appendix i hydrologic resources, probable hydrologic ... · hydrologic resources, probable...
Post on 26-Apr-2018
226 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
r'J' iVjs~ON OF • ,1 .... 1 I
() i L GAS & i'AINING
APPENDIX I
Hydrologic Resources, Probable Hydrologic Consequences and Hydrologic Monitoring Associated with the Wellington Prep Plant
--. ' ..
".
Water Quality Parameter List
Field: Water Levels or Flow pH
Conductivity at 25° c ":. ""Temoerature at 25°" c " . .
Total Suspended Solids Total Combustable Solids
Total Dissolved Solids Total Hardness (as CaC0 3 )
Aluminum (AI) Arsenic (As) Bariwn (Ba) Boron (B) -2 Carbonate (C03 )-1 Bi'··:lrbonate (nC03 ) Ca(.Lrni urn (Cd) Calcium (Ca)_l Chloride (el ) Chromium (Cr) Copper (Cu)_l Fluoride (F ) Iron - Total (Fe)
Lead (Pb) Magnesium (:~!g)
Mangenese (~) lvlercury (Hg) Nolybdenum (Mo) Nickel (Ni) Nitrogen: A=~2£ia (NH 3 ) Nitrate (N03 ) ,Nitr~te (N0 2 ) Potassium (~) -3 Phosphate: Total (P0
4 )
Dissolved Selenium (Se) Sodium (Na) -2 Sulfate (S~~ ) Sulfide (S ) Zinc (Zn)
units
~os/cm C. . •
mg/L mg/L
rng./L mg/L
'f -.
mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L :ng/L mg/L rng/L mg/L rng/L mg/L mg/L mg/L
mg/L mg/L mg/L rng/L mg/L mg/L mg/L rng/L mg/L mg/L og/L mg/L mg/L rng/L
mg/L mg/L
Surface \'later only if visible coal fines, oil or grease
Surface ~-1ater Ground ~"ia ter
(.
HYDROLOGIC RESOURCES PROBABLE HYDROLOGIC CONSEQUENCES
AND HYDROLOGIC MONITORING ASSOCIATED WITH THE WELLINGTON PREP. PLANT
PREPARED FOR
u.s. STEEL CORPORATION
APPENDIX III
DECEMBER 1983~
ENGINEERING-SCIENCE DESIGN. RESEARCH. PLANNING
'0 LAKESIDE LAN~ DENVER. COLORADO 80212 • • 303145H427 OFFICES IN PRINCIPAL CITIES
•
•
•
List of Tables List of Maps .
TABLE OF CONTENTS
. . . . . . . . Chapter 1 - Introduction
Chapter 2 - Description of Hydrologic Resources. Surface Water Resources .. . Ground Water Resources. ..... . . . . .
Ferron Sandstone.. •.... . . Blue Gate Shale • . . All uvi urn. • • • . . . . • . . . . . . . . .
Chapter 3 - Probable Hydrologic Consequences Potential Sources of Contamination. . . . . . .
Waste Pile. . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Road Pond, Auxiliary Pond, Drier Pond, and Refuse Pond . • . .. ... . . . . • . . Cumullative Effect of the Refuse Ponds and the Waste Pile ......•.
Chapter 4 - Hydrologic Monitoring. . ...•. Surface Water Monitoring ................ .
Potentially Affected Surface Water Resources .... . Refuse Ponds ....•...........•.•..
Ground Water Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . • Monitoring on the West Side of t~e Price River in the Vicinity of the Preparation Plant ...... .
Refuse Pile. . . . • . . .'. . . . .. . . . Road Pond and Auxiliary Pond . . . .. ... Up Gradient - Unaffected Wells . . • Summary of Ground Water Monitoring on the West Side of the Price River in the Vicinity of the Preparation Plant ., ........ .
Monitoring on the East Side of t~e Price River in the Vicinity of the Refuse Ponds . . . . Frequency of Ground Water Monitoring ..... .
i ii
1
3 3 4 5 6 7
10 10 11
14
15
17 17 18 19 20
22 22 22 23
23
24 25
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
Table 1. No=mal precipitation observej from 1951 to 1980in Price, Utah.. . ..... · · .. · 12
Table 2. La~oratory analyses of leachate from the refuse pile ...... ". 13
Table 3. 1-1c:1itoring frequency for sur:ace water stations. 20
•
• i
•
•
•
LIST OF MAPS
,- .".
Map 1. Hydrologic Monitoring Map Wellington Preparation Plant. . . See Map Pocket
REFERENCES
L. S. Department of the Interior Water and Power Resources Service, 1981. Ground Water Manual, U. S. Government Printing Offices .
ii
•
•
•
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
The primary objective of this ~epo~t is to arrive at a sound
hydrologic monitoring plan in relation to the potential sources of
pollution emanating from the Wellington P~ep. Plant (prep. plant).
