EPA 910-R-99-Q04
              United States
              Environmental Protection
              Agency    	
Region 10
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle WA 98101
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington
              Office of environmental Assessment
                                              April 1999
              Alaska Placer Mining
              Metals Study -YearTwo

-------
?,EPA
  United States Environmental Protection Agency
  Region 10,1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101 -1128
                            Alaska Placer Mining
                         Metals Study - Year Two
                                           April,  1999
                                            Prepared by
                  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
                        Office of Environmental Assessment
                                              Region 10

-------
Contributors
Project Planning

Cmdi Godsey. Carla Fisher, Jim Corpuz
Office of Water
Quality Assurance Project Plan

Laura Castrilli, Bruce Woods
Office of Environmental Assessment
Field Team

Cindi Godsey, Val Haney. Ann Winther, Martha Barber, Rick Albright, Mark Jen
USEPA

Victor Ross
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Dean Boening, Mark Silverstein. Jesse (Woody) Campbell, Neil Arnick
Lockheed Martin (ESAT)
Laboratory Analysis

USEPA Manchester Environmental Laboratory


Map Compilation

Steve Schumakei'
Lockheed Martin iESAT)

Report Compilation

Joe Guulet, David Frank, Krisien Rydiny, Lorraine Edmond
Office of Environmental Assessment

-------
Table of Contents

Contributors to Study                                                             ii

Abstract                                                                         I

1. Introduction                                                                   I
       A.  Background                                                            1
       B, Goal and Objectives                                                     1
11, Methods                                                                      2
       A.  Study Design                                                           2
             I.  Sample Sites                                                     2
             2.  Measurement Parameters                                          3
       B. Field Work                                                             4
       C. Laboratory Methods                                                     5
III. Results                                                                      5
       A.  Distribution of Mines and Relationship to Regional Geology                  5
       B. Overview of Data                                                       6
             1. Analytical Results                                                 6
             2. Temporal Variability                                               ft
             3. Estimation of Background                                          7
             4. Comparison Upstream and  Downstream of Mines                     7
             5. Summary of Exceedances of Criteria                                 7
             6. Comparison with  1997 Results                                      S
       C. Relationship Between Physical and Chemical Measures                       H
             I.  Settleable Solids. Total Suspended Solids (TSS). and Turbidity         8
             2.  Comparison of Physical Measures and Metal Concentrations           9
IV, Discussion and Conclusions                                                    10
V. Limitations of Study                                                           11
VI. References                                                                   11

Appendices                                                                      92
       A. Quality Assurance Project Plan
       B-  Field Reports
       C.  Description of placer mining districts, irom Nokleberg and others {1996).
       D.  Laboratory Report of Data

-------
List of Figures
       I. Index map of Alaska placer mines and mining districts included in study.        14
       2. Mine layout and sample sites,
             a,  Eldorado Creek.                                                   15
             b.  Ester Creek.                                                      16
             c.  Faith Creek.                                                      17
             d,  Ketchem Creek.                                                   IK
       3. Temporal variability of field parameters and metals.                           19
             a-g.  Eldorado Creek.                                                20-26
             h-n.  Ester Creek.                                                    27-33
             o-u.  Faith Creek,                                                    34-40
             v-ab. Ketchem Creek.                                                 41 -47
       4, Comparison  of physical and chemical parameters.                            48
             a.  Aluminum                                                        49
             b.  Antimony                                                        50
             c.  Arsenic                                                          51
             d.  Cadmium                                                        52
             e.  Calcium                                                          53
             I*.  Chromium                                                        54
             g.  Copper                                                          55
             h.  Nickel                                                            56
             i.  Lead                                                              57
             j.  Magnesium                                                       58
             k.  Mercury                                                         59
             1.  Selenium                                                         60
             in. Silver                                                            6!
             n.  Zinc                                                              62
List of Tables
       1 . Placer mine sites.                                                         64
       2, Source of placer gold deposits.                                             65-67
       3, List ol analytical data                                                     6X-75
       4. Summary statistics of data by mine and sampling location.                     76-X9
       5, Alaska water quality criteria,                                               90
       6. Linear correlation coefficients tor comparison of measurement parameters.      9 1

