My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2011-01-25_REVISION - M1977300
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1977300
>
2011-01-25_REVISION - M1977300
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/15/2021 3:11:55 PM
Creation date
8/9/2011 1:34:13 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977300
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
1/25/2011
Doc Name
Review of EPP
From
ARCADIS
To
Denver Water
Type & Sequence
AM2
Email Name
DB2
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Daniel Arnold, Esq. January 25, 2011 <br />Denver Water Page 10 of 21 <br />precipitation, timing and intensity of rain storms, timing of snowmelt runoff, and the rate <br />of diversions and timing of diversions of water from Ralston Creek upstream of the mine. <br />These types of data are not contained in the EPP, nor is there an indication that this level <br />of data collection has been performed. <br />EPP Finding: The mine pool is not strongly connected to the alluvium and Ralston <br />Creek. <br />The EPP presents several lines of evidence in an attempt to support this finding. Each line <br />of evidence is questionable and not conclusive. The following discusses these lines of <br />evidence and information is provided that indicates that the mine pool is connected to and <br />affecting the alluvium. <br />A chemical mixing calculation was used to support the minimal connection between mine <br />pool and the alluvium. However, the mixing calculation relies solely on comparison of <br />uranium concentrations in the mine pool and alluvial groundwater. In Table 9 -2 of the <br />EPP it states that 0.8 to 8 percent of alluvial groundwater is sourced from mine pool <br />based on the simple chemical mixing calculations. As an example, in well MW -9 in <br />Table 9 -2, the uranium concentration in the well is 0.308 mg /L, which is divided by the <br />mine pool concentration of 41 mg /L, resulting in the low -end range value of 0.8 percent. <br />This approach does not consider the rate of flow for either the mine pool or alluvial <br />aquifer, which is necessary to estimate the contribution from each. <br />A more appropriate method is to perform the mixing based on loads (concentration times <br />flow rate). This is illustrated in the following example by ARCADIS /Malcolm Pirnie <br />using a conservative mixing equation: <br />where: <br />QmixCmix= Q1C1 + Q2C2 <br />Q = 27 gpm (estimated flow in the alluvial aquifer entering the central mine area <br />from previous Darcy Law calculation) <br />C = 0.4 mg /L (uranium concentration in the alluvial aquifer entering the central <br />mine area based on MW -0, November 9, 2009 sample result) <br />Q2 = 2 gpm (flow rate based on the EPP's estimated upper end of 8 percent of <br />alluvial groundwater that is comprised of mine pool water times the estimated flow <br />in the alluvial aquifer of 27 gpm) <br />C2 = 34 mg/L (uranium concentration in the mine pool December 2010) <br />QMix = 29 gpm (estimated flow in the alluvial aquifer [Q and mine pool, [Q2]) <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.