In order to develop the hydrologic monitoring plan it was first
necessa~y to determine what hydrologic resources are present within
the adjacent area of the prep plant. Next an assessment of probable
hydrologic consequences was developed with respect to the prep.
plant. Finally, based on the hyd~ologic resources in the area and
the potential pollutant sources associated with the prep. plant a
monitoring plan was developed. The~efore, the following three
chapters (i.e., chapters 2,3, and 4) have been organized to present
this logical approach to the development of the monitoring plan:
Chapte~ 2 . Description of HydrologiC Resources; Chapter 3. Probable
Hydrologic Consequences; and Chapter 4. Hydrologic Monitoring Plan.
Throughout this report constant refe~ence is made to the previous
work and commitments made by U.S. Steel contained in the Operation
and Reclamation Plan CORP) inorder to maintain consistencey.
The pr-ep. plant is located near Wellington, Utah adjacent to
the Pr-ice River. The permit area is near the center of Township 5
S6uth Range 11 East. The area occupied by the prep. plant is part of
the flood plain. of the Price River and is underlain by alluvial
materials deposi~ed by the river. The entire plant site also has
Blue Gate Shale beneath the alluvial depos~ts.
The prep_ plant has been utilized for cleaning coal since 1958
and has an expected life in excess of 30 years. Map 1 provides the
location of all the structures and monitoring points that are ·r
..; ,"
1 . \
• discussed in the following report. The prep. plant receives coal by
rail and dumps, processes and ships clean coal by rail to the Geneva
Steel works in Ore~, Utah. The prep. plant receives from 1.5 to 1.8
million tons of raw coal annually and ships 1.2 to 1.5 ·million tons
of clean coal.
Approximately 300,000 tons of refuse is pumped or trucked to
the refuse disposal areas. Coarse refuse is trucked to the coarse
refuse pile. The auxiliary and read ponds are in direct
communication with the prep. plant and receive discharges from the
plant and provide support water to the plant on a daily basis. These
two ponds are joined by a culvert and together with the new drier
pond are designed for total containment of all plant discharges
(Refer to part UMC 784.11 of the ORP). Refuse from the coal cleaning
process is pumped via a pipeline to the east side of the Price River
4It into ~ series of refuse ponds. The ~pper refuse pond impounds all
•
waste that is pumped from the the prep. plant and coarse debris
settle out here. Clarification of prep. -plant waters continues as
the water moves to the so~th through .the lower refuse pond into the
clear water pond. Clean water is pumped from the clear water pond
via a pipeline from these ponds to the prep. plant. When necessary,
water is added to the clear water pond, to replenish water lost
during the processing of coal, from the river water collection well •
2
• DESCRIPTION OF HYDROLOGIC RESOURCES
The purpose of this chapter is to discuss the
resources present within the adjacent area of the prep.
sufficient detail to support the determination of
hydrologic
plant in
probable
hydrologic consequences in Chapter 3 and the development of the
hydrologic monitoring plan in Chapter 4. "In the following text
surface water resources are addressed first followed by a discussion
of ground water resources.
The topo~raphy in the vicinity of the prep. plant consists of
the valley of the Price River with small foot slopes to the east and
west of the river. The refuse ponds on the east side of the Price
River are located in a gentle swail with foothills to the east and
• west of the ponds (Refer to Map 1).
prep.
the
The surface water resources within the adjacent area of the
plant include the Price River that extends diagonally throu~h
permit area and s~veral ephemeral drainages that are tributary
to the Price River. On the west side of the river, the surface
drainages have been diverted around the prep. plant in order to
minimize the contact of unaffected waters with the plant site. The
ephemeral surface runoff that originates on the plant site is routed
into the auxiliary pond, the road pond or the new drier pond. These
ponds have been sized for total containment of the 10 year 24 hour
precipitation event in addition tq the volume necessary to contain
the -plant operating water (Refer to part UMC 784.11 of the ORP for
design specifications of the ponds). No discharge of surface water
• is 'anticipated from the plant site. Therefore, with respect to
• surface waters in the vicinity of the prep. plant there is little
possibility· that surface runoff from the, site will contaminate the
Price River or the ephemeral streams.
On the slurry pond side of the river several small first order
drainages run into the refuse ponds. The only second or third order
drainage, potentially in contact with the refuse ponds, is diverted
around the ponds via the north divers~6n ditch. The specifications
for the ditch c:an be -found in .Appendix E to the ORP.
It should be noted·th~t the ephemeral drainage diverted around the
refuse ponds via the north diversion ditch mingles with intercepted
seepage from irrigation return flow from the north and seep~ge from
the upper refuse impoundment to the south. Therefore, the
opportunity exists for the diverted ephemeral drainage to be
• contaminated by· the refuse pond seepage and for this contaminated
water to enter the Price River .
