Laserfiche WebLink
t <br /> SOE 362 <br /> Mn 13.52 — <br /> Zn 1.32 <br /> .. �-! os�-r SOS 75 <br /> :.:: ' <br /> pH 4.87 + �°' .+ Mn 0.07 <br /> A Zn N.D. <br /> X dr pH 7.15 <br /> SO4 971 <br /> Mn 4.79 _ lb <br /> Zn 0.24 3 <br /> SO4 711 <br /> pH 6.47 <br /> Mn 0.28 <br /> Zn 0.08 4 - <br /> pH 7.22 <br /> i <br /> SO4 755 <br /> Mn 1.01 <br /> Zn 0.07 <br /> pH 6.49 f <br /> s SO4 38 - ,...... .�. <br /> Mn 0.06 <br /> Zn 0.01 <br /> pH 7.35 ONWp..„ <br /> MAWMWX� 4- <br /> Figure 5: Distribution of geometric mean concentration of sulfate, manganese,zinc(all in mg/L)and field pH. <br /> 5. Analysis <br /> As shown in Figure 5, the six drainages have significantly different geometric mean concentrations of <br /> sulfate, manganese, and zinc. The following sub-sections address the chemistry data by drainage. In <br /> those drainages where dissolved constituents are at elevated levels, working hypotheses are developed <br /> to account for the elevated constituents in Section 4. <br /> 5.1 Squaw Gulch <br /> Of the six drainages, Squaw Gulch has the highest geometric mean concentration of sulfate and <br /> manganese, and second highest zinc, but has only one monitoring well upon which this assessment is <br /> based (SGMW 613-60). The other three wells (SGMW 6A-400, SGMW 713-60, and SGMW 7A-400) have <br /> been dry since their construction in April — June 2015, with the exception of SGMW 76-60, which was <br /> sampled in June and July 2015. Table 5 presents the geometric mean data of the SGMW 713-60 samples <br />