Laserfiche WebLink
ANALYSIS <br />• At the end of the first permit term, 28.3 acres of disturbed area <br />was present at the minesite. Monitoring of the sediment pond <br />discharge showed that the operation had no significant impacts to <br />the water leaving the site. The sediment collection ditch on the <br />south side of the refuse embankment was erosive and added extra <br />sediment to the pond, requiring cleaning on a yearly basis. This <br />ditch will be re-built with permanent erosion control material <br />for the upcoming permit term. <br />Water well quality or quantity was not affected during the first <br />permit term. <br />Mine water inflows were low, as predicted by the baseline <br />• studies. One panel was retreated underground during the first <br /> permit term and shows no inflow at all. Most of the mine inflow <br />was during spring-thaw, existed near the portals and was of poor <br />quality. <br />Concerning springs and seeps, the only change during the first <br />permit term occurred during excavation far the sediment pond. A <br />seep in the original Starkville Gulch just above the sediment <br />pond was excavated during initial site construction. The seep <br />became a spring. A four inch pipe was placed from the spring <br />entirely underneath the sediment pond and discharges into <br />Starkville Gulch below the sediment pond. The spring has flowed <br />steadily at 4-8 GPM for the entire permit term. Water quality is <br />. similar to wells in the area - generally poor. <br />586 <br />'q r <br />A~ <br />