. I, In summary, the 'potential for cont~minated surface water to
leave the areas involved with the prep. plant is limited to t~e
north diversion ditch because of the refuse pond seepage that
comingles with the diverted ephemeral flow and irrigation return
flow that also passes down the ditch. The Price River is the surface
water resource that receives the contaminated waters. The impact of
this lower quality water leavi~g the site and the appropriate
monitoring of this contamination source is discussed in Chapters 3
and 4 ·respectively •
• Before discussing the ground water resources present in the '-,
adjacent area of the prep. plant it is appropriate to discuss the
4 REV. 1: 4-11-87
geology as it relates to the presence and movement of ground water •
• ·The surficial geology in the vicinity of the prep. plant has been
presented on Map C9-1213- in the OR? (Refer to page 783-4). All of
•
the valley bottom areas occupied by the prep. plant and the refuse
ponds is mapped -as alluvium associated with various depositional
environments (i.e. river alluvium~ piedmont, or slope wash). The
foot slopes that rise adjacent to the Price River and adjacent to
the refuse ponds have been mapped as an upper unnamed shale. Later
correspondence in the OR? conclUdes that this unnamed shale is the
Blue Gate Shale~ a member of the marine Mancos Shale. Beneath the
Blue Gate Shale is another member of the Mancos Shale, the Ferron
Sandstone. The following narrative discusses each of the geologic
strata previously mentioned (i.e., alluvial deposits~ and the Blue
Gate Shale and Ferron Sandstone members of the Mancos Shale) as they
relate to ground water in the adjacent area of the prep. plant.
The Ferron Sandstone is a regionally extensive member of the
Mancos Shale which is nat considered a good aquifer in the viCInity
of the prep. plant. Part UMC 783.15 in the ORP contains a discussion
of the Ferron Sandstone that indicates the Ferron Sandstone varies
from 4~OOO to 21~534milligrams per liter of total dissolved solids
at 4 remote locations associated with gas wells and a coal mine.
Water of this quality is considered ~arginal for watering stock and
would be poor for irrigation use. No other use of the Ferron
Sandstone as an aquifer is known for the adjacent area of the prep.
plant. The search _for information on the use of the Ferron Sandstone
included a review of the State Engineer~s records extending through
5
all of Township 5 South, Range 11 East. In summary, because of
~ the total lack of ·use of the Ferron Sandstone as an aquifer in the
adjacent area of the prep. plant (i.e., T5S, RilE) and the apparent
poor quality of water that has been observed from this water bearing
zone, it is concluded that the Ferron Sandstone is of very little
importance as an aquifer in the adjacent area of the prep. plant.
The Blue Gate Shale has been observed at all locations drilled
through the alluvium in the vicinity of the prep. plant (Refer to
Map E9-3428 in the ORP). In addition, the Blue Gate Shale is exposed
in all of the foothills that rise above the prep. plant and refuse
ponds. Therefore, it is concluded that the Blue Gate Shale is
continuous beneath the alluvial deposits and over the Ferron
• Sandstone in the vicinity 'of the prep. plant.
The permeability of the Blue Gate Shale was measured during the
geotechnical investigations conducted with respect to the tailings
dikes (Refer to Appendix C of the ORP). The permeability
measurements corresponding to the Blue Gate Shale ranged from 13
feet per year to 3700 feet per year. This range of permeability is
considered low to.moderate (U.S. Department of the Interior Water
and Power Resources Service, 1981). It is expected that some of the
permeability measurements may be high because the drill holes only
extended approximately 10 feet into the shale. This thin surface of
the shale would likely be weathered and be more permeable than the
consolidated shale beldw. However, the permeability val L.leS
• documented in Appendix C of the ORP indicate that the Blue Gate
Shale is generally less permeable than the overlying alluvial
6
materials. Theref~re, the Blue Gate Shale is considered a less
... permeable bed that. impedes the downward movement of ground water and
serves as a perching bed for the shallow alluvial ground water
system that will be discussed next.
Alluvium overlies the Blue Gate Shale over much of the permit
area. The deposits range from a few feet thick at the contact with
the shale foothills to approximately 35 feet deep in the valley of
the Price River. The permeability measurements provided in Appendix
C of the ORP indicates that the alluvium has a wide range of
permeability, that generally can be considered moderately to highly
permeable. In addition, a search for water users in the shallow
alluvial aquifer in the records of the State Engineer revealed 7
... wells in the vicinity of the prep. plant (i.e., T5S RIlE). All seven
...
of the wells are located in Sections 7 and 8 T5S RllE. While these
wells indicate that the saturated alluvium serves as a local aquifer,
it should be noted that these wells are located two to three miles
upstream in the Price River valley. It is assumed that these wells
are up gradient from the prep. plant and that impacts from the plant
could ther~fore, not reach the wells.