-------
Abstract

       EPA sampled tour placer mines in Alaska during the summer of 1998. This was the
second phase of a study of the distribution ot metals in surface water at placer mines in surface
water upstream of the mine site, downstream of the mine discharge, and in the effluent.  The first
phase uf the study evaluated one-time measurements collected in  1997 from 31 mines located  in
14 mining districts across Alaska. The second phase of the study, reported in this document.
examines temporal variations from eight rounds of measurements collected  during 1998 from four
placer mines located in three mining districts. During the second phase in 1998, EPA obtained
field measurements of temperature, pH, electrical conductivity, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, and
settleable solids. In addition, EPA analyzed  samples for total suspended solids, total recoverable
metals, dissolved metals, and hardness. The  metals analyses included aluminum, antimony,
arsenic,  cadmium, calcium, chromium, copper, lead, magnesium, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver,
and zinc. The 199H data show typically large variations in total recoverable and dissolved metals
concentrations through the course of the mining season.  Consistent with 1997 results, turbidity
was an effective indicator for some, but not all. total recoverable metals found in surface waters.
In addition to turbidity, total suspended solids measurements showed similar variations with total
recoverable metal content.
I.     Introduction

A,     Background

       The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) undertook a two-year study of metals
in placer mining areas of Alaska in  1997.  This document is a report of data collected during the
second year of the study.  The report of the first year study is titled Alaska Placer Mining Metais
Study 
-------
              dissolved and lulu! recoverable metals              turbidity
              total suspended solids                     settleahle solids
              pH                                              hardness
              temperature                         electrical conductivity

       during summer at all discharging mines and approximately half of the active, but not
       discharging, mines during year I. The parameters of concern  were selected on the basis
       their usefulness in evaluating the distribution of metals in the aquatic environment at placer
       mines.

       Temporal variability of metals concentrations and other parameters in effluent at a few
       representative sites during year 2.

       The "natural background" of the parameters of concern for representative placer mining
       operations in mining districts tn Alaska.

       The parameters of concern immediately upstream of the  mining operations,

       The parameters at" concern downstream from the placer  mining operations,

       The relationship between  metais and total suspended solids, settleable solids nr turbidity in
       the natural background conditions and discharges.
II,     Methods

       Appendix A contains the Quality Assurance Project Plan for thus work, which includes
analytical methods and sampling specifications.

A.     Stud)1 Design

       1.  Sample Sites

       huir placer mining operations were selected and sampled at weekly intervals. Where a
mine was discharging waste water, four samples were taken, one from each of the following:

I) upstream of any obvious disturbance (i.e.. "background"),
2) immediateK upstream ot the discharge.
3) the ettluem,
4i down.sire.am ot the point of mixing (determined visually).  Where the state of Alaska indicated
the physical location oft he edge of the mixing zone, samples were taken at the edge of the mixing
/one.

-------
Where a mine uas not discharging, samples were only collected upstream of any I'i
disturbance (background) and immediately downstream from the site. The objective tor the
selection of" background was intended to be sites unaffected by mining or other construction
disturbance.  Considering the mining history of Alaska, it is unrealistic that all of the background
sites chosen for this study actually represent a natural background completely unaffected by
mining activities.  Although an attempt was made to pick background sues upstream from obvious
disturbance, the background data may not be representative of true  natural conditions,

       2. Measurement Parameters

       Physical measures consisted of field measurements of temperature, electrical conductiviiy,
turbidity and  seitleable solids, and laboratory analyses of total suspended solids (TSS).  Chemical
measures consisted of field measurements of pH and laboratory analyses of total recoverable and
dissolved metals, and hardness.

       Three of the physical measures including settieable solids, turbidity, and TSS, should be
related to suspended paniculate material in the water column. Settieable solids are  determined by
measuring the depth of sediment that settles from a sample of the water column over a one-hour
period.  Settieable  solids represent only the coarsest paniculate material in the water column
because substantial fine  participates may remain suspended after an  hour of settling.

       Total suspended  solids (TSS) is determined by a gravimetric measurement of filterable
material and therefore is a direct measure of the amount of particulates greater than the filter size.
0.45 ,-in, in a sample of the water column. The finest-size particulates such as colloidal material
may pass through the 0.45 ,-m filter and not be included in a TSS measurement.

       Turbidity is determined by a measurement of light scattered  by paniculate material in a
sample of the water column.  Light scatter is affected not just by the amount of paniculate
material, but also by the  density, shape, and color of the particulates. Therefore, turbidity can be
considered an indirect rather than direct measure of the amount of particulates. Turbidity is
especially sensitive to finer grained material

       bach of these physical measures is sensitive to somewhat different characteristics of
suspended paniculate material. In practice, rough correlation is usually found between total
suspended solids and turbidity,  Settieable solids, being a measure of only  the coarsest fraction of
water-borne material, may show less correlation with turbidity and TSS when the predominant
part of the suspended material is fine-grained.

