performance review of new outer drain, nyrstar myra falls · dear nicole, 1 introduction and terms...

ROBERTSON GEOCONSULTANTS INC. A Robertson Group Company

Consulting Engineers and Scientists for the Mining Industry Suite 640, 580 Hornby St., Vancouver BC, Canada V6C 3B6

Phone (604) 684-8072 Fax (604) 684-8073 www.robertsongeoconsultants.com

December 28th

, 2016

RGC Report No: 212010/3

Environment Department

Nyrstar Myra Falls

Attention: Nicole Pesonen

RE: Performance Review Of New Outer Drain, Nyrstar Myra Falls

Dear Nicole,

1 Introduction and Terms of Reference

This letter report summarizes the results of a performance review (including hydraulic

testing) of the New Outer Drain (NOD) at Nyrstar Myra Falls (NMF). This review was

completed by Robertson GeoConsultants (RGC) from October 2015 to June 2016.

Provided here are monitoring data for that period and recommendations for future

operation of the NOD.

Hydraulic testing was completed as part of developing a site-wide seepage control plan

for NMF. The hydraulic testing campaign consisted of systematically varying flow from

the different sections of the NOD while monitoring water levels, groundwater quality,

and water quality in Myra Creek. The objective of this investigation was to evaluate the

effectiveness of the NOD to capture seepage flows during various hydraulic regimes and

to determine appropriate settings for the drain system.

http://www.robertsongeoconsultants.com/

Nyrstar Myra Falls

Performance Review Of New Outer Drain December 2016

2 Background

The NOD was constructed in 2004 and 2005 as part of the Seismic Upgrade Project

(Klohn Crippen, 2006). The NOD was constructed to replace the Area II Outer Drain

should it be damaged during construction of the Seismic Upgrade Berm. The NOD was

also intended to improve performance of the Area II Outer Drain system by reducing the

bypass of impacted groundwater to Myra Creek between Stations 1+050 m to 1+250 m

(Klohn Crippen, 2004).

Figure 1 shows a location plan of the Old TDF and the various elements comprising the

NOD system. The NOD consists of a system of three separate drain sections referred to

as (i) Short Drain, (ii) Medium Drain and (iii) Long Drain. Each section consists of 450

mm and 550 mm diameter perforated drain pipes in a trench backfilled with minus 10

mm granular fill.

Flows from the Short, Medium, and Long Drains are directed into a solid pipe that

conveys water to Pumphouse #4. Electronically-controlled sluice gates were installed on

the discharge pipe of each of these new drain sections to control the flow out of the drain.

These gates are adjusted manually at Pumphouse #4.

Each of the NOD drains is typically run well below full capacity. In 2014 and 2015, the

NOD system was mostly run at a setting of “10-0-10”, representing 10% opening for the

Medium Drain, 0% opening for the Short Drain and 10% opening for the Long Drain.

Note that the Short Drain at a 0% setting is equivalent to 0.5% opening.

The Old TDF Drain System was previously tested by Marsland Environmental Associates

(Marsland, 2011). Hydraulic testing was completed from September to November 2010

and consisted of testing the different portions of the NOD under three different gate valve

settings (0%, 20%, and 100%). Marsland (2011) recommends setting the drain system at

a minimum of 10-0-5 (i.e., Medium Drain at 10%, Short Drain at 0%, and Long Drain at

5%).

The Marsland study has several limitations:

Nyrstar Myra Falls


Testing was completed over a short period of time (September to November), so

the study was not able to address the effects of seasonal variations on drain

performance.

Monitoring of hydraulic gradients and water quality south of Myra Creek were

not possible at the time, as wells MW13-16S/D and MW13-18S/D had not been

installed in 2010.

Monitoring of hydraulic gradients and water quality between the creek and the

drain system were limited to a single location (i.e., the Long Drain at well cluster

MW-A to MW-F) because groundwater monitoring wells located between Myra

Creek and the New Medium Outer Drain (MW13-14S/D and MW13-15S/D) were

not yet installed in 2010.

RGC completed further drain testing between October 2015 and June 2016. This testing

was completed over an extended period of time (from October 2015 to June 2016) and it

benefited from additional monitoring wells (i.e. the ‘MW13’ well series; see RGC,

2013).The results of RGC’s drain testing are summarized below.

3 Performance Review of New Outer Drain System

A total of nineteen (19) tests were performed during various hydrogeological conditions

including:

Late summer low flow.