It is accepted that the alluvium serves as ground water
resource in the area. The remainder of this chapter discusses the
characteristics of the shallow alluvial ground water system and the
potential for it to be contaminated by the prep. plant. Static water
table
the
measurements were taken approximately one to two weeks after
initial .drilling of boreholes installed during previous
geotechnical investigations of the prep •. plant site. Map E9-3428 of
7
•
•
the ORP presents cross sections with the water levels indicated. It
is emphasized that the water table measurements were made in 1957
prior to the construction of the prep. plant or the refuse
impoundments. The water levels on this cross section indicate that
the highest water table elevations occur in the topographically
highest locations (e.g., along the foothills). The water table drops
from the foothills toward the swail where the refuse ponds are now
located. The water table is lowest along the valley of the Price
River. It is therefore, assumed for subsequent discussion that the
water table in the shallow alluvial ground water system reflects the
surface topography, with ground water flow from topographically high
areas toward the Price River. In addition, with the location of the
refuse ponds impounded within the swail above the Price River it is
assumed that the ponds serve as points. of high ground water
potential,
ditch also
considered
creating a mounding of ground water. The north diversion
serves as a 9round water cutoff and therefore is
a point of low ground water potential in the area. The
cutoff trench (i.e., north diversion) therefore, serves to separate
the ground water connecti6n between the re~use p6nds and the
irrigated fields to the north.
At the prep. plant and refuse ponds the potential for·
contamination of the shallow ground water system exists wherever
affected waters have the opportunity to seep into the underlying
alluvium.
personnnel
December,
Following a site visit, conversations with prep. plant
(Glenn Sides and Randy WAtt, personal communication,
1983), and a review of the ORP it was concluded that the
following locations provided the potential. for contamination of ~he
8
•
•
•
alluvial aquifer: 1.Seepage from the refuse pile; 2.Seepage from the
road pond, the auxiliary pond and the drier pond in th~ vicinity of
the prep. plant; and 3.Seepage from the refuse impoundments located
east of the Price River. Each of these potential contamination
sources is examined in Chapters 3 and 4 with regard to potential
impacts and monitoring respectively. Please note, that these
potential sources of contamination may affect not only the shallow
alluvial ground water system but also the Price River. Please recall
the earlier assumption that ground waters flow in a pattern roughly
reflecting the surface topography and with the Price River as the
point of lo~est ground water potential in the area with respect to
the alluvial ground water flow.
9
•
PROBABLE HYDROLOGIC CONSEQUENCES
This chapte~ investigates potential sou~ces of contamination
associated with the prep~ plant that may Come in contact with the
hydrologic resources described in Chapter 2. In addition, for those
potential sources of contamination em~nating from the prep. plant
that are identified, an assessment of the degree of impact to the
hydrologic resource is also presented. Please note~ that the time
frames associated with this project dictated that limitations be
placed on the amount of data being reviewed and the techniques
utilized to assess impacts. Therefore, the following analysis relied
on the data in the ORP and was also limited to reviewing TDS as a
general indicator of water quality impacts.
POTENTIAL SOURCES OF CONTAMINATION
The potential sources of contamination to hydrologic resources
in the adjacent area of the prep. plant (i.e.~ as identified in
Chapter 2) were identified through discussions with prep. plant
personnel (i. e. !I Mr. Glenn Sides and Mr. Randy Watts) through an
analysis of the ORP and through a site visit. Please refer to part
UMC 784.11 (Operation Plan) in the
operations at the prep. plant
associated structures.
ORP for a detailed discussion of
and design specifications of
Three potential sources of contamination have been identified in
relation to the prep. plant including: 1.The waste pile; 2.The
auxiliary, road, and drier ponds; and 3.The refuse ponds, including
the seepage that is discharged via the north diversion ditch. Each
of these potential sources for contamination of surface and ground
• waters are discussed in detail in the following text. All of . the
10
•
•
refuse ponds are .addressed together in the assessment of impacts
because it
each pond.
was not possible to separate out the water
Rather, the total losses from all ponds
losses for
has been
determined and the cumulative effect of all of the ponds is
determined.
~~§~~ Eil~
As discussed in ~hapter 1 the waste pile receives coarse debris
that are a by product of the coal cleaning process. When viewed in
the field the fresh waste appeared to consist of 2 to 4 inch shale
fragments. In the older portions of the waste pile the shale
fragments had weathered into smaller chunks with voids still
remaining between the individual pieces of shale. The current extent
of the waste pile is shown on Map 1. It should also be noted that
the
the
waste pile will continue to grow as coal cleaning continues
prep. plant. The ultimate extent of the waste pile
at
is
approximately 22 acres as shown on Map 1.- No vegetation was observed
on the pile.
The only mechanism that could transport contaminants from the
waste pile is precipitation percolating down through the pile that
eventually reache~ the shallow alluvial ground water system. A
diversion ditch passes all other surface waters around the waste
pile in order to minimize the potential for contaminating surface
waters.
In order to determin~ the extent of cont~mination of the shallow
alluvial. ground water system from·the leachate f~om the waste pile
it was first assumed that all precipitation falling on the waste
pile would percolate through the pile and enter the shallow ground
11
water system. The annual precipitation for the prep_ plant was
• estimated from precipitation records obtained from the State
Climatological Office in Logan~ Utah for the nearest long term
precipitation record~ at Price Utah. Table 1 provides the normal' or
ave~age precipitation that has been observed at Price for the period
of record from 1951 to 1980.
Table 1. Normal precipitation observed from 1951 to 1980 in Price~
Utah. Data are presented in inches of precipitation. These records
were obtained from the Utah State Climatologist~s Office in Logan
Utah (personal communication~ December 1983).
