Laserfiche WebLink
water quality is monitored downdip of mining activity via samples are taken <br />from Well TRS-1. All of the monitoring sites are shown on Exhibit 4.6-26 of <br />the permit document. <br />WATER QUALITY ANALYSES AND SAMPLING FREQUENCY <br />The samples are analyzed for the parameters listed in Table 4.6-54, <br />Section 4.6.8.4 of the permit. Sampling frequency at the various sites is <br />also listed in Table 4.6-54. Parameters measured in the field include: pH, <br />temperature, and specific conductivity. All other parameters measured are <br />analyzed for at an independent laboratory. Surface water data are contained <br />in Appendix A and ground water data are contained in Appendix B. <br />III. SUAPACE WATER <br />GAUGING STATIONS <br />Figure 1 shows the continuous streamflow records for Trout Creek at TR-a <br />and TR-b. The graphs showing the results of the gauging stations along Trout <br />Creek indicate that the monitoring program is being placed on-line early <br />enough in the year to record flow prior to the peak runoff period for each <br />year. The graphs show the monthly average flows and give some indication of <br />the variability between mild winters (winters of less snow accumulation) and <br />harsh winters. The graph showing 1993-1995 data indicates a wide variation in <br />the streamflow between 1993, 1999 and 1995. The 1986-1995 graph suggests that <br />1994 was the driest winter over the past decade and 1993 was the wettest. <br />The flow record for 1995 shows the peak flow to have occurred in June as <br />in most previous years. The peak flow occurred in May during 1987, 1992 and <br />1994. The early peak flow in 1987, 1992 and 1994 was probably due to milder <br />winters with the on-set of warmer temperatures occurring earlier in the spring <br />than normal. <br />The stage/flow rating curve for TR-a was reviewed in June of 1994 to <br />ensure its continued accuracy. Sufficient differences in the channel cross- <br />section at TR-a were noted during the review to warrant development of a new <br />stage/flow rating curve. However, since the high flow period occurred in late <br />• May of 1994, data points representing the high flow period during 1994 were <br />not obtained. Therefore, additional calibration flow and cross-section <br />2 <br />