REP41515 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

of well GP-6 near the F pit. The mining at the F pit likely has not affected the water quality in cross • gradient QR well GP-6. The water quality in HI aquifer well GP-3, which is close to the reclaimed A pit, has not been influenced by mining. TDS concentrations were steady in 2005 in well GE-2 while a steady level in 2005 was observed in well GF-4 after a slight increase for several previous years. This small change may be due to mining but is within natural variations for this aquifer. The water quality in HI well GMP-1 may have been slightly affected by mining, but its concentrations aze within the range of natural concentrations. The water quality in HI well GC-1, downgmdient of the mining in this azea, increased in 2005. The water quality in HI well GP-7, which is east of the azeas mined, has not been affected. Mining could have caused concentrations to vary in 3rd White Sandstone well GE-3 but the variations observed are also within natural variation. The 3rd White Sandstone wells GC-2 and GP-9 are downgradient of mining starting in 2000 and changes in water quality in these wells in 2005 aze similaz to previous natural changes. TDS in 3rd White Sandstone well P-8 were lazge in ]996 through 2005 and the magnitude and timing of this increase makes it likely that it was caused by upgradient mining in the A pit. Significant changes in TDS concentrations have been observed in the alluvial wells GC-3, P- 1, J-l, and COY. The changes in the Flume alluvial wells had to be natural prior to 2000, while some of the changes in J-1 water could be due to mining. Overall, the TDS for J-1 were higher than normal in 2005 but is very similaz to concentrations observed in this well historically and the natural levels in the COY alluvial well. The changes in Pyeatt alluvial well P-1 are thought to be natural because they are similaz to those observed prior to mining in this drainage. Trapper Mining Company 6-4 2005 Mnual Report