Normal Precipitation (in inches) at Price, Utah J~Q~ E§~~ ~~c~h 8Qcti tl2Y ~~Q~ J~l~ e~g~ §~~t~ Q£t~ ~QY~ Q~£~
• 73 • 76 • 72 • 50 • 72 • 70 • 85 1. 17 • 97 1 • 09 • 60 • 87 Annual Average Precipitation= 9.68 inches •
• It should be noted that a closer short term precipitation record has
recently been developed at Wellington, utah. However? comparison of
the Wellington Data 1980- 1983) does not show strong
difference from the precipitation observed at Price, Utah.
Thet-ef ore ~ the decision was made to utilize the precipitation data
from Price, Utah in the calculation of water that will likely be
affected by the coarse refuse pile. Using the annual total
precipitation falling on th~ refuse pile (i.e., 9.68 inches of
precipitation) as the basis for the amount of water that would come
in contact with the refuse pile it is determin~d that approximately
17.8 acre feet of water could potentially leach through and out of
the waste pile annually.
The quality of ,the leachate that moves through the waste pile
~ can only be marginally predicted because only one partial analysis
12
•
•
o~ coal waste leachate has been provided to date. Please note~ that
while the available data are fully utilized in this prediction of
the quality of leachate emanating from the waste pile, U.S. Steel
commits to conduct additional sampling and analyses of waste pile
leachate in Chapter 4. The additional leachate analyses will provide
further verification and monitoring of the quality of water that
comes in contact with the waste pile. The analysis of leachate from
the waste pile is presented in Table 2.
Table 2. Laboratory analysis of leachate from the refuse pile.
%Clay /~Coal
'l.Gravel 'l.Sand 'l.Silt Te!-~ture
pH Initial units Acidity as CaC03 ppm Alkalinity as CaC03 ppm Calcium as Ca ppm Conductivity mmhos/cm Magnesium as Mg ppm /. Saturation Sodium Adsorption Ratio Sodium as Na ppm Total Dissolved Solids mg/l
1.5' <0 .. 01 83.5 2.50 12.50 Gravel 8.40 <0.01 142 76.00 250 18.20 20.40
33.97 1~270 7,040
The analysis presented above sUbstantiates the observation that the
coarse refuse pile is composed of gravel sized fragments that would
readily allow precipitation falling on the pile to percolate to the
shallow alluvial ground water system. The partial chemical analyses
do not su;;est any potential adverse effects -will occur to the
shallow al"luvial ground waters with the exception of the sodium
• adsorption ratio (SAR) and total dissolved solids (TDS). The SAR is
13
much higher than is recommended for irrigation waters. Itis assumed
..
• that the water seeping from. th~,~aste pile woufa:.·tmove· into 0 the
alluvial ." I , , .... ,"; . ground water system on a~radual basis iM-response to th~
periods of precipitation. Therefor~, water quality:int"'th~ alluvium
would be degraded periodically for short reaches· Jd'owr1 gradient from
the t- I-. ~ Lo' • ~.L -: _.:-.
w~ste pile and the primary water quality para~eters-thatwo~ld
be degraded are TOS and SAR.
~l'", - . .;..
water losses from the waste pile is also considered later
in this report together with the losses from the ponds- associated
with the prep. plant.
The probable hydrologic effects of the road pond the auxiliary
pond, the drier pond~ and the refuse pond are determined together
• because it was not possible to. separate out the losses from each
source. The approach taken to assess the effect of the previously
mentioned ponds is to set up a water balance for ~ll water coming in
to the plant and all water losses that can be a~counted for. The
remaining water that can not be accounted for i~ assum~d to be a
loss from the ponds mentioned above. The following narrative
describes the water balance that was used to arrive at the water
los~es that occur f~om the prep. plant (i. e. , in addition tb wate~
losses from" the waste pile).
The year 1981 'was selected as a typical year f~r' th~: wate~
balance. During 1981 832 acre feet 'of water was~ai~~f~ed frbm the
Price River to maintain the amount of water in c~rtulation between
the prep. pla~t and the refuse ponds (documente~' in the Report to
• the Price River Water Users). In addition to the water diverted from
14
•
•
•
the river precipitation added another 71 acre fe~~-of water to the
prep. plant water suppl y. Thi s figure was arri vea 1"at by mul ti pI yi ng
the .88.2 acres of pond surface times 9.64 inchesh8fl""'precipitation
for 1981 (Utah State Climatologist's Office, LbgiR; :O£~h,-·personal
communication regarding precipitation for Price, CUt~h).cThe loss of
water to' evaporation wa:s estimated by multiplying:Jthef 88'~2':"Acres-'of
pond surface ti mes 5 feet of annual evaporati on"-(measLlred at the
prep. plant site) losses yielding 441 acre feet of ~oistu~e lost to
evaporation. Therefore, the net input of water to· the prep. plant
water SLtppl y system is 462 acre feet for 1981. The only loss of
water that could be documented from the pr'ep. plant is the
evaporation losses resulting from the heat drier. The figure
provided by the prep. plant personnel for heat drier losses is 14.7
acre feet for 1981. In summary, the net input of: water t6 the prep.
plant water network is 462 acre feet of water, ~ith 14.7 acre feet
of water leaving the site via the heat drier. Therefore, it is
assumed that the remaining water that can not be accounted for in
the previously_ described water balance (i.e., 447.~ acre feet of
water loss) is the loss which occurs from th~' ponds previously
described.