       One physical measure, electrical conductivity, should be related to the dissolved  metal
content.  Conductivity is determined by measuring the ability of water to conduct electricity
Since conductance is directh related to the charged ion content of waier and since most of the
dissolved metals in natural surface waters occur as charged ions, electrical conductivity can he
then be related to  the major dissolved metals.

-------
       The chemical measures tor metals were lota] recoverable and dissolved Total recoverable
melals were determined by analysis of unfihered samples, which would represent metals in the
combined dissolved  and suspended paniculate phases. Dissolved meiuls were determined by
analysis of samples passed through a 0.45 ,,ni filter.  Therefore, the  difference in metals
concentrations between the unfiltered and filtered samples should represent mostly metals in the
particulate phase.

       The chemical measure, hardness, was determined by the sum of the magnesium and
calcium content. Hardness was included in the list of parameters because it Is used in calculating
chronic  water quality criteria for some of the  trace metals, cadmium, copper, lead, and nickel.

B, Field Work

       During the summer of 1998, EPA collected 120 samples and duplicates from four mine
sites located near Talkeetna, Central, and Fairbanks, Alaska (Figure 1). Table  1 lists the mines.
their owners and the mine locations.  Locations are based on uncorrected GPS readings except for
Eldorado Creek which was determined by plotting on a map.

       The four mines sampled  in 199H in eastern Alaska were in addition to the 3 1 mines
studied during  1997  in both the Fairbanks and other areas in eastern Alaska, and the McGrath
and Nome areas in western Alaska (Figure I). Criteria for mine selection for both years included:
I)  representative distribution from several mining districts. 2) preference for operating and
discharging mines, and 3) accessibility. Because of the necessity for repeated measurements, all
of  the 1998 sites were within driving or helicopter distance from Fairbanks.  All mines included in
the study were operating, though most were recycling waste water rather than discharging.
Dischargers included nine of 31 mines studied in  1997, and three of the four mines in  1998.

       The 1998 mines included operations on Eldorado Creek near Talkeetna, Ester Creek near
Fairbanks. Faith Creek near Fairbanks, and Ketchem Creek near Central (Figure I). As with
mines studied  in 1997. sample sites at each mine were chosen to determine the effects of the
mining activity on the respective stream (Figures  2a-d). Each of the  mines studied in 1998 had  a
sample site  chosen to be  representative ot background and another of downstream below mining
activities. The three mines with discharges (Eldorado, Faith, and Ketchem Creeks) had additional
sample sites for effluent and upstream of the discharge point for effluent.  The mine on Ketchem
Creek also had an established mixing zone designated by the Alaska Department of Environmental
Conservation.  Consequently, the downstream sampling point at  Ketchem Creek was set to
coincide with the edge of the  mixing  zone. The mine on Faith Creek had a change of in the
operation during the course of the sampling whereby water was redirected among the holding
ponds (Appendix B). Only the mine  operator on  Fster Creek continued to recycle waste water
during the study, and thus had no effluent sample.

       Sample collection occurred between June 23 and September 2   Sampling at the 'lalkeetna
mine began uti June  23 and continued through September 1. Sampling at  the three mines near
Central and Fairbanks bciMn the week ot Julv 13  and continued through the week of August 31.

-------
       The sampling plan was followed with some exceptions. Dissolved oxygen was not
measured at she Talkeeum mine  due to limitations on time available in the field and availubiliis of
Held equipment-  Turbidity was not measured during the first week at Talkeelna due to problems
with calibrating the turbidimeter. Two weeks of sampling were lost at Talkeetna, one due to bad
weather and another due to helicopter repair. Heavy rainfall in the Fairbanks area caused a
washout  of part of the Steese Highway during the first week of sampling. Access to the Faith
Creek mine was impeded on several occasions due to high water but the  sampling crew was able
to return later in each week to conduct sampling.

       Samples were collected using a "clean hands" technique, labeled in the field, and shipped
with a chain of custody form to the Manchester Laboratory using USEPA (1996) procedures.
Details of the sampling  procedure are described in the Quality Assurance Plan. Appendix A.
Appendix B contains the field reports.

