Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Kent Gorham <br />October 21, 1996 <br />Page 3 <br />Response: The meter reading for September 4 in Table 41B contains a typographical error. The <br />correct number should read 12,335,600. The discharge for 109 then calculates as represented in Table 35. <br />25,549,900 gal/yr / 525,600 min/yr = 48.6 gpm <br />48.6 gpm x 1 cfs / 448 gpm = .1 I cfs <br />2. The Division is confused by the totaling of the meter readings reported in Table 42B for site 115. <br />Other than meter replacement or reset, should the values not be read directly as shown in the table rather <br />than totaled? <br />Response: The numbers presented in Table 42B through May are derived from recording charts <br />which tracked the hours of operation for the dewatering borehole pumps contributing to Site 115 discharge. <br />The hours of operation were multiplied by the typical discharge value to estimate total volume discharged. <br />June's value represents the combined flow estimates from rewrding charts and readings from a new meter <br />which was installed in June. Subsequent values are all derived from meter readings. Table 42B depicts <br />monthly discharge quantities rather than meter readings as no functional meter was available during the <br />first part of the water year. Revised copies of Table 42B are provided herein which show a modified table <br />title to more accurately characterize this information. Please replace the original copies submitted with the <br />revised copies. <br />Mine inflow Monitorine <br />What is the period for the units million gallons/period? <br />Response: The flow unit indicated on Table 41 (million gallons/period) refers to the quantity of water <br />discharged between the sampling instances indicated. For example, the 8.269 million gallons indicated <br />under 2/17/95 occurred between 11/1 I/94 and 2/17/95. Quarterly measurements are required at site 109. <br />discharge. <br />2. Figure 92 is not mine inflow results as specified in the text. <br />Response: Revised copies of text page 11 are enclosed which refer to Figure 93 mther that Figure 92 <br />for mine inflow study results. Please replace the originals submitted with the enclosed copies. <br />3. Past reports have made comparisons between total mine inflows and mine water discharge. Some <br />totaling of mine inflows and mine water discharge should be made, similar to a mine water balance <br />analysis. <br />Response: Mine discharge totals for the 1995 water year from sites 109 and I IS equate to an average <br />flow rate of approximately 113 gpm (0.25 cfs). Measured inflows recorded during the annual mine inflow <br />survey totaled approximately 135 gpm (0.30 cfs) though experience has shown that individual inflow <br />sources, particularly flows from faults encountered in the mining process, tend to be variable occurrences. <br />is~AocumendahrU'oideLck~95ahnsp.doc <br />