The water quality associated with the pond losses is taken from
the ORP page 783-21. . . -.' The TOS val ues for the auxi·t"iary pond and the
north diversion - .' . ,. ditch averages appro;<imately 4foo milligrams per
liter. The shallow ground w~ter receiving this' ~eepage would be
marginal for watering domestic stock and would be poor for
irrigation use. In contrast to the sporadic seepage from the waste
15
'_
_
_
pile the refLlse ponds would provide a constant slug of affected
water that WOLll d move to the alluvial aquifer down gradient from the
ponds on both the east and west side of the river. The degraded
water quality would dissipate in an unknown distance down gradient
as it mixed with the alluvial ground waters moving along the Price
River valley. In addition, ~ccording to the assumptions made
previously this degraded alluvial ground water is expected to reach
the Price River.
If a further simplifying assumption is made that the degraded
alluvial ground water would be discharged from the ponds and the
refuse pile at a constant rate then approximately 0.64 cfs of pond
seepage would enter the Price River on a regular basis. Using a mass
balance for the refuse pond water quantity (i.e. !I .64 cfs) and
quality (i.e., 4100 milligra.ms per liter TOS) and a high TDS (i.e.,
2,800 milligrams per liter TDS taken above the prep. plant in August
of 1982) and a mean flow value for the Price River at the U.S.
Geological Survey gaging station just below the prep. plant site
(data taken from the ORP for J~ly 1982~ refer to page 783-17 and
783-24) the following conclusions can be made. The resultant water
quality in the Price River is 2,810 milligrams per liter TDS :which
is a negligible increase in TDS over the 2~800 milligrams per liter
TDS already in the river. Therefore~ using the conservative
assumptions described above it is concluded that the quality of
water in the Price River would not be noficably affected by the
cumulative volumes of water lost from the refuse ponds and the -waste
pi 1 e.
16
•
•
HYDROLOGIC MONITORING
The purpose of this chapter is to take the discussion- of
hydrologic resources presented in Chapter 2 and the prediction of
probable hydrologic consequences in Chapter 3 and provide a surface
and ground water monitoring plan that addresses all potential
sources of pollution from the prep. plant and that monitors all
hydrologic resources that may receive affected waters from the prep.
plant. The presentation of the hydrologic monitoring plan is
.separated into the surface water and ground water components of the
program. In addition with respect to each monitoring point a
-schedule of monitoring frequency and a list of parameters is
provided.
It should be noted that this monitoring plan is designed to be
a thorough documentation of potential effects resulting from the
prep. plant that agrees with the Guidelines For EstabliShment of
Surface and Ground Water Monitoring Programs provided by the Utah
Division of Oil Gas and Mining. The data should be reviewed on an
-annual basis. If certain parameters are constantly below the limits
of concern then U.S. Steel may propose to the Division of Oil Gas
:and Mining that those parameters be eliminated from the list of
·constituents being analyzed. In addition, if a parameter is'observed
:to have a low degree of variabi~ity, U.S. Steel may propose that the
frequency of observation of that parameter be reduced.
SURFACE-WATER MONITORING
The surface water monitoring program has been designed to
monitor all surface water resources that may be affected by the
~prep. plant and to document the quality of mining related waters
that may percolate from ~ef~se ponds into the shallow ground waters
17
------------------------------------------------~--~
in the area.
• Chapters "2 and 3 have identified the Price River and the
diverted ephemeral drainage along the north dike to be the only
surface water resources that may be affected by the operations
associated with the prep. plant. Therefore, the surface water
monitoring plan includes both of these surface water resources.
Monitoring has been carried out in the past and' will be
cont i nued i n the future on th~..J:~ri ~~. Ri ver above and below the .PIee.
monitoring points SW-l and 5W-2). In -addition, monitoring will also take place on the ephemeral drainage
diversion above and below the portion of the ditch that is adjacent
to the upper refuse pond (i.e., monitoring pOints SW-3 and SW-4).
• The monitoring sites on the ditch shown on Map .1 were selel=ted to be
above and below the -area that may receive seepage of prep. plant
affected waters from the upper refuse pond.
In addition to the monitoring points described ab6ve with
respect to potentially affected surface waters, four other
moni tori ng points are deseri bed here that wi 11 document the: qual i ty
of impounded refuse waters that may seep into the shallow alluvial
ground water system and eventually reach the Price River.
