Laserfiche WebLink
NW and MW-16 were each found dry on both visits. MW-65 and MW-23 returned <br />normal water levels, as compared to historic data, and samples were taken during both <br />the May and December visits. These samples were tested, at a minimum, for the <br />constituents as required by Exhibit 25, part III (C) (5.) <br />Water Quantity and Quality <br />Review of the 2008 data and the historic data for surface and ground water indicates no <br />evidence of any significant or unpredicted impact to water quantity in the surface and <br />ground water systems. Some decline in water level in the ground water system is <br />evident in past data, likely due to underground mining and subsidence. Impacts are <br />likely transient and temporary and are locally of no consequence due to the lack of use <br />in the general area. At this time, well MW-NW remains dry and is not recording the <br />flooding of the workings. It could be concluded that the water has yet to reach the <br />elevation of the screened interval of this well. Continued monitoring is necessary to <br />validate the prediction that mine flooding will eventually result in recovery of the local <br />ground water level. Water levels for 2008 indicate no changes due to mining activities. <br />Water quality sampling data indicate no significant changes in water quality of the <br />surface and ground water in the mine permit area. Inflow to the workings acts as a <br />pumping well; therefore, ground water flow is from the perched aquifers surrounding the <br />mined area toward the mine workings. Until water is measured in MW-NW (completed <br />in the mine workings), no conclusion regarding ground water quality can be made. <br />Continued monitoring in accordance with the approved plan may provide more definitive <br />information in the future. Field data regarding conductivity and pH indicate no change <br />in general surface water quality. <br />The mine is in compliance with the hydrologic monitoring requirements, with a minor <br />exception due to confusion regarding sampling constituents (now corrected for future <br />sampling and testing), and with the predictions made in the permit application <br />regarding impacts to the hydrologic regime, to the extent that the current data can be <br />interpreted. Please ensure that all future sampling is in exact accordance with the <br />approved plan. This concludes the Division's review. If you have any questions, please <br />call me. <br />Sincer ly, <br />Ke t Gorham <br />Environmental Protection Specialist III