My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL43244
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL43244
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:12:03 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 12:16:36 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981044
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
11/15/1983
Doc Name
STIPULATIONS 2 13 16 AND 19 PN CO-044-81
From
EMPIRE ENERGY CORP
To
MLRD
Permit Index Doc Type
STIPULATIONS
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
i <br />EF1PIRE EIJERGY CORPORATION <br />No. 5 11ine Sump Water Quality <br />As stipulated in the permit for Empire Energy's Eagle No. 5 and Plo. 9 <br />14ines, an analysis of the water pumped from the new sump in the No. 5 <br />~4ines was to be performed. This report summarizes the results of the <br />testing and includes a comparison of this water (which was in the sump up <br />to 54 days) to fresh mine inflow water, a copy of the results (Tables 1 <br />and 2), and Stiff diagrams (Tables 3 and 4). <br />The sump water and the fresh water inflow water are of approximately the _ <br />same water quality. They are both strongly sodium-bicarbonate waters. <br />The sump 4~ater has slightly higher sulphate and lower alkalinity and <br />sodium levels. The dissolved solids values are similar with the fresh <br />mine inflow having a higher value. There is no significant difference in <br />the pH values. The metals are very close; many of the trace metals are <br />below the detection limit in the sump sample; 1.30 mg/L in the sum versus <br />0.40 in the fresh water for total and 0.29 mg/L in the sump and ;0.02 mg/L <br />in the fresh water for dissolved. <br />The comparison indicates that both waters would be suitable for <br />agricultural use and that there is no significant deterioration in water <br />quality with residence time in the sump. In fact, the sump water appears <br />to be slightly better in quality. This might be explained by the alkaline <br />pH which provides a favorable environment for the precipitation of metals <br />as well as for their adsorption by the wall rock. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.