Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~\ <br />J <br />Table 3.1 <br />Water Chemistry Data from Selected Sources <br />Sample Site SOM-128-H <br />Rollins SS <br />(6109/93) <br />JMB-12 Jumbo 1 Spring <br />B-Seam Rollins Horz. <br />19 /0 919 31 (9!22/93) <br />pH 9.2 7.8 6.8 <br />Temp. 14.9 18.5 12.5 <br />PCI <br />DO - 2.8 4.3 <br />1%1 <br />TDS 8,548 1294 494 <br />Img/II <br />Fe <0.022 0.10 0.02 <br />Img/II <br />Mn <0.05 0.02 0.01 <br />Img/II <br />4.0 CONCLUSIONS <br />In response to the adequacy concerns as presented in the Adequacy Letter from the CDMG dated April 15, 1994 <br />and reiterated in a letter dated July 5, 1994, the following statements can be made: <br />Hydrology (Rule 2.04.7) <br />3. Concern: 'MCC should install a Rollins well downdip tram the proposed mining area. Rule 2.05.6131 <br />states that the quality and quantity of surface and groundwater should be protected. A downdip well will <br />provide data to assess whether any impact is occurring. The downdip well should be located where it <br />will not be destroyed by mining activities' (April 15, 1994). <br />Response: It was originally proposed that Jumbo No. 1 Spring which appears to emanate from the Rollins <br />Sandstone horizon would be suitable Tor monitoring impacts to the Rollins Sandstone horizon. Water <br />chemistry data, however, indicates that it is not likely that a high proportion of the spring flow comes <br />from the Rollins Sandstone. Even through it is felt that monitoring the spring is important, it may not be <br />appropriate for providing information on the Rollins Sandstone. <br />~~ <br />5 <br />