injune Creek Group Westbourne Formation Adori Sandstone Birkhead Formation Hutton Sandstone Boxvale Sandstone Member of the Evergreen Formation Precipice Sandstone Moolayember Formation Warang Sandstone Clematis Sandstone Dunda beds Colinlea Sandstone (1) The value is present when there are too few data points to average. PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 73

32 6.3 Summary of DERM GWDB flow and pumping test data for the Galilee Basin study area A special request was placed with DERM to obtain data from the Pumping Test and Design Table in the DERM GWDB (2010). The location of the DERM GWDB (2010) bores with flow data are presented on Figure The distribution of the water bores with flow data by tenement is illustrated in the histogram presented on Figure 6.23: the totals for each tenement include bores with static water level recordings (Appendix Table D-1), discharge data and calculated static water levels. Flow and static groundwater level data was received for nearly 2,100 bores in the Galilee Basin study area from DERM. Aquifers have been identified for fewer than 1,100 water bores (Table 6.4). The first flow test was conducted on a bore in 1887 and the most recent was conducted on 18 May More than 450 flow observations made prior to 1900 have been recorded by DERM. The changes in aquifer pressure and depth to groundwater over time were analysed by plotting the discharge flow rate upon arrival at the bore (Figure 6.24) and changes in the static and calculated groundwater levels (Figure 6.25 and 6.26). The groundwater discharge from water bores in the early 1900s peaked at over 100 L/s per bore for a small of bores (Figure 6.24) The peak measured groundwater flow per bore declined non-linearly to about 40 L/s per bore sometime in Groundwater flow following 2000 continues a slow decline to approximately 30 L/s per bore. However, there is a slight increase in the of flow observations exceeding 40 L/s per bore after DERM recorded the largest of observations at the largest of bores between 1910 and Prior to 1910, the of observations recorded in the DERM GWDB (2010) reflects the of bores drilled into the Eromanga and Galilee Basin aquifers. The increase in recorded observations reflects the increasing of bores tapping the Eromanga and Galilee Basin aquifers. The decline in recorded observations following 1975 is due to reduced measurement levels and not the availability of bores to measure. The static groundwater level data are dominated by subartesian values prior to 1975 and artesian values after This shift between subartesian and artesian values is likely due to changes in the bores monitored and not due to an apparent increase in aquifer pressure. There is a slight decline in the peak artesian groundwater levels over 100 m agl prior to 1975 and peak artesian groundwater levels near 75 m agl after The deepest depth to groundwater is relatively consistent at 150 m bgl between 1900 and However, there are significantly more subartesian observations following 2000 than there were prior to It is unknown if this is an artefact of the bores sampled or if this is related to an actual loss of aquifer pressure. The calculated static groundwater levels appear to remain constant from the early 1980s through to If there is any trend, the calculated static groundwater levels appear to have increased slightly since PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 74

33 Figure 6.22 DERM GWDB bores with flow and pumping test data PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 75

34 Figure 6.23 Distribution of flow data measurements by GBOF tenement Numbe of bores with data Tenement Number Table 6.4 The of water bores with flow data by formation Basin Formation Name bore tapping Surficial deposits Eromanga Basin sequence Galilee Basin sequence Alluvial sediments (undifferentiated) 37 Tertiary sediments (undifferentiated) 16 Glendower Formation (Tertiary) 4 Winton Formation 107 Mackunda Formation 65 Allaru Mudstone 15 Coreena Member (Wallumbilla Formation) 11 Doncaster Member (Wallumbilla Formation) 16 Wallumbilla Formation (undifferentiated) 50 Gilbert River Formation 37 Ronlow beds 70 Cadna-owie Formation 2 Hooray Sandstone 191 Longsight Sandstone 1 Westbourne Formation 13 Adori Sandstone 59 Birkhead Formation 8 Injune Creek Group (undifferentiated) 33 Hutton Sandstone 269 Boxvale Sandstone Member (Evergreen Formation) 3 Evergreen Formation 2 Precipice Sandstone 32 Warang Sandstone 1 Moolayember Formation 9 Clematis Sandstone 14 Dunda beds 1 Rewan Formation 1 Blackwater Group 1 PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 76

35 Figure 6.24 Bore discharge (L/s) at arrival for all bores in the Galilee Basin study area with data, 1900 to 2010 PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 77