Fall moderate flow.

Winter low flow.

Spring Freshet.

High flow (or storm) events.

Sluice gate positions for each section of the NOD were varied systematically during each

hydraulic regime while hydraulic performance (water levels), groundwater quality, and

water quality in Myra Creek were monitored.

Nyrstar Myra Falls


3.1 Methods

Groundwater levels were measured manually before and after varying drain settings at

the following locations:

Upstream of the NOD at the Old TDF.

Adjacent to the NOD (Hillside and Creekside).

In standpipes completed right along the NOD.

Downstream (south-east) of Myra Creek

Myra Creek water levels were monitored as follows:

Automated measurements in fifteen (15) minute intervals at the car bridge using a

pressure transducer,

Manual depth-to-water readings taken off a marked rebar installed within the

creek (initial top-of-rebar survey completed by NMF personnel), and

Creek levels surveyed directly by NMF personnel at locations aligned with

groundwater monitoring points.

Water quality sampling allows evaluating drain performance as seepage bypass can be

detected in the form of increased metal concentrations. Groundwater quality samples

were collected at select monitoring wells:

Creekside of the NOD at MW13-14S and MW13-15S.

South of Myra Creek at MW13-16S and MW13-18S.

Water quality in Myra Creek was sampled during the drain testing campaign as follows:

Grab samples at Station 0+800 North and South and at TP4 North and South,

analyzed on site for total Zn by NMF personnel.

Daily water quality samples for Zn downstream of the site at MC-TP4 using an

automated, on-site Atomic Absorption (AA) Spectrophotometer.

After a primary survey had been completed, drain settings were varied and samples taken

once equilibrium had been reached.

3.2 Hydraulic Performance

Hydraulic performance of the drain system was evaluated by measuring groundwater and

surface water levels and examining the resulting hydraulic gradients. The NOD is

Nyrstar Myra Falls


considered to be effective in capturing groundwater seepage if water levels in the drain

are below the river level and adjacent groundwater levels, i.e. hydraulic gradients are

reversed and are directed towards the NOD.

Figures 2a and 2b show detailed water level plots for surveys performed on December 10,

2015 and May 10, 2016 respectively. A complete set of longitudinal water level sections

for all testing completed by RGC as part of this study is provided in Appendix A. These

cross-sections show the elevation of the following:

Short, Medium, and Long Drains.

Myra Creek bed.

Water surface level of Myra Creek.

Water levels in the NOD obtained from standpipe piezometers P1 to P5.

Water levels in observation wells MW13-14S and MW13-15S.

In general, the drain is providing hydraulic control (i.e. prevents seepage by-pass) if the

water levels measured in the drain (orange line) is higher than the creek level (blue line).

The NOD was set to 5/0/5 on December 10th

, 2015. Figure 2a shows that hydraulic heads

measured in standpipes next to the NOD (P1 to P5) are above the nearby creek level and

groundwater levels in downgradient monitoring wells. This suggests that the NOD was

not able to provide full hydraulic control during this testing event as the general hydraulic

gradient is directed from the drain towards Myra Creek.

Transverse sectional plots of water levels were also created at standpipes P4 (A–A’) and

P5 (B-B’) (see Figure 1 for location) to further illustrate the groundwater flow field near

the drain system. Figures 3a and 3b show transverse sections (along flow path) for P4 and

P5 respectively on December 10, 2015 (drain set to 5/0/5). It is evident that creek levels

are slightly below the water level in the drain system, indicating that flow is towards the

creek. This suggests that impacted groundwater from the Old TDF reach is partially

bypassing the NOD at this section.

Figures 4a and 4b show another set of cross-sectional water level plots for testing

performed on May 10, 2016 with a drain setting of 10/0/10. This transverse section

Nyrstar Myra Falls


clearly illustrates that the drain has effected a reversal in local groundwater flow (from

Myra Creek towards the drain) and hence provides adequate hydraulic control.

Table 1 summarizes all the drain testing performed by RGC and indicates whether the

individual sections of the NOD system are providing hydraulic control along Myra Creek.

Analyzing all longitudinal cross-sections suggests that the NOD generally provides

adequate hydraulic control and effectively captures shallow seepage flows when sluice

gates are set to 10-0-10 (Medium, Short, and Long Drain) or higher. Lower settings, that

is further restricting flow from the drain system (5-0-5), have only proven to work for one

survey during low flow conditions (4,370 L/s in Myra Creek).

