2021-05-06_REPORT - C1981044 (3)

Home Browse Search

9P2, 9P3 (024); 904 (014); 9P5 (017), 9P6 (015), 9P7 (013), 9P8 (016); HRPIA, HRP1B (004); SHP1 (O11), SHP2 (012); 5AP1 (009); wastewater (023). Other discharge monitored is spoil spring 1 SP (022). When submitted, content is adequate. There was no recorded discharge from sediment ponds in 2019. The majority of groundwater monitoring wells were sampled at the required frequency. Groundwater well No. 5 Mine Well, had power cut to it in July 2013 and currently only WLs are collected. The well has not been sampled since July 2013, although Ex 29 Table 1 (pg 29-6) indicates it should be sampled annually. In Ex 29 Table 3A (pg Ex29-8A), indicates that YAW 1, 2 and 5 or 6 are alluvial wells requiring sampling. These wells were not sampled during 2019. These wells are missing from the Table IB in 17. Sampling Table 1; Exhibit the AHR. frequency of 29 of CDRMS groundwater mining permit C- The shallow alluvial wells AVF-3, 5, and 6 were sampled on a monitoring wells 1981-044 quarterly basis. According to Ex 29 Table 1 (pg 29-6) the wells are only to be sampled on an annual basis (revised in 2000). In the AHR report Table 1B shows the wells are to be sampled quarterly. Table 1B is the same table as Table 3A Part 2 in the list of tables revised in 1988. Additionally, AVF-6 was not monitored or sampled during the first quarter 2019. Table 17 it states this well was damaged but no further explanation was provided. Well 9BF listed on Ex 29 Table 1 (pg 29-6), was not monitored according to the table. Also, according to Note 5 of Table 1 the well is required to be sampled on a quarterly basis if the No. 9 Mine waste rock backfill area has undergone final grading. All groundwater monitoring wells that were sampled during 2019 18. Parameters to be Table 1; Exhibit had their respective samples analyzed for the correct constituents. analyzed in 29 of CDRMS In Table 3B of the 2019 AHR the groundwater analyte suite does groundwater mining permit C- not match Ex 29 Table 8. Table 3B lists hydroxide and omits samples 1981-044 hardness. Hydroxide monitoring and reporting were removed as part of TR94-23 as indicated on page Ex 29-4a. The Division compared the 2019 monitoring results for each well with the Basic Standards of Ground Water and the Baseline Water data tables provided in Tables 14 to 20 in the Williams Fork Mines permit. Table 14 contains information related to No.5 Mine Well which was not sampled and the Okie Plaza well has been abandoned. Regarding the Middle Sandstone well TR-4; conductivity, sodium, 19. Basic Standards CWQCC sulfate, chloride, and boron concentrations were elevated above their for Ground regulations baseline levels and are below the maximum levels recorded at the Water 41.4 and 41.5 site. The pH levels were above the drinking water standards and within baseline levels. Well TR-7a is within the expected flow path of mine leachate. Well TR-7a data indicates the parameters monitored at this well are within their baseline water quality levels. The pH levels at this well were above and below the drinking water standard and within the baseline levels. Page 3