36 Figure 6.25 Static groundwater levels for all bores in the Galilee Basin study area with data, 1900 to 2010 PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 78

37 Figure 6.26 Calculated static groundwater levels for all bores in the Galilee Basin study area with data, 1900 to 2010 PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 79

38 6.4 Groundwater Quality Groundwater quality data were extracted from the DERM GWDB (2010) for analysis (Appendix E). The DERM GWDB (2010) groundwater quality data represents a wide range of groundwater samples collected over many decades. Some groundwater samples have been collected as part of ad hoc sampling often overseen by the bore driller or bore owner. Those samples generally have not undergone data quality validation. Other samples have been collected as part of bore sampling programs with data quality validation procedures in place. Additionally the compounds tested for varied considerably between water bores, so a comprehensive set of results are not available for all of the aquifers sampled. Nothwithstanding these variations in sampling protocol and analytes tested, all available data obtained from the DERM GWDB have been incorporated into the ground water quality data analysis. The groundwater quality data presented below, in Appendix Table E-1 and in Section 8, provide a snap shot of the groundwater quality in the aquifers of the Galilee Basin study area prior to this investigation. However, additional groundwater quality sampling, conducted to current quality assurance and quality control standards and analysed using current laboratory methodologies, is needed to establish a quantitatively defensible groundwater quality baseline for the aquifers in the Galilee basin study area. For instance, dissolved and free methane, which are likely to be present in the groundwater found in the study area, have not been tested historically. DERM GWDB (2010) reports constituent concentrations below the Limit of Reporting as the LOR value. The constituent concentrations below the LOR are identified by a data flag in the DERM GWDB (2010) and are denoted in Appendix Table E-1 as non-detects or ND. A review of the water quality data identified a of constituent concentrations reported in the DERM GWDB and Appendix Table E-1, which are considered to be implausible hydrogeochemically. These values have been labelled as ND, or non-detects, in the Section 8 groundwater quality summary tables; however, the value reported in the DERM GWDB is presented in Appendix Table E-1. Groundwater quality data presented in Appendix Table E-1 also contain data obtained from the QPED database and the GBOF operators. A of these data have been collected from the Permian age coal measures as part of an exploration or stratigraphic drilling program. Specifically, the groundwater samples were obtained from drill stem and as a result can show strong drilling fluid influences, including high electrical conductivity values and high chloride, sodium and potassium levels when compared to the groundwater samples obtained from a water bore completed in a comparable aquifer or water-bearing sediment. The constituents in the drill stem test results are sufficient to skew the statistical representation of groundwater quality analyses; therefore, the data collected from exploration or stratigraphic programs has been excluded from the groundwater quality analysis.this data is summarised in Section 8.0. The significant majority of the ph values reported in this report were measured in the laboratory. The ph of a groundwater sample can change significantly between the time the groundwater is brought to the surface and the time it reaches the laboratory for measurement. This lag between sampling and the laboratory means that a ph measured at the well head provides a better indication of the ph of the groundwater within the aquifer than a measurement made at the analytical laboratory. Therefore, it is recommended that ph measurements are recorded in the field. PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 80

39 The groundwater samples were obtained from water bores attributed to 32 aquifer systems and water bearing sediments ranging from the Quaternary alluvium aquifer to the Joe Joe Group. Groundwater samples have been assigned to stratigraphic groups, formations and formation members. Those samples where aquifers and water bearing sediments could not be clearly identified from the DERM GWDB (2010) are grouped as undifferentiated aquifers. These undifferentiated groups could represent individual or multiple aquifers or water-bearing sediments (Table 6.6a). Groundwater samples have also been taken from drill stem for ten aquifers and water bearing sediments. These results have been summarised in Table 6.6b separately from the groundwater samples. Where aquifer units or water bearing sediments have not been clearly assigned to an aquifer or water bearing sediment, these samples have been labelled as undifferentiated aquifer. The Quaternary alluvium was sampled most frequently and the aquifers in the basement sequence rocks were sampled the least. Groundwater quality data are available from the major and some of the minor Eromanga Basin and Galilee Basin aquifers. A of groundwater samples were obtained from water bores attributed to several of the major Eromanga Basin and Galilee Basin aquitards. Groundwater quality sample results were obtained from more than 650 individual water bores in the study area. Most of these bores were only sampled a single time. Note that DERM records the depth below ground surface that a groundwater sample was collected. This depth may represent the depth of the pump, the screen interval or the water level at the time the sample was collected. The recorded depth that a groundwater sample was collected frequently differs from the depth to groundwater or the depth of the screened or perforated interval. According to data recorded in the DERM GWDB (2010), bores with groundwater quality data, tap aquifers ranging from 2 m bgl (RN 2089) to 2,999 m bgl (RN 15577). DERM listed one sample collected at a depth over 6,410 m (RN 1382, Clover Hills 2 drilled in 1908); however, this is almost certainly an error in GWDB, given that another sample is recorded at 641 m bgl for the same bore. Generally, groundwater quality ranges from fresh water to saline (Table 6.5). However, the majority of the groundwater quality results for electrical conductivity and total dissolved solids suggest that the groundwater in the water bores in the Galilee Basin study area is suitable for stock watering and locally suitable for domestic consumption. The groundwater is typically fresh water to slightly brackish water. PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 81

