Laserfiche WebLink
T = I 1.20 R n I( 560) + 0.030 R n 24 + 0.024 R n 23 + 0.015 R n 22 + <br />4 n(6.00) ) 1207 23 22 21 <br />• 0.0007 R n 2 t = 5 X 10-4 ft2/min <br />= 0.7 ft2/d. <br />Table 2.5-13 contains a summary of the hydraulic coefficients for the water bearing <br />strata encountered in this study. With The exception of one overburden test result <br />by D'Appolonia, The iransmissivities shown in Table 2.5-13 are very small indicating <br />low productivity. Well productivity was so low that all investigators experiencing <br />difficulty in maintaining a discharge sufficiently low to keep the wells from <br />de watering. Discharges utilized during the test were on the order of I - 2 gpm and <br />even at this small discharge, drawdowns of several tens of feet occurred in a <br />pumping time of one hour. <br />2.5.2.4 Ground-Water Quality <br />The chemical analyses of water samples taken from wells on the Moffat Area <br />• of the Edna Mine and immediately to the east are tabulated in Table 2.5-14. <br />Relative to the standards presented previously, trace element concentrations are less <br />than the recommended limits, with a few scattered exceptions. The only three <br />elements that are consistently greater than the standards are iron, manganese and <br />zinc. The wells from which these samples were collected are cased with steel <br />casing. Some manganese and iron are contributed to the sample from the casing, <br />even when pumping has removed several well-bore volumes before taking the sample. <br />The pump used for sampling is equipped with galvanized iron discharge pipe which is <br />believed to account for a substantial portion of the zinc concentration. <br />Wells 05-01-0010 and 05-01-0005 are updip wells relative to the other two <br />wells listed in Table 2.5-14. The dissolved solids concentrations in these two updip <br />wells are less than in the lower elevation well 05-01-0004. In addition to 05-01-0010 <br />and OS-01-0005, well 05-01-0004 is terminated above the zero potential line (see <br />Exhibit 2.5-I I), but is lower in elevation than the two updip wells. These <br />observations suggest that the quality of ground waters degrades from east to west in <br />a downdip direction on the Moffat Area. This is consistent with our interpretation <br />of the groundwater hydrology insofar as we believe that any upslope groundwaters <br />r ~ <br />~J <br />2.5-55 <br />