Laserfiche WebLink
(2004) resulted in volumes sufficient to allow sampling. Water was found <br />• in this well during each of the quarterly samplings for 2005, and during all <br />of 2005 it was possible to obtain the requisite samples following the <br />standard three well volume purge procedure. While the well bore water <br />level recovery following testing remains slow, it continues to provide <br />evidence that the highly disturbed zone in the reclaimed overburden area is <br />recharging. The timeline for this recharge is not inconsistent with earlier <br />predictions. <br />Copies of the "executive summary" of analytical laboratory test results are <br />available in the pages following this text. Each ground water monitoring <br />well was sampled in accordance with the "permit procedure". The "B" <br />designation following the well identification indicates that the laboratory <br />sample was obtained after initial field sampling, well purging and a <br />subsequent (second) field sampling. The 2005 ground water monitoring test <br />results remain consistent with results from previous analyses in that there <br />have been no confirmed statistical exceedences, with the exception of <br />samples drawn from the SMW-2 during 2004. This well is completed in the <br />disturbed spoil material which is being subjected to slow re-saturation by <br />groundwater, and appears to be leaching/dissolving minerals as the water <br />level rises. This has caused the manganese concentrations to slightly <br />exceed the calculated tolerance limit. CEC addressed the tolerance limit <br />exceedence with the CDPHE during 2005, and was granted permission to <br />continue the current detection monitoring program. [Doty & Associates <br />letter dated 04/08/05, "Alternate Source Demonstration, Statistically <br />Significant Increase over Background, Manganese in SMW-2, Fourth <br />Quarter 2004, Keenesburg Disposal Facility".] <br />The ground water flow, to the extent it has been documented in the area of <br />the Keenesburg Mine property, trends down-gradient to the northeast. <br />Recharge of the aquifer in the "spoil area" continues to be limited to a single <br />source, the localized infiltration of precipitation to the subsurface. There is <br />no evidence of any significant ground water recharge to the site from the <br />nearby Ennis Draw fluvial ground water system. Ground water elevations in <br />the sampled Ennis Draw wells close to the Keenesburg Mine site remain <br />significantly higher than in either the spoil monitoring well (SMW-2) or the <br />ash monitoring wells (AMW-1 and AMW-2). <br /> <br />AHR-2005 -58- <br />