Laserfiche WebLink
. "= <br />UPDATED. PROBABLE <br />HYllROLOGIC CONSERUENCES <br />A/O 1.2!1/89 <br />A summary ofi the da±a f{~rm the annual hydrologic reports {A.H.R.) has <br />been shown on Tables 1,2,3. and 4 for Well 178, Upper carhon ,jr-!notion <br />canyon spring #1 R.E.A. Spring # '. and L._ower carbon junction canyon <br />spring # ~F, respectj.vely. <br />The general. weather pattern for the area has been ebserve~d to be mere <br />dry than ant"icipated. this i.s evadanced by the fact that spring # 1 went <br />dry firer- the .last two years, and that_ the water in well .17F1 rir-npperi from 8' <br />to + ]^' feet: der_p. It should be noted that mining has occured ahrwe the <br />P7~.•ati-on of this well. <br />As can be noted from the individual data nn the =ample lr:rcation, one <br />and sometimes two quarters were biased by runoff or recent precipat.ion <br />events. 1"hereforra the annual averages are distorted 6y inr_lusi.on ^f t:hnns <br />data. <br />As discussed i.n ttie section pretanning to "Protection of the <br />Hyrirolagi~" Balance" (Pages 111. -- 115 in permit), the proposed mining <br />op~r-ati.on was expected to have some imparts on the Hydrologi..c balance. <br />However-, the mining disturbance to date has been insufficient to <br />y~_!antat.i.vily effer_t the monitoring points. There have been only two <br />p+=r.iods ofi discharge from the ponds in the last four years. <br />To date no agr.ti"fr?rs have been intercepted and none are ant.i.c.ipa+_r~d t.o <br />br-.~ d.i.st~_!rbed. There h~~s been no penetra t.i on of strata t.^ the F'ic tc.rred <br />C1 if~f Sandstone .?.red tht:re is, acr._nrrJ.ingly, no impaot to the aq~_rai~er. <br />Surface water has been mast affected by th? low apparent recharge (1F. <br />].o'N pr-ecip.ition) in ir~E38 and 19H9. The discharge from the springs ar-e <br />dirertl.y tied to sr_rrface water as seen by the, high filow d±!riny spring <br />r-unofif or- immiediatel.y after a percipati.on event (sew. tables ..^_.?.and 4}. <br />There has keen no 4:.nown nor .idAntif.iable, effect nn the ground water <br />system i.n the area of the mine. <br />In summary, there have been nn V.:nown impacts to the hydrolaq.io <br />balance as a. result of the mining activet.y t.o date. A:, e;:per_ted, surface <br />f.!.04•A has drama.t.ically responded to spring runoff and large precipete.*_ion <br />e•,~ent.s. Otherwise, irr,pacts from the mining operations have no*_ bs.en <br />^L~served nor expected to ocn..!r. Quality and quantity of the s+_rrfaoe water <br />is c-!e. expected in the original permit. The only natir_ihle change in the, <br />ground water .i.s a 4'drop (from Ef' to 1..^") in the depth of the water .in <br />w~=1.1 17t?. this .is .in response to the low annual. preci.pet~tinn e;:pcrence i.n <br />the ]asi:. two years. As can be seen from the data i.n Tables 1 thee.! ~F, rho <br />au:+lit.y ni the wat~:r monitored showed no precc:pti.ve change. <br />Enclosed are the quarterly reports annualized for the years L9Eh, <br />7 9[17. 198!3, and 19E19. <br />.~_ J. L" d.e.MS~r.a: J....t dtuJ..,u-v.aa.dlc~~Ja.. .. "v. ~,s'%iiN6rr.1 "~.art~....a.~_.....us1~._~~rnJR llli".~. a..Y'Y~•~ <br />