Note that periods of unfavourable hydraulic conditions do not necessarily imply that

seepage immediately discharges into Myra Creek. It was estimated that travel times for

contaminants are in the order of 4 to 10 days for a distance of around 15 m between the

NOD and Myra Creek. If hydraulic gradients are reversed, contaminant transport is also

reversed. Hence it is important to analyze water quality data collected during testing and

routinely over longer periods of time.

3.3 Water Quality Performance

Water quality was sampled at MW13-14S (Medium NOD) on May 10 and May 24, 2016

with total Zn concentrations of 2.0 mg/L Zn and 1.5 mg/L Zn, respectively. These

samples were taken during spring freshet with drain settings of 10/0/10 and 30/0/10,

respectively. Hydraulic gradients are directed towards the drain suggesting that the NOD

was able to intercept the majority of seepage flows at the time of measurement. The

moderate Zn concentrations, however, indicate some seepage bypass occurring. At

MW13-15S, Zn concentrations of 0.2 mg/L Zn and 0.08 mg/L Zn were observed on May

10th

and May 24th

, 2016. These data suggest little bypass at the downstream end of the

Medium Drain.

A review of routine water quality monitoring performed within the Lower Old TDF

Reach (not shown here) suggests the following:

Groundwater in the Myra Valley aquifer (MVA) beneath the Old TDF is highly-

impacted by seepage from WRDs #1 and #6. For example, up to 23 mg/L Zn has

Nyrstar Myra Falls


been observed in groundwater from well TD13-05D. This screened in the shallow

MVA sediments upgradient of the NOD.

Groundwater immediately upstream of the drain at MW-A (deep) and MW-D

(shallow) was characterized by total Zn concentrations of 26.7 mg/L Zn and 20.1

mg/L Zn, respectively. These data are for September 2015. Zn concentrations are

usually higher in the deeper monitoring well, MW-A.

Groundwater on the creek-side of the Long Drain at MW-C (deep) and MW-F

(shallow) has shown Zn concentrations of up to 14.6 mg/L Zn and 3.9 mg/L Zn,

respectively (see Figure 5). Zn concentrations are generally higher in the deeper

monitoring well (MW-C). Zn concentrations in both wells varies, yet no

correlation between Zn concentrations and Myra Creek flows is evident.

MW13-14S/D between Myra Creek and the Medium Drain has shown Zn

concentrations of up to 17.5 mg/L Zn (MW13-14S) and 15.5 mg/L mg/L Zn

(MW13-14D) (see Figure 5). Again, water quality varies over time but there is no

apparent trend or correlation with creek flows is evident. This suggests that some

performance of the Medium Drain at this location varies and seepage is

bypassing.

MW13-15S/D between Myra Creek and the downstream end of the Medium

Drain has shown Zn concentrations of up to 0.9 mg/L Zn (MW13-15S) and 0.03

mg/L Zn (MW13-15D). This suggests that the drain at this location is performing

well and/or dilution from the creek is occurring.

Zn concentrations in groundwater downstream of Myra Creek at MW13-18S/D

(Figure 6) are around 0.1 mg/L Zn or lower. These concentrations suggest minor

reflect relatively unimpacted conditions.

3.4 Loading to Myra Creek

In order to quantify contaminant loads within various sections of Myra Creek, results of

detailed water quality sampling along Myra Creek (“Myra Creek profiles”) were

analyzed. Between 2012 and 2016, a total of thirty-three (33) water quality sampling

campaigns were undertaken during open water season. Each sampling event consisted of

collecting water samples from Myra Creek at twenty (20) equally-spaced stations ranging

Nyrstar Myra Falls


from upstream at the car bridge (station MC-S11) to the downstream end of the site at

station MC-TP4. Samples were collected on the north bank of the creek and, on several

occasions, also on the south bank.

Figures 6a and 6b show Zn loads within the various reaches of Myra Creek for every

sampling event from 2012 to 2016. Total Zn loads within the creek range from 4.8 kg/day

(in July 2014) to 77.4 kg/day in February 2015. Zn loading in Myra Creek within the

Lower Old TDF Reach (shown in yellow) varies from ~0 kg/d (September 2014) to 14.4

kg/d in August 2015. The creek is protected by the NOD in this area.

