Laserfiche WebLink
2.5 2001 Hydrological Data <br />• Hydro-Engineering Inc.'s collation of the 2001 hydrological data for Trapper Mine is submitted as Section <br />2.5, following this discussion, and addresses: <br />a. Groundwater ............................................................................Sections 2.0-3.6 <br />(1) Groundwater level figures and tables ............................. Appendix A <br />(2) Groundwater quality figures and tables .........................Appendix B <br />(3) Piezometric surface maps for the major aquifers........... Maps 2-1 thru 2-3 <br />(4) Springs data ....................................................................Appendix B <br />b. Surface water ................................................... ........................ Sections 4.0-5.3 <br />(1) Water quality figures and tables ............. ........................AppendixC <br />(2) Flow measurement figures ..................... ........................Appendix C <br />(3) Flow vs TSS vs time figures ................... ........................Appendix C <br />(4) Conductivity vs flow vs time figures ........ ........................Appendix C <br />c. Observed impacts on the hydrologic systems ......................... Section 6.0 <br />InGuded with the 2001 Hydrology Report is an index sheet to keep the basic well data and aquifer <br />information available to the reader. This index is to be used as the reference and also a "bookmark" as <br />the section is reviewed. <br />2.8 Trends <br />Hydro-Engineering's Section 6.0 discusses the observed impacts on the hydrologic systems of Trepper <br />Mine. In general, ground water levels continued to show decreasing trends in response to the relatively <br />• lower recorded precipitation amounts measured the past three years. Surface water discharge peak flows <br />were also recorded at levels lower than average. Only five surface water monitoring sites experienced <br />discharge during 2001. Peak flows occurred in the spring in association with snowmelt runoff. . <br />Previously noted conductivity increases in Johnson Gulch and East Pyeatt Gulch surtace water discharges <br />continue to be expressed. Likewise, the conductivity increase previously noted at well P-8, a 3'" White <br />Sandstone well situated downgradient of A pit mining in the Pyeatt drainage remained evident in 2001. <br />Hydro-Engineering's Section 6.0 discussion provides more details concerning these observations and <br />trends. Overall, Trapper continues to have little effect on the local hydrologic regime. <br />2.7 Spoil Spring Sampling (2001) <br />Trapper conducted spoil spring sampling throughout the permit area during 2001. Data from this <br />monitoring is presented in the 2001 Annual Hydrology Report Appendix B Table B-2. Spring and Seep <br />locations are shown on the Annual Hydrologic Report Map 2 (Sheets 1, 2, and 3) of this report. Only a <br />handful of springs exceeded the 5 gpm sampling threshold during 2001. Only those springs with flows <br />exceeding 5 gpm are sampled for full suite analysis in accordance with the approved monitoring program. <br />2.8 WET Testing Results <br />In 2001, Three NPDES outtalls had Acute WET tests performed as required by NPDES Permit CO- <br />0032115 -sites 001, 002, and 011. In all cases the discharges showed no acute toxicity to the test <br />species. Summaries for the tests conducted during 2001 are included in Appendix C of Section 2.5. In <br />accordance with our NPDES permit only those drainages that receive pit dewatering or spoil spring <br />contributions are required to undergo WET testing. <br /> <br />KGWktlc 3q7 <br />