40 Table 6.5 Groundwater salinity based on electrical conductivity Water type Electrical conductivity (µs/cm) Fresh <1,660 Slightly brackish 1,660 to 5,000 Brackish 5,000 to 16,600 Saline 16,600 to 66,400 Brine >66,400 Source: Suttar, S., 1990 The upper aquifers, the Quaternary alluvial and Tertiary sediments have some of the highest salinity values measured for bores constructed in the Galilee Basin study area. This is important, because these aquifers are the most important groundwater resource, with regard to the total of water bores in the study area. The highest average electrical conductivity is seen in the Moolayember Formation followed by the Winton and Mackunda Formations (Table 6.6a). All other formations regardless of vertical or stratigraphic depth (Table 6.6a) have an average electrical conductivity of groundwater below 3,000 µs/cm. Overall highest average total dissolved solids (TDS) are present in the Moolayember Formation. Within the Eromanga Basin sequence the Winton and the Mackunda Formations have the hightest average TDS (Table 6.6a). PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 82

41 Basin Surficial Deposits Eromanga Basin Sequence Aquifer Formation Alluvium undifferentiated Tertiary Sediments Winton Formation Mackunda Formation Allaru Mudstone Coreena Member of the Wallumbilla Formation Doncaster Member of the Wallumbilla Formation Wallumbilla Formation Gilbert River Formation Wyandra Sandstone Hooray Sandstone Statistic Depth of Sample (m bgl) Conductivity (µs/cm) ph Hardness (mg/l Ca) Alkalinity Dissolved Solids Sodium Potassium Calcium Average , Maximum , , ,380 1, , Minimum Average , , Maximum , , ,211 4, , Minimum ND Average 212 6, ,253 1, , Maximum , ,052 3,002 17,073 16, , , , , Minimum Average 193 4, ,591 1, , Maximum 1,098 13, ,402 1,361 7,652 3, , , Minimum Value -- 1, Average Maximum 266 1, Minimum Average Maximum 317 1, Minimum Average 273 1, , Maximum , ,214 6,056 42,096 12, , , , , Minimum Average Maximum 582 1, Minimum Value Table 6.6a Summary of groundwater quality data by aquifer formation Average 466 1, Maximum 1,274 12, ,072 1,062 9,613 3, , , , Minimum ND Magnesium Iron Manganese Bicarbonate Carbonate Chloride Fluoride Nitrate Sulphate Zinc PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 83

42 Basin Galilee Basin Sequence Aquifer Formation Cadna-Owie Formation/ Hooray Sandstone/ Injune Creek Group Westbourne Formation Adori Sandstone Birkhead Formation undifferentiated Injune Creek Group Ronlow Beds Hutton Sandstone Precipice Sandstone Warang Sandstone Moolayember Formation Clematis Sandstone Statistic Depth of Sample (m bgl) Conductivity (µs/cm) ph Hardness (mg/l Ca) Alkalinity Dissolved Solids Sodium Potassium Calcium Average 890 1, Maximum 984 2, , , ND Minimum ND Average Maximum 950 1, , ND ND Minimum ND ND Average Maximum 1,102 5, ,480 1, , Minimum Average Maximum ND Minimum ND Average 600 1, Maximum 1,099 2, , , Minimum Average Maximum , , ,403 11, , , , Minimum ND Average Maximum 1,550 2, ,147 1,648 2, , , Minimum ND Value Average Maximum ND ND 11.0 ND Minimum ND ND 9.4 ND Average , , ,904 3, , , Maximum , , ,320 13, ,340 2, , , Minimum Average 220 1, , , Maximum 1,352 11, , ,195 6, , , Magnesium Iron Manganese Bicarbonate Carbonate Chloride Fluoride Nitrate Sulphate Zinc PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 84

