REP11025 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Jim raised a few issues, in italics, after a cursory review of the hydrology report There is no upper Taylor Creek location that is reported, although there is a point that Colowyo shows as being a monitoring location. 1 was thinking that there should be a point even farther upstream than this point on Taylor Creek, like in the Section 17 area, due to current West Pit mining. Given the current status of mining in Taylor Creek, I don't see the need for a station at this time. Any flows down Taylor are likely ephemeral or intermittent at best and until mining and reclamation is complete in the watershed, this site would seem unnecessary. Should there be any surface water monitoring points (that are reported) along Wilson Creek (on the west side of the mine)? Wilson Creek flows right by the Gossard Loadout and the ponds at the loadout discharge to Wilson Creek. Potentially. This site will (and has been via PR-02) added as a baseline site for the Lower Wilson Creek. Should there be any monitoring at the confluence of Good Spring and Wilson Creek (to possibly determine any impacts on Milk Creek)? I think between the Lower Wilson, Lower Taylor Creek, and Lower Good Spring Creek sites that the surface water system is covered adequately. If the situation changes drastically in a negative way in the future, which is not likely, a site on Milk Creek could be established. There do not appear to be any upgradient ground water monitoring locations for the three reported wells. Two of the wells are shallow alluvial wells along Good Spring Creek and the third is a shallow alluvial well at the Gossard Loadout (basically on Wilson Creek). I think the alluvial system is adequately covered but this will be looked at again during PR-02 and any need for additional sites should become apparent through that review. There are no deep monitoring wells at any location at the Colowyo Mine. Is this appropriate for the site? tt is appropriate and has been looked at many times in the past. As a result of PR-02, the Division will request that a spoil well be established in the backfilled area of Section 21 in South Taylor. Deep bedrock wells are not necessary at this time. Does all of the water from the Section 16 Pit area (including the mining from Section 15) flow to the north and east where any impacts are detected or does the water flow to a location above NUGSC and A-6? The reason /ask this is because levels of the constituents in these waters (including conductivity, TDS, SO42+, Na', etc.) are all trending upward. My review indicates the watershed above proposed pond 21 in Section 21 will receive spoil spring discharge in the long-term. I also believe that all flows from Section 16 are adequately diverted to the Section 16 pond. If this is not the case, that is a current problem that should be addressed. Should we require laboratory pH, as this tends to be less accurate than field pH due to potential bottle contamination and a very short holding time? Similarly, should we require