Laserfiche WebLink
H}'dro(o~t Dato /ucrpretation and /mpact Aaessmea~ for the Permit nrtd Adjacent Ares <br />~~ Table 7 Comparison of GP-L Baseline and 1992 Sam pling Results, West Elk M1line <br />Sampling pH Conduct. TDS Temp. Fe Mn <br />Date Turbidity (units) (µmhos/cm) (mg/L) (°C) (mg/L) (mg/L) <br />08/08BS 048 7.s 990 566.0 10.1 <0.02 0.21 <br />08/O8/8s 048 7.5 990 s26.0 10.0 <0.02 0.21 <br />(Dup) <br />10 10 8s Os4 ~q ~ I -- 693 870.0 7s <0.02 O.Os <br />Os/OS/rYL 053' 00~ 7.2 7~I 1130 q5 7>OO~L 10.0'il,y 99.7 ~,3~ 0.61~,p2 <br /> <br />06/04~Y2 <br />Os6 01 D 7.2' i ~ S 980' 7 i9 <br />746 la'~ L <br />12.1' 10, 0 <br />s.86 ~, I e ~ <br />0.28 (), 0?i <br />o9ros/92 '' Iq3 7.z ~,} 1uog9Y s6z4~~ '' y,~ z4s.o ~~ o.4a ,.ov <br />Note: <br />' Field measurement. Others are laboratory test results. <br />• <br />'"~1 <br />S2 r <br />'~t <br />cubic yards of mine development waste, coal <br />processing waste. and sediment pond cleanout <br />material. In 1992 approximately 8,810 tons (9,837 <br />nt. yd.) were placed in the lower refuse pile in the <br />phase IV area. <br />Table 7 shows the 1992 sampling results from <br />monitoring well GP-1 as well as baseline data <br />from the well. The sample results indicate the 7 <br />lower refuse pile is not impacting the groundwater <br />zone near Sylvester Creek. Due to the low perme- <br />ability of [he colluvial soil and the lack of a <br />groundwater table near [he surface in the colluvi- <br />um (except along the margin of Sylvester Creek), <br />no significant future impacts to the groundwater <br />regime are anticipated. <br />Conductivity and TDS From samples of monitoring <br />well GP-1 were closely monitored because values <br />were slightly higher than the baseline samples. <br />However, this may not be a continuing problem. <br />September TDS values were within the range of <br />baseline values. <br />~5 Concentrations of iron in the 1992 monitoring <br />~yU ~ samples were higher than in those iden[ified during <br />' t1J4rj I baseline monitoring. This increase may be associat- <br />1 ed with the "B" development waste. Concentra- <br />t ; >> [ions of iron in the 1993 samples will be observed <br />to. see if the elevated levels continue. <br />Refuse pile monitoring wells GP-3 through GP-s <br />remained dry throughout water year 1992. Also, <br />there were no visible flows from the toe and mid- <br />section underdrain during water year 1992. Howev- <br />er, pond MB-6 collected surface runoff from the <br />refuse pile, as well as any flows from [he <br />underdrain and can be considered representative of <br />refuse pile conditions. Information on samples <br />taken from MB~i is presented in Table s. <br />The amount of refuse material placed in the lower <br />refuse pile is highly dependant on conditions <br />encountered in the mine. Projected refuse produc- <br />tion for 1993 from mining in the "B" seam and <br />rehabilitation of the "F' seam bel[ entries is <br />approximately 25,000 tons. <br />During 1992, water level i^ well GP-1 appeared to <br />correlate with flows in Sylvester Gulch. The water <br />level rose during the spring and decrease during <br />the summer (Figure 1). However, because no <br />measurable water exists in the other GP wells, no <br />piezometric surface exists in the area. <br />Assessment of Springs <br />A comparison of 1942 monitoring data with <br />previous years shows no significant trends or <br />changes which can be associated with mining <br />activity. Most springs are responsive to spring <br />runoff, but [low rates are sporadic and many times <br />do not correlate well with other seasonal parame- <br />terssuch as snowpack, precipitation, or streamflow. <br />• <br />