C. Laboratory Methods

       Laboratory methods are. described in the Quality Assurance Plan, Appendix A


III. Results

A, Distribution of Mines and Relationship to Regional Geology

       Alaska has been divided into ten mining regions which are  subdivided into 67 mining
districts,  as defined by the U.S. Geological Survey (Cobb, 1973).  Over the two-year period of
this project, mines were sampled in 14 of the mining districts (Figure 1).  primarily within the
Seward Peninsula and Yukon River Regions. Since the report on  1997 data did not consider the
distribution of mines with respect to mining district or to regional geology, the following
discussion includes both sets of mines sampled during 1997 and 199K.

       Summary information relating the placer mining districts to their regional geologic
settings can be found in Cobb (1973) and in  Nokleberg  and  others (1996).  Appendix C  contains
selected district descriptions taken from Nokleberg and others (1996). Table 2 derived from these
references lists the types of potential source  mineralization found  in the districts sampled, as well
as iheir associated mineralogy and host rock type.

       In most cases, the precise source of the placer gold deposited in these districts remains
unknown, but. inferences arc-  often made based on the surrounding geology.  While some of the
summary information applies to the particular drainage containing  the sampled mine, more often
the descriptions are less specific and apply to the entire  district.

       The most common type of source mineralization described is pnlyrnetallic veins and/or
guld-quartz veins related to igneous intrusions, which are included in nearly all the districts.

-------
Massive sulfide deposits are described in the Bonnifield and Circle Districts, and skarn deposits
are described in the Fairbanks and Circle Districts.

B, Overview of Data

       1. Analytical Results

       Table 3 lists the full data set tor analyses of both laboratory and field parameters.  The
results are arranged by mine, sampling round, and type of sample site. Sample types  are denoted
by background, upstream, effluent, downstream,  and mixing zone designations that refer to the
respective locations noted on the mine diagrams (Figure 2). Appendix D contains the laboratory
reports for IWH data. Summary statistics of laboratory and field data are listed in Table 4.
Statistical  functions include the arithmetic  mean,  geometric mean, and maximum and  minimum
values derived from the full data set in Table 3. The summary data are grouped in Table 4 by
measurement parameter and by sample type for each mine, and for the combination of all four
sample types for each mine.

       2. Temporal Variability

       An objective of the 199X study was to determine the temporal variability of metals
concentrations by  repeated sampling through most of a mining season.  Figures 3a through 3ab
show the variation for field parameters and metals during eight rounds of sampling. The. sampling
rounds span the period from June 23 to September 2. Inspection of the temporal plots shows that
metal concentrations at all mines are variable through time, but in general in a non-synoptic
manner except for Round 6.

       Comparison with field observations of site conditions indicates that  periods of higher
precipitation and stream flow generally result in greater variability in concentrations.  At Ester
Creek, for example, maximum variation  in metals concentrations occurred for both background
and downstream samples in Round 6 at a time when very wet conditions had increased the stream
flow and turbidity  (see Figures 3i - turbidity. 3j -  aluminum, 3k-n - other metals). The mine on
Ester Creek was not discharging at the time of the samples, indicating that  increased  turbidity and
u.etals concentrations during that round  resulted from naturally occurring erosion. The results tbi
the other three mines, which were discharging, also show increases in turbidity and several metals
for Round A.  However, additional variability among the mines during the remaining part of the
mining season does not appear ID coincide \\iih changing background conditions.

       Data  tor the Faith Creek mine provide a specific example of the influence of changing sue
operations. The operation of holding ponds at Faith Creek changed between the Round 3 and
Round 4 sampling, as noted in the field work reports (Appendix Bi. Figures 3o-3u for Faith
Creek show increases in  TSS. lurbidity. and all i>tThe trace metals during this period. The
increases coincide  with the redirection ot the mine discharge. This example and most of the other
trends in temporal variability among the  mines studied appear in genera! to be specific lor each
site rather than coincident amonsi sites.

-------
       3, Estimation of Background

       The arithmetic mean concentrations of background measurements for the tour mines are
listed in Table 4. As shown by the summary in Table 4 and by the temporal plots of individual
measurements (Figure 3). the background concentrations represent the lowest values found at
each mine for turbidity and for most, but  not all, metals.  In those few cases where metals in
background are at higher concentrations  than downstream sites, the difference in mean values is
less than a factor of two.  The most conspicuous of the high background values occurred for
aluminum, copper,  mercury, and zinc, with a smaller increase for antimony, lead, and selenium.