43 Basin Aquifer Formation Statistic Depth of Sample (m bgl) Conductivity (µs/cm) ph Hardness (mg/l Ca) Alkalinity Dissolved Solids Sodium Potassium Calcium Magnesium Iron Manganese Bicarbonate Carbonate Chloride Fluoride Nitrate Sulphate Zinc Dunda Beds Minimum Average Maximum ND Rewan Formation Minimum ND Average , , Maximum , , ,036 1, ND 2, ND Betts Creek Beds Minimum ND ND Average Maximum 1, , ND ND ND 4.1 Colinlea Sandstone Minimum ND ND ND Average 1,282 1, , Maximum 1,543 3, , Blackwater Group Jochmus Formation Minimum 742 1, Value Average 1,461 1, Maximum 1,727 1, Minimum 1,364 1, Jericho Formation Average 1,630 4, , Maximum 1,713 4, , , , Minimum 1,588 3, , Lake Galilee Sandstone Joe Joe Group Value 2, , , Average 894 8, , Maximum 1,529 8, , ,663 1, , ND Minimum , ND undifferentiated Devonian undifferentiated Carboniferous undifferentiated aquifer Value 1, Value 1, PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 85

44 Basin Aquifer Formation Statistic Depth of Sample (m bgl) Conductivity (µs/cm) ph Hardness (mg/l Ca) Alkalinity Dissolved Solids Sodium Potassium Calcium Magnesium Iron Manganese Bicarbonate Carbonate Chloride Fluoride Nitrate Sulphate Zinc Average 338 1, , Maximum 6,410 39, ,250 5,690 64,355 27, ,488 1, , , , Minimum ND PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 86

45 Table 6.6b Summary of groundwater quality data from drill stem by aquifer formation Basin Aquifer Formation Statistic Depth of Sample (m bgl) Conductivity (µs/cm) ph Hardness (mg/l Ca) Alkalinity Dissolved Solids Sodium Potassium Calcium Magnesium Iron Manganese Bicarbonate Carbonate Chloride Fluoride Nitrate Sulphate Zinc Hooray Sandstone Average 937 1, , Eromanga Basin Sequence Adori Sandstone Hutton Sandstone Maximum 1,108 1, , , Minimum 766 1, , Value 861 1, Value 916 1, Betts Creek Beds Average 1,019 17, ,020 4, , Maximum 1,141 90, ,256 57,664 23, , , , Minimum 942 1, ND Bandanna Formation Average 1,168 4, ,011 1, , , Maximum 1,449 16, ,026 10,381 3, , , Minimum 820 1, , Galilee Basin Sequence Colinlea Sandstone or Jochmus Formation Aramac Coal Measures Value 1, Average 1,025 27, ,546 6, Maximum 1,083 77, ,792 19, , , ND Minimum 916 2, , ND Lake Galilee Sandstone Value 2, , undifferentiated Permian Average 1, ,159 1,337 Maximum 1, ,375 9,540 19, , , ,740 2,810 15, , Minimum 1, undifferentiated aquifer Average Maximum ND 0.03 Minimum ND 0.03 PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 87

