Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Richard D. Lamm <br />Governor <br />DATE: <br />T0: <br />FROM: <br />RE: <br />~II ~I~~I~~II~I~~ ~I~ <br />sss <br />DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES <br />David H. Getches, Executive Director <br />MINED LAND RECLAMATION DIVISION <br />DAVID C. SHELTO N, Director <br />April 4, 1985 <br />Tom Gillis <br />Philip C. Saletta, Hydrologist/Geological Engineer ~/!gyp <br />ANNUAL HYDROLOGIC REPORT -RED CANYON MINE - FILE N0. C-034-81 <br />~a:~. <br />As per the request of Brian Munson, I have reviewed the above-mentioned Annual <br />Hydrologic Report. The report is well written and organized. The good <br />organization allows for the facility of review and future insertion of <br />reports. However, the lag time between submitted reports and data <br />interpretation as submitted is approximately on year, i.e., the 1983 report <br />text was submitted in October of 1984. I believe that this is longer than <br />necessary. The Annual Hydrologic Report should be submitted within six months <br />of the end of a particular water year. For example: October through <br />September is considered a water year, the Annual Hydrologic Report should be <br />submitted no later than the following April. I believe this would allow for <br />ample time to receive laboratory results, compile data, and write descriptive <br />and interpretive text. <br />Concerning the text for the 1983 Hydrologic Report, there are several items of <br />concern. I have listed these concerns under each category in the report. <br />Surface Water <br />1. If monitoring at the Downstream Ward Creek location is required then <br />cfs should be reported. Calibration can easily be accomplished by <br />stream cross section control or culvert control, if feasible. <br />2. It was stated that the flume on Williams Creek washed out. This flume <br />should be replaced or another type of gauging station should be <br />installed, if required in the permit application. <br />It is stated that flows and mass balance conductivities from SP-A, SP-B <br />and SP-C indicate an inadequate sampling schedule. I agree with this <br />statement after reviewing the information submitted from UG-6 (mine <br />discharge) which indicates that mine water discharge conductivities are <br />less than surface water (Red Canyon Ditch) conductivities. However, if <br />water from refuse piles or the old mine discharges into Red Canyon <br />Ditch then this would cause the high conductivities measured at SP-B. <br />Also, there may be a need to adjust the sample frequency or add to the <br />schedule at this station, to coincide with discharges. <br />423 Centennial Building, 1313 Sherman Street Denver, Colorado 80203 Tel. (303) 866-3567 <br />