Laserfiche WebLink
100 <br />90 <br />80 <br />70 <br />60 <br />50 <br />�R 40 <br />30 <br />20 <br />10 <br />0 <br />Seneca IIW Sagebrush Reference Area Corer Data <br />200E 2067 2009 2011 2012 <br />Year <br />Veg cover <br />#Ground cover <br />Annual cover <br />9b. The division requested analysis which compares suspended solids generated off the pre- mining land to the bond <br />release area. Table 17 -25 on page 68 in Tab 17, Probable Hydrologic Consequences of the Seneca II -W Permit <br />Application Package shows Peak Sediment Concentrations predicted by SEDIMOT II, the precursor to SEDCAD for <br />Pond 006 (shown below). <br />These runs remain useful considering that recent pond capacity surveys in Pond 006 from 2009 through 2013 <br />show negligible sediment accumulation over a five year period as seen on the graph for Pond Capacity Table for <br />Pond 006 (above for response to 9a). The above graphs for Ponds 005, 009, and 016 also show negligible <br />sediment accumulation over the last three years (2011 through 2013). Modeling showed both the pre and post - <br />mine conditions contribute very small sediment loads compared to the condition during mining when there was <br />little or no vegetation present above the pond. Furthermore, the original modeling results indicated minimal <br />erosion would occur once reclamation is completed above both Ponds 005 and 006 due to a predicted increase <br />in runoff The capacity surveys on Pond 006 and the other three ponds support this prediction, and also show <br />sufficient treatment (detention time) has been maintained in these ponds prior to the eventual discharge from the <br />impoundment outfall. <br />Peak <br />Discharges Runoff <br />Volume, Peak Sediment <br />Concentration and Sediment <br />Yield <br />Calculated Using <br />SEDIMOT II for the 005 <br />and 006 Gulch watersheds <br />Peak <br />Runoff <br />Peak Sediment <br />Sediment <br />Watershed Condition <br />Storm <br />Discharge (cfs) <br />Volume (ac -ft) <br />Concentration (m 11) <br />Yield (tons) <br />0051 <br />Premising <br />10 <br />yr -24 <br />hr <br />0.00 <br />0.00 <br />0.00 <br />0.0 <br />2 <br />005 <br />Postmining <br />10 <br />yr -24 <br />hr <br />0.20 <br />0.123 <br />8,66 <br />0.0013 <br />0051 <br />Premining <br />100 <br />yr -24 <br />hr <br />0.31 <br />0.259 <br />8,10 <br />0.0022 <br />0052 <br />Postmining <br />100 <br />yr -24 <br />hr <br />6.41 <br />7.52 <br />20.2 <br />0.0453 <br />006 <br />Premining <br />10 <br />yr-24 <br />hr <br />0.05 <br />0.020 <br />8.45 <br />0.0002 <br />4 <br />006 <br />Postmining <br />10 <br />yr -24 <br />hr <br />0.98 <br />0.665 <br />9.12 <br />0,0073 <br />0063 <br />Premining <br />100 <br />yr -24 <br />hr <br />2.04 <br />1,52 <br />60.7 <br />0,0760 <br />0064 <br />Postmining <br />100 <br />yr -24 <br />hr <br />26.4 <br />11.7 <br />22.8 <br />0.2319 <br />1 <br />Total <br />drainage area = 198.4 <br />acres <br />2Total <br />drainage area = 196.9 <br />acres <br />3 <br />Total <br />drainage area = 725.3 <br />acres <br />4 <br />Total <br />drainage area - 729.9 <br />acres <br />These runs remain useful considering that recent pond capacity surveys in Pond 006 from 2009 through 2013 <br />show negligible sediment accumulation over a five year period as seen on the graph for Pond Capacity Table for <br />Pond 006 (above for response to 9a). The above graphs for Ponds 005, 009, and 016 also show negligible <br />sediment accumulation over the last three years (2011 through 2013). Modeling showed both the pre and post - <br />mine conditions contribute very small sediment loads compared to the condition during mining when there was <br />little or no vegetation present above the pond. Furthermore, the original modeling results indicated minimal <br />erosion would occur once reclamation is completed above both Ponds 005 and 006 due to a predicted increase <br />in runoff The capacity surveys on Pond 006 and the other three ponds support this prediction, and also show <br />sufficient treatment (detention time) has been maintained in these ponds prior to the eventual discharge from the <br />impoundment outfall. <br />