46 7.0 QPED wells There are 370 petroleum exploration wells recorded in QPED (2011) within the Galilee Basin study area (Figure 7.1, Table 7.1 and Table C.1). Fewer than 150 bores were drilled within a GBOF tenement. Six exploration wells were drilled in non-galilee Basin sequences where a tenement overlaps into the adjoining basins (i.e. stratigraphic sequences). This general analysis of the QPED exploration wells is based on the data contained in the database, which was accessed in January The GBOF members have drilled more than 30 additional wells. However, the well completion reports for the recent wells have not yet been made public. Table 7.1 Statistics for QPED wells in the Galilee Basin study area Statistic Value Units wells with any QPED records 370 wells wells on GBOF tenements (1) 131 wells wells with Queensland Government stratigraphic units recorded 186 wells wells with QPED drill stem test (DST) records 156 wells Earliest recorded spud date (HNT Tambo 1, well id 798) 1922 year Earliest recorded spud date on a GBOF tenement (QOD Langdale 1, well id 761) 1927 year wells with reported DST groundwater quality 28 wells (1) Value does not include recent CSG wells The basic statistics for these exploration wells are presented in Table 7.1. The analysis of the exploration wells focuses on those wells located on the GBOF tenements. However, there were very few groundwater quality samples available, so the groundwater quality analysis includes all of the readily available groundwater quality data for the entire Galilee Basin study area. The first exploration well in the Galilee Basin study area was drilled in 1922 (Table 7.1). The deepest exploration well was PPC Log Creek 1 (well id 646) which penetrated to the underlying basement sequence at a depth of 4,440 m bkb (metres below kelly bushing). The deepest well drilled on a GBOF tenement was CAR Mogga 1 (well id 1260) which penetrated to a depth of 3,620 m bkb. The average exploration penetrated to a depth of 1,205 m bkb. The average exploration well drilled on a GBOF tenement penetrated to a depth of 1,167 m bkb. Prior the 1990s, subsurface exploration was dominated by petroleum exploration wells and shallow to deep government stratigraphic wells. Since the early 1990s drilling has increasingly focused on CSG targets. Only a small of exploration wells have been converted to water bores (Table 7.2). Converted wells are most commonly completed in the Cadna-owie / Hooray aquifers and the shallower water-bearing sediments in the Rolling Downs Group (QPED, 2011 and various well completion reports). PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 88

47 Figure 7.1 Map showing the location of the QPED wells in the Galilee Basin study area PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 89

48 Table 7.2 Type and Status of QPED wells in the Galilee Basin study area and on the GBOF tenements Galilee Basin study Units GBOF Tenements Statistic area Value Value Drill date Oldest Date 1922 (well id 761) 1927 (well id 798) (year) Well type (1) Petroleum (wells) CSG 53 (2) 45 (wells) Well status Well depth statistics Stratigraphic (wells) Plugged and abandoned (wells) Suspended and shut-in (wells) Completed as producer 4 0 (wells) Converted to water bore (wells) Unknown 5 16 (wells) wells with depth data (wells) Average well depth 1,205 1,167 (m bkb) Median well depth 1,138 1,130 (m bkb) Deepest recorded well depth 4,440 (well id 646) 3,620 (well id 1260) (m bkb) Shallowest recorded well depth (3) 12 (well id 2770) 45 (well id 1758) (m bkb) (1) Results include wells in QPED only, recent CSG wells are not included. (2) Recent exploration wells not included in this total. (3) BMR Springsure 10 and BMR Longreach 5 respectively DSTs have been conducted at 156 exploration wells in the Galilee Basin study area. Sixty-one final shut-in pressure data measurements could be obtained from 20 exploration wells on the GBOF tenements (Table 7.3 and Figure 7.2). Pressures have been measured in a wide range of formations. While measurements in the Permian age formations dominate, the final shut-in pressures were also recorded in the: Hooray Sandstone; Hutton Sandstone; Colinlea Sandstone; Joe Joe Group; and Drummond Basin sequence. The shut-in pressure data were collected from depths that range from 636 to 2,739 m bgl and average 1,279 m bgl. The final shut-in pressures ranged from 971 psia to 3,800 psia and average 1,675 psia. One extremely low-pressure value was returned. However, this value likely represents a failed test. Analysis of the final shut-in pressure values return equivalent water levels that range from 1,648 to 87 m agl and average 101 m bgl. Twenty-three of the DSTs yielded equivalent groundwater levels above the ground surface. Only two of the remaining equivalent groundwater levels did not indicate significant subartesian pressure. PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 90