A monitoring point has been established in the uppe~ refuse
impoundment in the vicinity of where the refuse waters initially
enter the pond (refer to monitoring point SW-S on Map 1). This site
• will allow . observation of the variation in the quality of waters
18
entering the refuse pond network. The second m6nitoring site ·e assoc i ated wi th impounded ref use waters is in the' i ower- refuse pond. s'// - ' ..
The third refuse pond monitoring site is located in the clear water
pond adjacent to the Price River (refer to monitoring point SW-7 on
Map 1). This site will document the variability of the quality of
water as it is recycled through the refuse pond ~ystem and as the
clear water pond receives wate~ from the Price River. Between the
three monitoring points just described, the full range of variability
of water quality associated with the refuse ponds will be
documented. In addition, the range of potential contamination to
shallow alluvial ground waters will also be documented.
The last monitoring point associated with impounded refuse
waters is located on the west side of the Price River adjacent to
the prep.
e r-lap 1).
plant in the road pond (refer to monitoring point SW-8 on
This monitoring point will document the quality of water
that is utilized within ~he prep. plant (i.e., and stored in the
road pond, the auxiliary pond, and the drier pond) and that is
discharged from the plant. It should also be noted that this
monitoring point will also serve to document the quality of water
that may seep into the shallow alluvial ground water at this site.
Table 3 provides the sample collecti"on frequency for each of
the surface water monitoring points. Please note that a distinction
has been made with respect to monitoring of perennial streams (i.e.,
the Price River) and ephemeral streams (i.e., the ephemeral stream
diversion) per the Guidelines fpr the Establishment of Surface Water
Monitoring Programs. Please note tha~ flow measurements will. be mad~
at the same time that water quality samples are taken at all
stations where appropriate (i.e., no flow measurements in ponds). ;..
19
•. Table 3. Monitoring frequency for surface water stations.
•
'.
~Qni1Qring ECggH§n£~ Bimonthly* Representative**
SW-l Price River upstream. X SW-2 Price River downstream. X SW-3 Diversion Ditch upstream. X SW-4 Diversion Ditch downstream. X SW-5 Upper Refuse Impoundment. X SW-6 Clear Water Pond. X SW-7 Road Pond near prep. plant. X /
* Once every other month to include the annual high and low flow. ** Sufficient number of samples to define seasonal variability including at least spring snowmelt and thunderstorm runoff. If the diversion ditch receives a continuous discharge of seepage from the adjacent refuse pond then the discharge will be monitored bimonthly.
The surface water parameters, that will be analyzed for on all
surface water samples for at least one year, are presented in
Append i :.: A. This list of parameters is consistent with the
guidelines of the Utah Division of Oil Gas and Mining. The data will
be submitted to the Division on a biannual basis with an annual
summary that interprets the data. U.S. Steel will recommend changes
in the frequency of monitoring and the parameters being monitored as
appropriate following the first year of data collection.:
GROUND WATER MONITORING
The ground water monitoring plan has been designed to
correspond to each of .th~.~ote~t~~l sources of contamination that
were identified in Chapter ,~:_<:.(;:i.e.,_ the refuse pile, the road pond
artd.th.~ rI',""_efusE;!:. impoundments). In addition, the
shallow alluvial groLlndwa~er system was identified in Chapter 2 as
the .~nl y .. gr:.oLt~.d ~ater r:~~~ur,=,c:.::e 't:1l.¥. may be affected by seepage from ;..
20
the previously described contamination sources associated with the
• prep. plant. Therefore!! the ground water monitoring plan provides
monitoring of the shallow alluvial ground water system at each of
the potential sources of contamination. The alluvial wells will--
be ~rilled during the fi~st seasonal I-
opportunity and will be
installed to provide three types of data. First, the wells will be
drilled down through the alluvium to the top of the Blue Gate Shale
to verify the depth of alluvium in the areas being monitored.
Second!! alluvial wells will be completed to allow sampling of
unaffected water quality up gradie~t (i.e., hydraulically higher
than the disturbed aquifers) from the prep. plant. Third!! wells will
be used in groups of three in order to define the hydraulic gradient
for" the plane of the water table in the vicinity of the
• contamination source being monitored • Collection of the three types
of data described above will allow calculation of the amount of
water moving through the alluvium and away from the contamination
sources. This information on flow rates together with the quality of
affected (i.e., down gradient from the contamination source) and
unaffected waters (i.e., up gradient from the contamination source)
will provide thorough documentation of the effects associated with
the prep. plant.