       Background concentrations for some trace metals differ by over an order of magnitude
from mine to mine, indicating that  background is quite specific to a particular site. Using
aluminum as an example, three of the mines had mean values for dissolved aluminum in the range
of 1H-60 ug/L whereas, the Ketchem mine had a value of 615 ug/L (Table 4).  Additionally,  in
contrast to the other sites with  circumneutral pH values, the Ketchem site had a relatively low-
mean pH of 6 for the  background site.  For most dissolved metals, the Ketchem mine had the
highest background concentrations. Exceptions occurred  for dissolved arsenic and nickel, for
which highest background values were found at the Ester Creek mine, and for dissolved selenium
found to be highest in at the background site for the  Eldorado Creek  mine (Table 4).

       4. Comparison Lfpstream and Downstream of Mines

       The most common pattern  for mean metals concentrations at  the four mines is an increa.se
from the background  site to the upstream-of-mine site, followed by a further increase to the
downstream site (Table 4). For arithmetic mean values of 12 dissolved trace metals  at  four mines.
representing a combination of 48 mean measurements. 77'??- had higher concentrations at the
downstream site than at either the upstream or the background site (Table 4).  For mean values of
12 total recoverable trace metals, X7r/f had higher concentrations at the downstream site. The
data  show that the relative concentration  of upstream versus downstream sampling sues is specific
to each mine.

       5, Summary of Exceedances of Criteria

       Analyie  concentrations tor  both the total recoverable and dissolved samples were
compared with Alaska water quality criteria for chronic ettects to freshwater aquatic life, with the
exception of arsenic (Table 5 i.  For arsenic Alaska has adopted a freshwater criterion for public
water supplies, which is used in Table 5 as a  benchmark for comparison with measured
concentrations (see Office of the Federal  Register, IWS).

       Flxceedances of criteria are depicted on graphs that show variation with time (Figure 3)
Criteria  on these graphs are shown by doited lines when the criteria are within the plotting range
ot the graph.  Fable 3 also depicts criteria exceedances with outlined  values. For metals that used
hardness for calculating criteria, the hardness value measured at each sample site was used.

-------
       Exceedances were found for the following parameters: arsenic, cadfiuum. chromium.
copper. lead, mercury, silver and zinc. Copper, lead and mercury had the largest number ot
exceeiJanc.es.  In general, most exceedances occurred in the effluent samples, with a decreasing
number of observance* found in downstream, upstream and background  samples, in that order.

       Looking at exceedances by creek. Eldorado Creek had the fewest with only one
exceedance of the mercury criterion in a downstream sample.  In Ester Creek, four background
and one downstream sample exceeded the water quality criteria  for the total recoverable mercury.

       Faith Creek hud exceedances for seven metals.  Most exceedances were observed in the
effluent samples with the exception of lead,  where exceedances were found at all stream sample
locations at some time  during the study.

       Ketchem Creek had exceedances for eight metals and the highest  total number of
exeeedances.  Copper,  lead and mercury criteria were exceeded  at all sampling locations in almost
every sample round.

       6. Comparison with Il>97 Results

       In general, metals concentrations found in I99X measurements are similar to those found
in  1997.  During both years, mean concentrations varied greatly  between  individual mines.
However when values  are averaged together tor all mines for each year, the mean yearly values
show more similarity.   For example, comparison of mean values  for each  type of sample site
(background, upstream, effluent, downstream) in Table 4 of this report with mean values listed in
[he report of 1997 data (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1998, Table 4) shows that
averaged data from both years  are within an order of magnitude  regardless of'sample site.

C. Relationship between Physical and Chemical Measures.

       The discussion  below follows the approach taken for  1997  data (U.S.  Environmental
Protection Agency,  IWKK  A comparison of the physical measures is made with the two types of
metals samples,  tillered and unfiltered. in order to examine the relationships between physical and
chemical measures.  As no led under study design, the unfiltered  metals samples represent metals
in  the combined dissolved and paniculate phases.  The filtered samples represent metals largely in
the dissolved phase.

       1,  Settleable Solids. Total Suspended Solids  (TSS). and Turbidity

       Three ol the mines had  delectable values of settleable solids, hut mostly only in trace
amounts (see values noted by ""I"" in Table K Ol those with detectable settleable solids, only one
mine (Faith Creek) hud at least one value greater than 0.2 ml/L.  which is a value used as  an
eltlucnt  limitation criterion. Inspection of Table 3 shows limited correlation between settleable
suhd.s. turbtdiu and TSS  wherein the site with the highesi value  tor settleable solids t 1.2  ml/L in
an effluent sample at Faith Creek i al>o had one m (he highest turbidity  values i MhO \'I I' i  and

-------
TSS (N76 ing/Li.  The remaining data show poor correlation between settleable solids and either
turbidity or TSS.  Many samples with no detectable seuleable solids still had turbidity values well
over 10 NTU to as hi ah as 2000 NTLr. and TSS to over 900 mg/L.

