Laserfiche WebLink
State Reg. <br />and 2800 mg/1 with a highest recorded TDS value of 2770 mg/1. <br />• These values are slightly higher but similar to those for the <br />combined effluent discharging from NPDES 002 and 003 which <br />ranged on the average for June through September from 2319 to <br />2574 mg/1. Additional, representative spoils water quality <br />data as evidenced from spoils springs are extremely limited. <br />Monitoring of the field parameters flow, conductivity, <br />temperature and pH of spoils water discharging from Spoils <br />Spring i13, 4 and 5 began in the fall of 1985 upon request from <br />hu>L w~ Cam- the MLRD. No samples for laboratory analysis of TDS <br />~f 1 ~ concentrations were taken at this time; consequently, the <br />~S~~a ~ ~~ry~ relationship between field conductivity and TDS concentration <br />wel/ wr~~ ~~ has not been established, precluding an accurate estimation of <br />the TDS concentration of the spoil water at these sites. <br />For monitoring sites 26 and 27 within the Fish Creek drainage, <br />TDS concentrations for the period of record are presented in <br />Tables 7-58 and 7-59. Monthly data for June through September <br />• for both sites are summarized at the end of each of the tables. <br />At site 26, TDS ranges for June from 282 mg/1 in 1983 to 573 <br />mg/1 in 1985 with an average of 421 mg/1; for July, from 390 <br />mg/1 in 1982 to 675 mg/1 in 1984 with an average of 533 mg/1; <br />for August, from 444 mg/1 in 1981 to 802 mg/1 in 1980 with an <br />average of 557 mg/l; and for September, from 426 mg/1 in 1982 <br />to 770 mg/1 in 1984 with an average of 599 mg/1. At site 27 <br />\r n 1 ~,,, located approximately four miles below site 26, the average TDS <br />1 ~ ~~ I concentration of Fish Creek was slightly lower for June through <br />~~- September, reflecting a slight amelioration in water quality <br />~l between sites 26 and 27. However, this trend is not well <br />~S (~" substantiated upon comparison of mean monthly and same-day TDS <br />br concentration for the two sites. These data are summarized in <br />n ~51"' Tables 7-62 and 7-63 and graphically presented in Figures 7-39 <br />I~I,~j', and 7-40. The variability in quality between the two sites <br />from day to day and month to month show that no pattern of <br />increasing or decreasing TDS concentrations between the two <br />sites exist. These data also make it clear that if Fish Creek <br />water quality has been affected by the Seneca II Mine, it has <br />not been detectable. <br />7-218 Revised 10/01/86 <br />