Laserfiche WebLink
Page 3 of 4 <br />Bowie No. 2 Mine, based on existing groundwater quality and use, and a prediction in the Probable <br />Hydrologic Consequences section of the permit application package that mining will not likely have a <br />negative effect on groundwater quality. <br />7. Springs, Ponds, and Ponds with Springs: Monitoring data for springs and ponds was consistent with <br />baseline data and the predicted impacts presented in the PHC section of the permit application <br />package. Flow and water levels were lower than average at most of the sites. Conductivity was at <br />an all time high at SP34 -11, S -4a, 5 -16, 53 -1, and 534 -7, and higher than background monitoring data <br />at most sites. The increased conductivity at low flows was consistent with historic trends. <br />8. Surface water flows at all monitoring points were consistent with precipitation recorded for 2012 <br />and with historical data. <br />9. Surface water quality: Reported quality at most surface water sites is within the baseline ranges, <br />with a few exceptions. Several parameters were much higher than average (see table below) on the <br />North Fork of the Gunnison and Hubbard Creek, but the increase was also evident in the upstream <br />flow, which would suggest that the increased levels are not primarily influenced by mining impacts. <br />Similar results were observed and reported in baseline data for Terror Ditch, Stevens Draw, and <br />upper Terror Creek (Cottonwood Stomp area) none of which have been affected by mining to date. <br />Parameters Reported Higher than Average <br />Location <br />Date <br />Parameter <br />Value <br />Upstream Elevated <br />B- Gulch -lo <br />6/20/2012 <br />TSS <br />162,160 mg /L <br />NA <br />HUB -low <br />10/19/2012 <br />Chloride <br />203.6 mg /L <br />Y <br />SAR <br />2.62 <br />Y <br />6/12/2012 <br />Hardness <br />315.52 mg /L <br />Y <br />TDS <br />445 mg /L <br />Y <br />Arsenic <br />.06 mg /L <br />Magnesium <br />34.6 mg /L <br />NFG -low <br />10/19/2012 <br />Chloride <br />288.3 mg /L <br />N <br />Conductivity <br />754 umhos /cm <br />Y <br />Hardness <br />270.4 mg /L <br />Y <br />TDS <br />692 mg /L <br />Y <br />SAR <br />2.42 <br />Y <br />Sulfate <br />82.5 mg /L <br />N <br />Calcium <br />82.4 mg /L <br />Y <br />Magnesium <br />15.7 mg /L <br />Y <br />Sodium <br />91.5 mg /L <br />Y <br />06/11/2012 <br />Bicarbonate <br />138.67 mg /L <br />N <br />Nitrate - Nitrite <br />0.38 mg /L <br />N <br />Arsenic <br />0.05 mg /L <br />N <br />10. No NPDES effluent limits were exceeded in 2012. <br />11. Overall, the report was well organized and thorough. We have identified a few areas where the <br />report could be improved: <br />a. Data is presented in tabular form for all monitoring points, and in graphic form for several of the <br />monitoring points. In future reports it would be helpful if the data were presented graphically <br />