       Turbidity measurements are well correlated with TSS daia, with a correlation value of
r = 0.95 tor  106 comparisons (Table 6). Turbidity measurements were made in the field at all
sites, whereas TSS was measured in lab samples.  Both parameters appear to be useful measures
of participates in the water column for the I99H data.  Because of their sensitivity, both turbidity
and TSS rather than seitleable solids are used in the discussion below as the paniculate measures
with which to compare metals concentration.

2, Comparison of Physical Measures with Metal Concentrations

       Concentrations of total recoverable metals and dissolved metals were compared with
turbidity and other physical measures using the same method as used for  1997 data (U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, I99X). Figures 4a~4n show the comparison of metal
concentration of both total recoverable and dissolved fractions with other chemical and physical
measures including turbidity. Linear correlation coefficients, r values, were calculated for some of
the comparisons and are listed in Table 6.  The correlation coefficients indicate that for the
combination of all mines, moderate to strong correlation (r values  between 0.92 and 0.97) occurs
between  most total recoverable trace metals and turbidity.  These trace metals include aluminum,
arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, and zinc.  Somewhat lower correlation (r =
0.87) occurs for mercury.  Inspection of the data indicates that similar correlations also exist
between  the  same total recoverable trace metals and TSS.  In contrast, no correlation occurs
between dissolved trace metals and either turbidity or TSS (all r values less than 0.5 in Table 6),
The only physical measure that shows correlation with dissolved metals concentration is electrical
conductivity, and then only for the major metals, calcium and magnesium.

       The degree of correlation between the total recoverable trace metals and turbidity in the
199K daia is  influenced to a large extent by results from the two mines with the highest values,  on
Ketchem Creek and Faith ("reek. For copper for example, the correlation (r) with turbidity for the
complete data .set is 0.95 (Table 6).  Consideration of each of the four mines individually yields r
values of 0.99 (Ketchem), 0.90 (Faith). 0.7S (Eldorado), and 0,52 (Ester).  In another example tor
lead, overall  correlation with turbidity is 0.97 whereas r values for individual mines are 0.99
(Ketchem). O.K8 (Faith). 0.72 (Eldorado), and 0.34 (Ester). The characteristics controlling metal
partitioning at Faith Creek and especially Ketchem Creek, therefore, tend to dominate the amount
of correlation found in the complete data set. Conversely, poorer  correlation values result when
the evaluation is restricted to just those mines at Eldorado Creek and Ester Creek which had
lower concentrations more in the range of aquatic criteria.

       Inspection of the temporal plots thgure 3) shows that the  variation of  total recoverable
trace metals  at individual sites through time are  also associated with changes in turbidity as well as
total dissolved solids.  An example using the data discussed previously for Eldorado Creek shows
the highest downstream measurement of total recoverable aluminum, chromium, copper,  nickel.

-------
and zinc occurring in Round 6 when turbidity was also at its highest in the downstream .sample.
Simitar temporal patterns of increasing total recoverable concentrations and increasing turbidit.)
are evident at the oilier sites, especially tor this same group of trace metals,

       In contrast, no similarity in temporal patterns of dissolved trace metals and turbidity
occurs for these sites. The physical measure expected to be influenced by dissolved metals is
electrical conductivity as noted above under Study Design (Section II.A.2).  The dissolved major
metals, calcium and magnesium (and consequently hardness which is derived from calcium and
magnesium), show a strong coincidence of temporal trends for all sites. For trace metals.
however, very limited similarity in trend through time occurs with electrical conductivity.  An
isolated example can he shown for dissolved nickel and electrical conductivity  at the Eldorado
Creek mine (Figures 3a and 3f) whereby an increasing trend in dissolved nickel concentration is
evident through time coincidental with increasing conductivity.  However, most dissolved  trace
metals do not track well with conductivity or any of the other physical measures.
IV. Discussion and Conclusions

       The 1998 data indicate that all four mine sites had surface water that exceeded chronic
aquatic criteria for at least one metal.  The highest concentrations, greatest number of elevated
metals, and most numerous exceedances occurred at two of the four mines.  These e.xceedances
generally occurred at higher concentrations in downstream relative to upstream sample sites,
indicating an influence from mining operations. The remaining two mines only had exceedances
for one metal, mercury.  One of these mines had the highest mercury value in the downstream
sample even though the effluent did not exceed criteria.  The other mine had its highest values for
mercury at the background sample site as well as downstream, suggesting the occurrence of an
unrecognized source of mercury further upstream.