There is no clear pattern evident during which conditions the Lower Old TDF Reach is

contributing larger Zn loads to Myra Creek. This suggests that the performance of the

NOD is variable and that seepage bypass is occurring. Note that wells MW13-14S/D (at

Station MC 1+250 between Myra Creek and the Medium NOD) has shown elevated Zn

concentrations.

On average, these loads represent around 10% of the total Zn load within Myra Creek

detected at MC-TP4. Therefore, it can be concluded that the NOD system effectively

captures the majority of highly contaminated seepage flows in the lower Old TDF reach

migrating towards Myra Creek.

4 Key Findings and Recommendations

4.1 Key Findings

The Lower Old TDF Reach has an existing seepage interception system (SIS) that

consists of the Old Outer Drain and the NOD. Both drains are adjacent to Myra Creek

and are located about 1 to 2 m below the creek bed. Further upstream, the Inner Drain

captures seepage from the portion of WRD#1 that is buried by tailings in the Old TDF.

The key findings from the hydraulic testing of the NOD in the Lower Old TDF Reach are

summarized here:

Analysis of water level measurements within the NOD, surrounding aquifer, and

Myra Creek suggests that the NOD generally provides adequate hydraulic control

when sluice gates are set to 10-0-10 (Medium, Short, and Long Drain) or higher.

Nyrstar Myra Falls


In other words, hydraulic gradients are generally directed towards the drain

system suggesting that shallow seepage flow is largely captured.

Groundwater sampling of monitoring wells screened between Myra Creek and the

NOD indicate that some seepage is regularly bypassing the NOD at selected

locations, e.g. near Station MC 1+250 (Medium NOD). Monitoring wells at the

downstream end of the Medium NOD, however, show only slightly elevated Zn

concentrations, which suggests that the drain is performing well at this location

and/or dilution from the creek is occurring. This indicates that there is spatial and

temporal variability in the performance of the drain system.

Sampling of Myra Creek shows that Zn loading is regularly entering Myra Creek

within the Lower Old TDF Reach. Bypass appears to vary temporally with no

clear pattern. The Zn load contribution from the Lower Old TDF Reach, however,

only represents about 10% of the overall load found in Myra Creek.

Groundwater downstream of Myra Creek is relatively unimpacted indicating that

there is very limited underflow of impacted groundwater leaving the mine site.

These findings demonstrate that the NOD is generally working as intended, capturing the

majority of the contaminant plume migrating underneath the Old TDF. Select monitoring

wells between the drain system and the creek are elevated in zinc and seepage is regularly

bypassing at certain locations. However, water quality surveys along Myra Creek suggest

that the resulting Zn loading to Myra Creek along this Lower Old TDF reach is relatively

small. It appears that unfavourable hydraulic conditions only last for a short period of

time (say a few days) and hydraulic gradients are reversed shortly after resulting in

relatively low net by-pass.

4.2 Recommendations

The NOD in the Lower Old TDF Reach is generally working as intended and therefore

capturing the majority of seepage flows within this reach. There is currently no need to

install additional seepage control measures. RGC recommends the following for the

operation of the existing NOD:

Nyrstar Myra Falls


Operation of the NOD should continue at settings of 10/0/10

(Medium/Short/Long) as it appears to effectively protect Myra Creek.

Improve water management on site, that is provide enough treatment and/or

storage capacity to continue operation of the Inner Drain and NOD during high

flow events.

Continue routine (quarterly) water quality monitoring in the Lower Old TDF

Reach to monitor drain performance and detect potential seepage bypass.

Continue monthly water quality surveys of Myra Creek to detect load increases

within the creek.

Include drain system standpipe piezometers P1 to P5 in quarterly site-wide water

level survey.

Record sluice gate settings and daily flows from Pumphouse #4 in an electronic

database.

To further improve operation of the NOD system, RGC recommends continuous

monitoring of the hydraulic performance of the NOD. This monitoring network would

include the following:

Installation of pressure transducers in drain standpipe piezometers P1, P2, P3, P4,

and P5.

Installation of pressure transducers in monitoring wells screened between the

NOD and Myra Creek, more specifically MW-F, MW13-14S, and MW13-15S.

Placement of barometric pressure logger in vicinity of the NOD.

Manual groundwater level measurements in standpipe piezometers P1 to P5 in

conjunction with quarterly groundwater surveys.

RGC recommends downloading water level logger data quarterly and conducting a yearly

review of the NOD performance. Continuous monitoring of the hydraulic performance of

the NOD would allow the following:

Document the performance of the NOD.

