Laserfiche WebLink
Phase III Hydrology <br /> A.) Basic Standards Interim Narrative Standard for Ground Water(CWQCC Regulation 41.5(c)(6). <br /> The Groundwater Point of Compliance (GWPOC)for the Seneca II West Mine was established in 2009 <br /> under Technical Revision 63 (TR-63).The GWPOC well at the Seneca II West Mine is monitoring well <br /> DCAL-02 which is screened within the Dry Creek Alluvium downgradient (north) of the mines permit <br /> boundary(see Map 1). A GWPOC for the Sage Creek Alluvium was deemed unnecessary due to the small <br /> portion of the ridgeline mined within the Sage Creek watershed.The bedrock within the permit area <br /> dips to the west and the spoil water generated at the ridge top drains to the west along the dipping <br /> bedrock, away from the Sage Creek tributaries. GWPOC bedrock wells were also deemed unnecessary <br /> due to the limited potential for the mine to negatively impact the quality of bedrock groundwater.The <br /> Wadge and Wolf Creek Coal exhibit low hydraulic conductivity(3.5E-8 to 3.5E-5 cm/sec) and attenuation <br /> and dilution should further limit water quality impacts. Low permeability confining layers isolate mine- <br /> impacted water bearing units from the nearest useable aquifer,the Trout Creek Sandstone.The Trout <br /> Creek Sandston lies approximately 300 to 400 feet below the Wadge Coal seam and approximately 60 to <br /> 100 feet below the Wolf Creek Coal Seem. See TR-63 in Appendix 15-313 of the Seneca II West Mine <br /> permit package for additional justification for the Groundwater Point of Compliance. <br /> Table 16 includes a summary of the water quality collected at well DCAL-02 over the last five years (2015 <br /> —2019) and provides a comparison against the Dry Creek alluvial GWPOC water quality standards <br /> established in TR-63 in 2009. The groundwater quality at DCAL-02 consistently meets the water quality <br /> standards except for dissolved iron. Over the last five years dissolved iron has ranged from 0.14—10.8 <br /> mg/L(mean: 6.74 mg/L). DCAL-02 was installed in the Dry Creek alluvium in 1998 after mining had <br /> already started in the watershed. Since pre-mining background water quality data is not available for the <br /> Dry Creek alluvium the ambient groundwater standards were established from wells located within the <br /> adjacent Hubberson and Watering Trough Gulch alluvium.The dissolved iron at these locations was <br /> variable with concentrations as high as 61 mg/L. Potential outliers were excluded from the dataset and a <br /> standard of 8.06 mg/L was established for the alluvium in this area. Dissolved iron ranged from 6.96- <br /> 11.1 mg/L(mean: 8.59 mg/L) in the three initial samples collected in July 1998, shortly after the well's <br /> installation. A statistical comparison of the dissolved iron measured in the 1998 samples to the dissolved <br /> iron present in the samples collected over the last five years indicates that there has not been a <br /> statistically significant change (95%Confidence Limit) in the dissolved iron concentration at DCAL-02 <br /> (Attachment 1). Considering that no other groundwater quality standard has been exceeded and that <br /> there has not been a statistically significant change in dissolved iron at the well it is probable that the <br /> dissolved iron in the post mining samples is reflective of the Dry Creek Alluvium's ambient iron <br /> concentration.Therefore, it is not believed that the elevated dissolved iron is indicative of an offsite <br /> impact to the local groundwater system and may be the result of organic matter and plant debris <br /> present in the alluvium (Hem 1985, pg. 77). <br /> B.) Instream Numeric Standards(CWQCC Regulation 33) <br /> The Colorado Water Quality Control Commission (CWQCC) has established segment specific water <br /> quality standards for upper Dry Creek(Yampa River Segment 13d) and Sage Creek(Yampa River <br /> Segment 13e).Tables 1—4 includes the analytical results for the samples collected from the four stream <br /> points within Hubberson Gulch and Dry Creek during the last five years (2015—2019) and a comparison <br /> against the Segment 13d water quality standards. Table 5 includes the analytical results for the samples <br />