       Comparison  of the results from IM°S mines with those studied in  1997 can be made in
general terms, though with the recognition that the two sets oJ sites are not the same.  The
individual ore characteristics and depositional environment tit the placer deposits would be
expected to be important factors controlling relationships between the metals content in either the
paniculate or dissolved phase and the physical measures.  Although the second year's study sites
were different from  the first,  two characteristics show broad commonality.  First, except for the
mine sm Eldorado Creek, the selection of mines for 1WX came from three of the same mining
districts examined in IU97 (Section 111.A). Second, the mean values tor metal concentrations
derived from each year's data set are  within an order of magnitude (see Section 11I.B.6) and the
overall spread of data cover a similar broad range for each  year.

       The data sliou that for several metals, the physical  measure of turbidit)' wa.s a good
quaiiiative indicator of total recoverable concentration for the IWS samples.  The best
correlations between the paniculate measures and the total recoverable metal concentration
occurred for aluminum, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, and zinc. The
correlation fur total  recoverable mercurv was not as strum1   The  IWX dala are consistent with

-------
 1997 data in that good correlation was also found in the first year's study lor aluminum, copper.
 lead, nickel, and zinc (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 199K. p. 12). Too few data above
 detection limits were available for 1997 to draw conclusions for cadmium and mercury- Arsenic
 showed little correlation with turbidity or any other physical measure in 1997 data; whereas for
 I99S data, arsenic shows good correlation with turbidity (r = 0.94).

       These results are consistent with the occurrence  of most trace metals in the placer streams
 as primarily adsorbed or coprecipitated  phases in paniculate material.  The major metals, calcium
 and magnesium, show poor correlation  with turbidity but high correlation with electrical
 conductivity, indicating occurrence primarily in the dissolved phase. The metalloid, arsenic.
 occurs in both  the dissolved and paniculate phases depending on site and which year's data are
 considered.  The other metalloids, antimony and selenium, appear to be primarily in the dissolved
 phase though fewer data above detection limits are available for these species to .support the
 evaluation.
V.  Limitations of Study

       The results of this study would not be expected to necessarily be representative of other
placer mining areas not included in the study. For example, a placer mine operating in alluvial
sediments that are much more mineralized than those sites included in the study, or that have ore
minerals of much higher solubility, would be expected to have higher metals concentrations
relative to turbidity than found here. The results for background conditions found in this study do
not necessarily represent a natural background because of the potential occurrence of mining or
other activities that were not recognized when selecting background sites.
VI. References

Alaska Administrative Code, I99K, 18 AAC 70.020, Toxics and other deleterious organic and
       inorganic substances. March I. 1998.

Cobb. Edward H.. 1973. Placer deposits of Alaska.  U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 1374, 20
-------
L2

-------
List of Figures
       1. Index map of Alaska placer mines and mining districts included in study,        14
       2. Mine layout and sample sites.
             a.  Eldorado Creek.                                                  15
             b.  Ester Creek.                                                     16
             c.  Faith Creek.                                                      17
             d,  Ketehem Creek.                                                  IK
       3. Temporal variability of Held parameters and metals.                           19
             a-w.  Eldorado Creek,                                               20-26
             h-n.  Ester Creek.                                                   27-33
             o-u.  Faith Creek.                                                   34-40
             v-ab. Ketehem Creek.                                                41-47
       4, Comparison of physical and chemical parameters.                            4H
             a.  Aluminum                                                        49
             b.  Antimony                                                        50
             c.  Arsenic                                                          5 I
             d.  Cadmium                                                        52
             e.  Calcium                                                         53
             f. Chromium                                                        54
             g.  Copper                                                          55
             h.  Nickel                                                           5ft
             i. Lead                                                             57
             j. Magnesium                                                       5K
             k.  Mercury                                                         59
             1. Selenium                                                         60
                Silver                                                           AI
                Zinc                                                             62

-------

-------
                • City
                '• 1997 Sample Sits
                A 1998 Sample Site (labeled by name)
                s Mining District ID
                 Mining District Boundary
                0   50  100  150  200  250 Miles
                        ' ^  V f*
1997-98 Sample  Sites'  *
 Alaska Placer Mines
         Figure 1
•Juneati,