Further identify under which circumstances unfavorable hydraulic conditions

exist at the NOD and determine their duration.

Nyrstar Myra Falls


Reconcile results of water quality surveys conducted routinely in Myra Creek

(MC-TP4) with hydraulic performance monitoring of the NOD.

Monitor NOD performance during planned testing of the Lynx Seepage

Interception System.

Nyrstar Myra Falls


5 Closure

We trust that the information provided in this letter report meets your requirements.

Please contact the undersigned if you have any questions regarding the content or require

further information.

Best Regards,

ROBERTSON GEOCONSULTANTS INC.

Alex Trapp

Alex Trapp, M.Sc. Christoph Wels, Ph.D., M.Sc., P.Geo.

Water Resources Engineer Principal Hydrogeologist

6 References

Marsland Environmental Associates (2011), Myra Falls Operations, Report on the TDF

Under Drain, May 2011.

Klohn Crippen (2004), Myra Falls Tailings Disposal Facility, Seismic Upgrade Project –

Optimization of New Outer Drain System Layout”, Report submitted to Boliden Westmin

(Canada) Ltd., dated April 2, 2004.

Robertson GeoConsultants Inc. (2013), 2013 Hydrogeological Drilling Program Report,

Nyrstar Myra Falls , RGC Report No. 212001/4, May 2014.

TABLES

Table 1 Summary of Hydraulic Testing of New Outer Drain

Med Short Long

5‐Oct‐15 Summer/Fall Low Flow 0.66 0.049 10/0/10 4‐Nov‐15 Fall Low/Moderate Flow 0.87 0.089 10/0/5 10‐Dec‐15 Winter High Flow 1.32 NS 5/0/5 ‐ ‐ 11‐Jan‐16 Winter Low Flow (Snow) 0.26 0.085 10/0/10 ‐ 27‐Jan‐16 High Flow Event 2.49 0.057 0/0/0 ‐ ‐10‐May‐16 Spring Freshet 1.02 0.04 10/0/10 24‐May‐16 Spring Freshet 0.94 0.034 30/0/10 6‐Jun‐16 Spring Freshet 1.23 0.039 3/0/3 ‐ ‐

7‐Oct‐15 Summer/Fall Low Flow 0.3 0.06 5/0/5 7‐Oct‐15 Summer/Fall Low Flow 0.3 0.06 0/0/0 ‐ ‐ 8‐Oct‐15 Summer/Fall Low Flow 0.41 0.067 0/5/0 ‐ ‐ 8‐Oct‐15 Summer/Fall Low Flow 0.41 0.067 0/15/0 ‐ ‐ 9‐Oct‐15 Summer/Fall Low Flow 0.76 0.042 5/0/0 ‐ ‐ 9‐Oct‐15 Summer/Fall Low Flow 0.76 0.042 5/0/5 ‐ 5‐Nov‐15 Fall Low/Moderate Flow 0.58 0.073 10/0/10 6‐Nov‐15 Fall Low/Moderate Flow 1.17 0.057 5/0/10 ‐ 12‐Jan‐16 Winter Low Flow (Snow) 0.48 0.093 5/0/5 ‐ 13‐Jan‐16 Winter Low Flow (Snow) 0.71 0.086 10/0/5 ‐ ‐ 12‐May‐16 Spring Freshet 1.16 0.035 30/0/10

T‐Zn at TP4 [mg/L]

Secondary Surveys

Hydraulic PerformanceSurvey Date Myra Creek Conditions

Pump House 4 Valve Settings MED/SHRT/LNG

Primary surveys

Pump House 4 Flow to Superpond

Myra Creek Stage at Carbridge [m]

FIGURES

G

G

G

G

!.!.

!.!.

!.

!.!.

!.!.

!.!.

!.

!.!.

!.!.

!.!.!.!.!.

!.!.

!.!.

!.!.

!.!.!.

!.!.

!.!.!.!.

!.!.

!.!.!.!.

!.

!.!.!.

!.!.!.

!.!.

!.!.

!.!.

!.!.

!.!.

!> !>

!>

!>

!>

!>!.

!.

