1. The well was video taped 3 times, twice with water in it, and once after the lower borehole was
abandoned and the water was pumped out of the casing. The significant amount of debris dislodged
from the casing and floating in the water made it very difficult to see if there were any cracks or
holes in the casing. We paid particular attention to the joints at the top of the St. Peter (sulfide
mineralization) where one would suspect the greatest weakness in the casing. The video of the
casing after the water was pumped out was also inconclusive; i.e., there appeared to be a slight
darkening at the 103-foot joint, but it did not look like an obvious hole or crack.
2. The pressure test was also inconclusive. One would have expected the pressure to drop more than
1/3 of a pound if there was a hole in the casing. Instead, the pressure dropped a third, and then
stabilized for the next 25 minutes with no further loss of pressure indicated on the gage. It is
possible that there was a slight fissure or hole in the casing (most likely at the joint) but that it
"healed" itself by having material entering back into the hole from outside the casing once the
pressure was generally equalized. Another puzzling aspect of the pressure test was the inability to
get more than 16 PSI of air into the well.
Consequently, the physical testing conducted on the King well neither proves, nor completely
disproves, the possibility of loss of casing integrity. Again, we did not have the technology to check the
grout.
Physical testing conducted by: Dave Johnson, DNR; Troy Simonar, Tom Van DeYacht, and Andy Van De Yacht of Van DeYacht
Water Wells; Kelley O'Connor, DNR; Liz Heinen, DNR; and Ken Meyer of Luisier Well Drilling.

61