Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />Table 17-27 <br />Assumptions Associated pith the Mater Quality Impact <br />Calculations Presented in Tablas 17-19, 77-20A and 17-20B <br />1. Background ground water Inflows into the streams and the of facts on hater quality <br />were ignored. <br />2. Surface Water Site SM-N3 was used to measure the quantity and quality of spoil <br />df seharge from ehe Nucla Mine; Site SM-Nl was considered representative of <br />background. <br />3. Tha "K" value (40 ft/day) used for ealeulati nq spoils flow from Nucla Eest was <br />determined from a 'T" value estimate xhich was caleulatetl from short term <br />(approximately 30 minutes) pumping drawdowna measured while sampling spoil well <br />CN-N27 for water quality. <br /> 4. All spoil water at Nuela East was assumed to Sion into the overburden aquifer end <br />• ~ than di seharge into Calamity Draw undiluted. <br />5. Ground water (noon Soto the coal aquifer at Nuc1a East is considered w be of no <br />aignift canes as the coal aquifer crops in Calamity Draw a eonsfderabla dt stance <br />downstream of the mine. <br />6. The saWrated thickness in the Nuela Eaat spoils was esaumed to approzfmate premi ni ng <br />saturated chi eknessea. <br />7. A77 mine induced flows and ehanieal loads are assumed to reach the San Miguel <br />unchanged. <br />B. The mean annual TDS for the San Niguel was aaauwed to equal the nun of the mean <br />concantratS ohs of Ca, Mg, Na, K, 504, (K;03, and C3 and xas determined to ha 551 mq/1 <br />(based on Lorna et el., 1965x), <br />17-72 Revised Oa/11/88 <br />• <br />REVISED MARCH 2006 Attachment 2.05.6(3}2-83 <br />