3

3A

4

RSA DECANT

APA DECANT

STRIPDECANT

RECLAIMSANDSAREA

WRD #6

BACKFILLO/F DISCHARGE

HUT B

Amalgamated Paste Area(APA)

OLD TDF

PASTEBERM

SPILLWAY

STRIP SPILLWAY

HW Headframe

BACKFILLPLANT

QUARRY

ADIT10 LEVEL

ADIT9 LEVEL

ADIT11 LEVEL(MYRA DECLINE)

TO CAMPBELL RIVER

MYR A

CREEK

0+10

00+00

0

0+20

0

0+30

0

0+40

0

0+50

0

0+60

0

0+70

0

0+80

0

0+90

0

1+00

0

1+100

1+200

1+300

1+400

SHORT NEWOUTER DRAIN

MEDIUM NEWOUTER DRAIN

LONG NEWOUTER DRAIN

NEW OUTER DRAINDISCONNECTED

OLD OUTER DRAINDISCONNECTED

OLD OUTER DRAIN

GG

Inner Drain

Lynx Diversion Channel

CASCADE REACH

UPPER REACH

LOWER REACH

A

A'B

B'

PH#4

MW04-02

MW04-01

MW11-05S/D

MW-G

MW-FMW-E

MW-DMW-C

MW-BMW-A

MW13-17

MW13-13

MW13-12

TD13-05S/D

TD13-04S/D

TD13-03S/D

TD13-02S/D

TD13-01S/DMW13-18S/D

MW13-16S/D

MW13-15S/D

MW13-14S/D

MW13-11S/D

MW13-10S/D

MW13-09S/DMW13-08S/D

MW15-14

MW15-13S/D MW15-12S/D MW15-08S/DMW15-05S/D

MW15-04S/D

MW15-02S/D

MW15-01S/D

MW15-03S/M/D

GG

MW15-11S/D

GG

MW15-10S/D

GG

MW15-09S/D

GG

MW15-06S/D

GG

MW15-07S/M/D

MW16-03 GG

MW16-02MW16-01

P6

P5

P4

P3

P2P1

MC-TP4

300030

00

3500

3500

4000

« 0 200100Metres

Layout of New Outer Drain and Monitoring NetworkMyra Falls Mine Site

SCALE 1:2,500

Legend

Projection: Local Grid System, Mine Datum (m)Contour Interval: 5 m

Report No: 212009/1Drawn: L.R.Nyrstar Myra Falls, BC, Canada

Figure: 1Client:Project No: 212009

Last Update: Dec 23, 2016

Original File: Fig1_NOD_Monitoring_Network.mxd

Project: Contaminant Load Balance

Waste Rock Dump (WRD)

Cyclone Sand

Tailings DamsPaste TailingsCycloned Fine TailingsInner Drain

Myra CreekOld Outer Drain

Long New Outer DrainMedium New Outer DrainShort New Outer Drain

New Outer Drain (Disconnected)

Standpipe PiezometerMonitoring Well!.

> Transverse Section Line

A A'

Surface Water Sampling Station!.

Client:Project: Myra Falls Seepage Control Plan

Figure: 2a

Report No: 212009/1Original File

Project No: 212009

Last Update: 28 July 2016

Longitudinal Water Level SectionNew Outer Drain


Figure: 2b


Project No: 212009



Client:

Project: 2015/2016 Site-Wide SIS Study

Figure: 3a


Project No: 212009

Last Update: 23 June 2016

Transverse Water Level Section at P4 (A-A’)

TD13

-05D

P4

MW

13-1

4S C

or.

Cree

k

Cree

k

3,347.0

3,348.0

3,349.0

3,350.0

3,351.0

3,352.0

3,353.0

3,354.0

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Wat

er Le

vel [

m]

25 = ~200 m

P4 Groundwater Elevation Section Dec 10, 2015

Water Level Elevation Myra Creek Bed Medium New Outer Drain

A A’

Client:


Figure: 3b


Project No: 212009


Transverse Water Level Section at P5 (B-B’)

TD13

-05D

P5

MW

13-1

5SCr

eek

Cree

k

3,347.0

3,348.0

3,349.0

3,350.0

3,351.0

3,352.0

3,353.0

3,354.0

-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

Wat

er Le

vel [

m]

25 = ~200 m

P5 Groundwater Elevation Section December 10, 2015


B B’

Client:


Figure: 4a


Project No: 212009


Transverse Water Level Section at P4 (A-A’)

TD13

-05D

P4

MW

13-1

4S C

or.