49 QPED well DERM bore registration Tenement Number Table 7.3 Available final shut-in pressure data for GBOF tenement exploration wells QPED well Name Geological formation DST # Top Depth m bkb Bottom Depth m bkb Final shut-in pressure (psia) Groundwater level (m bgl) (1) Aberfoyle 1 Bandanna Formation 1 1,444 1,449 2, Aberfoyle 1 Bandanna Formation 2 1,400 1,410 2, Aberfoyle 1 Bandanna Formation 3 1,386 1,398 1, Aberfoyle 1 Bandanna Formation 4 1,399 1,410 2, Aberfoyle 1 Bandanna Formation 5 1,444 1,449 2, Aramac 1 Joe Joe Group (Jericho Formation) 1 1,713 1,823 2, Injune Creek Group Birkhead Burgamoo 1 Formation 1 1,556 1,573 2, Carmichael 1 Joe Joe Group (Jochmus Formation) 1 1,296 1,306 1, Coreena 1 Colinlea Sandstone 1 2,418 2,465 1, Coreena 1 Joe Joe Group 3 1,378 1,445 2, Corona 1 Hutton Sandstone 1 1,025 1,067 1, Crossmore 1 Aramac Coal Measures , Crossmore 1 Bandanna Formation , Crossmore 1 Bandanna Formation , Crossmore 1 Bandanna Formation , Crossmore 1 Bandanna Formation , Crossmore 2 Aramac Coal Measures , Crossmore 2 Aramac Coal Measures , Fleetwood 1 Moolayember Formation 1 1,110 1,148 1, Fleetwood 1 Moolayember Formation 1,110 1,237 1, Jericho 1 Basement (Ducabrook Formation) 1 1,703 1,733 2, Jericho 1 Basement (Ducabrook Formation) 1 1,703 1,733 2, Jericho 1 Basement (Ducabrook Formation) 3 2,593 2,633 3, Jericho 1 Joe Joe Group 2 1,643 1,652 2, Lake Galilee 1 undifferentiated Early Permian 5 2,645 2,668 3, Lake Galilee 1 undifferentiated Early Permian 8 2,739 2,768 3, Lake Galilee 1 undifferentiated Late Permian 2 1,010 1,052 1, Marchmont 1 Colinlea Sandstone 2 (2) 1,346 1, , Marchmont 1 undifferentiated Late Permian 1 1,287 1, PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 91

50 QPED well DERM bore registration Tenement Number QPED well Name Geological formation DST # Top Depth m bkb Bottom Depth m bkb Final shut-in pressure (psia) Groundwater level (m bgl) (1) Mogga 1 Basement (Bulliwallah Formation) , Muttaburra 1 undifferentiated Early Permian 1 1,391 1,390 2, Rand 1 undifferentiated Carboniferous 2 1,873 1,883 2, Rand 1 Joe Joe Group 4 1,718 1,725 2, Rodney Creek 1 Betts Creek beds , Rodney Creek 1 Betts Creek beds 2 1,041 1,054 1, Rodney Creek 1 Betts Creek beds 4 1,055 1,072 1, Rodney Creek 2 Aramac Coal Measures 1 1,077 1,083 1, Rodney Creek 2 Aramac Coal Measures 10 1,057 1,077 1, Rodney Creek 2 Betts Creek beds 2 1,034 1,039 1, Rodney Creek 2 Betts Creek beds 3 1,025 1,029 1, Rodney Creek 2 Betts Creek beds 4 1,010 1,013 1, Rodney Creek 2 Betts Creek beds ,003 1, Rodney Creek 2 Betts Creek beds , Rodney Creek 2 Betts Creek beds , Rodney Creek 2 Betts Creek beds 8 1,018 1,023 1, Rodney Creek 2 Betts Creek beds 9 1,025 1,029 1, Rodney Creek 2 Betts Creek beds ,026 1, Rodney Creek 2 Betts Creek beds , Rodney Creek 2 Betts Creek beds ,003 1, Silsoe 1 Hooray Sandstone 1a 1,342 1, Silsoe 1 Hooray Sandstone 2 1,337 1,344 1, Thunderbolt 1 undifferentiated Late C to Early P 3 1,364 1,404 1, Thunderbolt 1 undifferentiated Late C to Early P 4 1,588 1,596 1, Thunderbolt 1 undifferentiated Late Permian , Toobrac 1 Hooray Sandstone , Toobrac 1 Hutton Sandstone 2 1,100 1,106 1, (1) Negative values represent groundwater level above the ground surface. (2) Failed test PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 92

51 Figure 7.2 Map showing the location of QPED wells with final shut-in pressures PR ; Rev 1 / December 2012 Page 93