My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REP13414
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Report
>
REP13414
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:43:43 PM
Creation date
11/27/2007 1:12:02 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981012
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Date
3/3/2003
Doc Name
2002 Annual Hydrology Report
From
Peak Project Management LLC
To
DMG
Annual Report Year
2002
Permit Index Doc Type
Hydrology Report
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
70
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
The effects on the side canyon drainages should be similaz to the Purgatoire alluvium. Based on general <br />• geologic mapping, the alluvial area of each canyon was multiplied by the permeability. The water lost to <br />seepage in Apache Canyon has been estimated at 0.3 gpm. This represents less than one percent of the <br />calculated runoff for this canyon system. <br />The Purgatoire River monitoring sites, PRS-1 and PRS-4, had flow throughout the year similar to those <br />encountered in previous years. However, high spring runoff prohibited flow measurements during the <br />May sampling. <br />Water supplies at New Elk were turned off for five months the year and the sewage treatment plant (NE- <br />033) was out of service for the entire yeaz. Pond 7 discharged after precipitation events in <br />August and September. No discharges from any of the other ponds at the property were recorded in 2002, <br />due to limited operational activities and dry climate conditions. <br />Water levels for alluvial wells (PAW -series) were within historic ranges for water levels at individual <br />sites. The depth to water was lower throughout the year, responding directly to reduced water flows in <br />the river. <br />3.1.3 Groundwater <br />As might be anticipated from no noticeable impact from dewatering activities conducted in the 1980's, <br />there has been no noticeable impact on groundwater hydrology from the gradual flooding of the New Elk <br />• Mine. The apparent low vertical transmissivity and integrity of the surrounding rocks might inhibit any <br />effect of free water on the recharge of the overburden. The depths to which recovery might be taking <br />place are probably too far removed from the ground surface to manifest any impacts at the surface (seeps <br />and springs) at this time. <br />3.1.4 Piezometers <br />Refuse Disposal Area piezometer readings are included in this report (Table B-10). TH-201, on the first <br />bench, and TH-202 and TH-203 on the second and third benches had minimal water throughout the year. <br />Embankment stability, the primary purpose of the piezometers, is discussed within the quarterly waste <br />pile certifications. <br />3.2 WATER QUALITY <br />3.2.1 Springs and Seeps <br />The 2002 spring and seep survey occurred hr August. No flows were observed at any of the four <br />monitoring sites. There is no evidence that mining activities have affected the water quality of springs or <br />seeps, nor are such changes anticipated. Additional discussion of springs and seeps is contained in <br />Appendix C. <br />J <br />15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.