Cree

kCr

eek

MW

13-1

6S

3,347.5

3,348.0

3,348.5

3,349.0

3,349.5

3,350.0

3,350.5

3,351.0

3,351.5

3,352.0

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

Wat

er Le

vel [

m]

25 = ~200 m

P4 Groundwater Elevation Section May 10, 2016


A A’

Client:


Figure: 4b


Project No: 212009



TD13

-05D

P5

MW

13-1

5SCr

eek

Cree

k

MW

13-1

8S

3,347.0

3,347.5

3,348.0

3,348.5

3,349.0

3,349.5

3,350.0

3,350.5

3,351.0

3,351.5

3,352.0

-5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

Wat

er Le

vel [

m]

25 = ~200 m

P5 Groundwater Elevation Section May 10, 2016


B B’

Client:


Figure: 5


Project No: 212009



0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

14000

16000

18000

Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Dec-14 Feb-15 Apr-15 Jun-15 Aug-15 Oct-15 Dec-15 Feb-16 Apr-16 Jun-16

Zn (μ

g/L)

MW13-14D MW13-14S MW13-15D MW13-15S MW-C MW-F

Client:


Figure: 6


Project No: 212009



1

10

100

1000

Jul-13 Sep-13 Nov-13 Jan-14 Mar-14 May-14 Jul-14 Sep-14 Dec-14 Feb-15 Apr-15 Jun-15 Aug-15 Oct-15 Dec-15 Feb-16 Apr-16 Jun-16

Zn (μ

g/L)

MW13-17 MW13-18D MW13-18S MW13-16D MW13-16S

Client:Project: Contaminant Load Balance

Figure: 7a


Project No: 212009

Last Update: Nov 2016

Zinc Loads in Myra Creek, 2012 to 2015

9,367

10,240

14,700

16,270

5,964

4,206

9,462

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

Apr-12 May-12 Jun-12 Jul-12 Aug-12 Sep-12 Oct-12 Nov-12

Zinc

Load

[kg/

d]

2012 Myra Creek Zinc Loads

Lower Old TDF

Upper Old TDF

Effluent

Lynx Reach

Myra Creek Background at MC-M14,156 Myra Creek Flow Rate [L/s]

August Effluent T-Zn estimated

4,827

10,850

7,621 3,462

2,367

5,197

3,078

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

Apr-13 May-13 Jun-13 Jul-13 Aug-13 Sep-13 Oct-13

Zinc

Load

[kg/

d]


Lower Old TDF

Upper Old TDF

Efluent

Lynx Reach

Myra Creek Background at MC-M14,156 Myra Creek Flow Rate [L/s]

4,251

9,574

5,472

3,571

1,917 1,633

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

Apr-14 May-14 Jun-14 Jul-14 Aug-14 Sep-14

Zinc

Load

[kg/

d]


Lower Old TDF

Upper Old TDF

Effluent

Lynx Reach

Myra Creek Background at MC-M1

4,156 Myra Creek Flow Rate [L/s]

4,715

7,288

9,5528,098

4,577

2,628

2,003

2,766

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

Jan-15 Feb-15 Mar-15 Apr-15 May-15 Jun-15 Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15

Zinc

Load

[kg/

d]


Lower Old TDF

Upper Old TDF

Effluent

Lynx Reach



4,150

Client:Project: Contaminant Load Balance

Figure: 7b


Project No: 212009


Zinc Loads in Myra Creek, 2016

15,679

10,280 7,049

7,920

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

Apr-16 May-16 Jun-16 Jul-16

Zinc

Load

[kg/

d]


Lower Old TDF

Upper Old TDF

Effluent

Lynx Reach



July Effluent T-Zn estimated

APPENDIX A

NOD Hydraulic Testing Results


Figure: A1


Project No: 212009




Figure: A2


Project No: 212009




Figure: A3


Project No: 212009




Figure: A4


Project No: 212009




Figure: A5


Project No: 212009




Figure: A6


Project No: 212009




Figure: A7


Project No: 212009




Figure: A8


Project No: 212009




Figure: A9


Project No: 212009




Figure: A10


Project No: 212009




Figure: A11


Project No: 212009




Figure: A12


Project No: 212009




Figure: A13


Project No: 212009




Figure: A14


Project No: 212009




Figure: A15


Project No: 212009




Figure: A16


Project No: 212009




Figure: A17


Project No: 212009




Figure: A18


Project No: 212009



performance review of new outer drain, nyrstar myra falls · dear nicole, 1 introduction and terms...

Documents