Laserfiche WebLink
June 25, 2010 5 of 15 <br />I= <br />U; ar95 rrgl <br />MG: -D.1 mdL <br />RaG28: 0.97 pM <br />EC: 421 un**SA n <br />$ U: 0.9Y1 nwL <br />Mx <&I ffs <br />moJl <br />RC2 <br />U: 0.385 PWL <br />MO: 0.1 <br />/CUL <br />RaM 0.73 <br />EC: 969ufmib m <br />RC1 <br />U: 0.985 mWL <br />M¢ a0.1 <br />Ra226:0 pCW. <br />EC: 412 untMACa <br />EXPLANATION <br />Qi iwma?aeocw.,raarum.nver.a.r.mc.sa? <br />amaa.•?u...mzn® <br />oeaoor•u+a <br />oeauar. rw wrr <br />oLOioor •amlExale ?oav <br />m <br />rat 0.?11pbI w waMllr M al Pa wawa, <br />Figure 2. Water Quality Survey Results Across Schwartz Trend, December 2009 <br />Pumping down the mine pool would result in increased oxidation and mobilization of contaminants within <br />the mine pool, reversing the current trend of declining uranium concentrations. <br />Uranium concentrations in the mine pool have been declining for the past seven years. As the mine <br />initially filled, concentrations rose rapidly and peaked at 60.2 mg/L in October 2002. Uranium <br />concentrations have shown a relatively steady decline to 36.2 mg/L in April 2010 (Figure 3). The <br />decreasing trend is expected to continue as the water in the mine pool returns to pre-mining unoxidized <br />conditions. Uranium is generally mobile in oxygenated environments and immobile in reducing <br />environments. Dewatering would create oxidizing conditions in the mine pool, and would mobilize <br />uranium that would otherwise remain stable and insoluble in the flooded mine. It has taken seven years to