It should be noted, that throughout the ground water monitoring
program the following assumptions that have been supported in
previous chapters influenced the placement of the ground water
monitoring . network: 1.The shallow alluvial ground water system; is
the only a~uifer in hydrauliC contact with the potential sources of
• contamination at the- prep. plant; 2.The Blue Gate Shale acts as a
21
perching bed by restricting the downward mQv~~ent out of the
• alluvial aquifer to lower strata; . 1··
3.The gradient of :ground water in
the alluvium roughly reflects the topography (i.e:: moving from the
foot hills towards the Price River. In the valley of the Price River
ground water is assumed to move in the direction of the trend of the
valley and towards the Price River; 4.The north dl~ersion ditch is
serving to cut-off the ground water seepage from the upper refuse
pond; 5.Wells located topographically higher than the potential
contamination source are assumed to be hydraulically up gradient
from the contamination source. Therefore samples taken from wells at
this location are assumed to provide water quality in~icative of the
alluvial aquifer without the effects of the prep. plant •
•• Ground water monitoring in the vicinity of the refuse pile
located on the west side of the river adjacent to the prep. plant
will be conducted to gather the monitoring data previously
described. Three alluvial wells will be utilized to monitor down
gradient from the refuse pile (i.e., between the refuse pile and
the river). Two wells will be located adjacent to the refuse pile
while the third well will be further down gradient in the direction
of the Price River. As par·t of the moni tori ng program associ ated
with the waste pile quarterly leachat~ snalyses takeN from the waste
rock will also be collected +or at lea~t one year.
22
Three wells will be located around the road pond and auxiliary
• pond to document the effect of water seepage from these locations •
Two wells will be located adjacent to and down gradient from the
pan d s (i. e. , between the ponds and the Price River). The third well
will be further in the direction of the river in order to document
the gradient of the water table toward the river.
Two additional wells will be placed up gradient from the refuse
pile and the two ponds near the prep. plant. One well will be
located out in the valley of the Price River to document unaffected
water quality along the Price River alluvial ground water system.
The second well will be located up gradient from the potential
contamination sources along the valley margin to see if the
• unaffected water quality moving from the foot hills is of different
quality than alluvial ground water along the Price River valley. It
should also be noted that the down gradient wells in the vicinity of
the prep_ plant have also been located to provide an observation of
the gradient of the alluvial ground water along the trend of the
Price River valley.
In summary, the wells that have been sch~duled for placement
around the prep. plant will provide the following documentation with
respect to the shallow alluvial ground water system: 1.The
unaffected water quality; 2~The water quality effect o~ the
• contamination sources; and 3.The gradient of the water table in -. order to verify the direction and volume of ground water flow in the
23
- (' '-1--, :::_t. ar~a·f utI_~-: st"1.ou1 d -be noted, ~:C\t -:for':- fotllre work dtf'r'-i z-i ng the data
° .-::'-o:f=Ol;:1~~ ~y this monitoring°'-program can :arso-'°i:itfli:;:e the
•
;oeo
that have been measured for the alluvial materials
during p~evious geotechnical investigations that have been conducted
at the p~ep. plant.
As described in Chapter 2 and 3 the refuse ponds are located in
a swail between two low hills. The entire area is underlain by Blue
Gate Shale ·that impedes the downward movement of ground water
seepage from the refuse ponds. Therefore, the opportunities for
hydraulic communication of the refuse ponds with the shallow
alluvial ground water system is to the north along the upper refuse
pond and to the south west along the clear water pond. For this
reason two sets of wells have been scheduled to be located at the
northern and southern end of the refuse pond system.
At the northern end of the upper refuse pond-two wel1~ have
beEn scheduled to document the water quality and water levels in the
alluvium adjacent to the ponds. There is not a need for a third
well .to document the hydraulic gradient at this loc~tion because it
has been assumed that the diversion ditch is serving as a ground
water cutoff to the north and as such can be considered the lowest
point of ground water potential- in the area.
At the south western end of the refuse pond system two wells
~ave been scheduled to be immediately adjacent to the clearwater
pond. These wells are deSigned to measure the water quality
water levels in the alluvial ground water system down gradient
24
and
from
• the refuse ponds. A third well has been located further to the south
west in the direction of the Price River to document the gradient of
the water table toward the Price River.
One additional well to those mentioned above has been located
on the east side of the Price River North of the refuse ponds to
document the unaffected water quality in the alluvium up gradient
from the the refuse ponds. The selected location is considered to be
a good site to document the unaffected water quality in ·this
alluvial ground water system because the diversion ditch is
considered the ground water low point in the ~re~ that would prevent
the migration of affected ground water to the north of the ditch.
In summary!! the ground water monitoring progaram for the area
• e~st of thE Price River in the vicinity of the rEfuse ponds h~s been
de~igned to document the rate and quality of ground water flQW from
the refuse ponds.
wat~r monitoring will be conducted in accordance with
t~~ Guide!i~ss for Ground ~~ter MonitQrin~ provid~d by the Utah
~~t~r levels will
Guarterly. ~2ter qualIty wi!l ~:sc be ~Easu~ed quartErly ~n C~~2~ to
I=.rervi de -----.:. -.!..--' ;.':":) = ~_i:_ ..i. ::: _ =~ __
the potent: =.1 cont~min~tion sources and the ~~ter quality in thE
• 2~ presentE~ in Appendix A.
All da~a will be submitted to the Utah Division of Oil G~5 6nd
Mining on a biannual basis. An annual summary interpreting the
will also be provided. As mentioned previcusly. u.s. will
r~view the information fallowing a year of dat~ collection and
propose mc~ific2tiQn~ to the fr2quency and p~rameter5 being modified
top related