My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2017-06-26_HYDROLOGY - M1980244
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Hydrology
>
Minerals
>
M1980244
>
2017-06-26_HYDROLOGY - M1980244
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/27/2020 1:25:58 AM
Creation date
6/28/2017 10:03:40 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1980244
IBM Index Class Name
Hydrology
Doc Date
6/26/2017
Doc Name
Demonstration of Compliance with WQCC Regulation No 41
From
Newmont
To
DRMS
Email Name
TC1
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
45
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
with the sample taken from SGMW 613-60 in July 2015 (no sample was collected from SGMW 6B-60 in <br /> June 2015). <br /> Table 5: Comparison of analytical results from SGMW 7B-60 and SGMW 66-60, June-July 2015 <br /> (N.D. indicates not detected). <br /> Analyte SGMW 713-60 SGMW 613-60 <br /> SO4 (m /L) 953 1040 <br /> Mn m /L 0.05 5.94 <br /> Field pH 6.62 6.36 <br /> Zn m /L N.D. 0.24 <br /> WAD CN m /L N.D. N.D. <br /> It is evident from Table 5 that sulfate and pH are relatively consistent between the two wells, but <br /> manganese and zinc are higher in SGMW 613-60 by several orders of magnitude. The sulfate, <br /> manganese and zinc concentrations in SGMW 6B-60 are within one standard deviation of the overall <br /> geometric mean of the data from that well (see Table 3), suggesting that the July 2015 sample is <br /> reasonably representative. The more recent data indicate that sulfate varies over a narrow band of <br /> approximately 100 mg/L. <br /> The water chemistry data from Squaw Gulch were examined against precipitation, as measured at the <br /> Rigi meteorological station, and the total precipitation between sampling events plotted against the <br /> various constituents. However, due to the short record of water chemistry data, no clear relationships <br /> were apparent. <br /> Figure 6 presents the Squaw Gulch data for sulfate, and Figure 7 presents the data for manganese, zinc, <br /> and pH. Whilst there are few data available, it appears that since early 2016 manganese and zinc co- <br /> vary, and together with sulfate exhibit a temporary spike in concentration on 21 June 2016. Field pH has <br /> been very slowly declining since the initial sample was taken from SGMW 66-60, and given the absence <br /> of detectable WAD CN, suggests that process solution from the Squaw Gulch valley leach facility (VLF2) <br /> does not enter the groundwater. <br /> Precipitation, as measured at the Rigi meteorological station, was totaled between sampling events, and <br /> plotted against the analytes of interest. No clear relationships were evident, so precipitation has not been <br /> included in Figures 6 and 7. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.