-------

-------
              Seepage
                                                     Background
                                                     Sample Point
                                                    Eldorado Creek
                                                      Upstream
                                                     Sample Point
                                                                 N
igure 2u. Eldorado Creek Site Ma

-------
                                                                      Background
                                                                     .sampling point
      Downstream
     sampling point
               l-airnanks
             apprux 4 miles
Fiure 2h.  Ester Creek Site Mii

-------
                Settling j
           Settling pond runoff
           Mountains of
           Tailing*/ \vastt- rock
                      Effluent
                      sample point
                    Downstream
                    sample point
                Effluent
                Sample Point^
                upstream
                Sample I'oint
                                                              Background
                                                              Sample Point
H»|H'
     Downstream
     Sample Point
                                                                           Mining Operations
                                                                                   4 onward
                                                                                    \
Figure 2c.  Faith Creek Site Map

-------
                                                                           Background
                                                                           Sample Point
            -N
    Old Stees« Hwy
    TciCirdt, AK
                            Upstream
                           Sample Point
                                                Pooled Effluent
                                                Sample Locale
                       Downstream
                       Sample Point
                                      Ketelwm Cr. Rd.
                                                                    Holdem Creek
Figure 2d.  Ketchem Creek Site Map

-------
Figure 3a - 3 ab. Temporal variability of field parameters and metals. The following time trace
graphs are arranged in order by creek and parameter with ? pages for each creek:

       a-g.  Eldorado Creek.
       h-n.  Ester Creek.
       o-u.  Faith Creek.
       v-ab. Ketchem Creek.

       Chronic aquatic criteria are shown as horizontal dotted lines on those graphs where the
       criteria occur within the field of the diagram.

-------
                 Time Trace for River Conditions, Eldorado Creek
        246
        Hniind Samnlfi IVOR = Tnfal
                                           o
                                           o
                                           C\J

                                           o
                                           CO

                                           o
                                           o-
                                           o
                                           03
                                                           B
 2         4        Q         8
Round Samnie Tvne = Dissolved
o-
                      ^
                 Round
           4         6
           Round
      Figure 3a. Temporal variation of field parameters and metals. Hardness, TSS, and pH.
                                        20

-------
                   Time Trace lor River Conditions, Eldorado Creek
 o
 o
 CO
 o
 if)
00
I3O
c
o
 LO
 O
 o
                     ound
                             6
 o
 CM
 IO.
 T


&
                                              if)'
                4   r, 5  ,   6
                    Round
                                                                              tr
E
0)
 LO
                   4
                   Round
  Figure 3b, Temporal variation of field parameters and metals. Conductivity, turbidity, and temperature,
                                            21

-------
                     Eldorado Creek - Time Trace of Concentration
5-
                  -id bampN? type - To^a!
                         -a	B	8	a
                                                JfS

                                                I
                                                e
                                                a
                                                o
                                                E
                                                   B—
                                                              Round, Sample Jype ~
                                                              Round, Sample type =
                                                              --a	a	&	g	QC;	B
                                                              Round, Sampfs Sype = Di
                                                                              -r~
    Figure 3c. Temporal variation of field parameters and metals.  Aluminum, antimony, and arsenic


                                               22

-------
                   Eldorado Creek - Time Trace of Concentration
                     -—B
            5Round,4^
              :>un
-------
                 Eldorado Creek - Time Trace of Concentration
                    type <
          "
           Round, Saniffle fype -
                                                           Hound, Sample type = Disso^ed
                                                           Round Sampis type ^ Dissolved
           Bound, sample type = Total
                                                               , Sample type = Dissolved
Figure 3e.  Temporal variation of field parameters and metals.  Copper, lead, and magnesium.




                                           24

-------
               Eldorado Creek - Time Trace of   Concentration


                                           sr
,3o
^r
, jo
c"
^
•3
4D-4
.a






B- 	 • — O 	 B 	 B 	 D 	 B 	 B 	 -B
                 ie fype ~
              4     5
            ill. Sample type - Total
                          6     7     S~
"fr
—
'^rs


^^
u
"®
u
C5

>J
/
/
/
/
f. t- ^«a— — e— •* ^^&*

	
                                                           d, Sample lype =
F?Oijfid( Sample type^
Figure 3f,  Temporal variation of field parameters and metals. Mercury, nickel, and selenium,



                                         25

-------
        Eldorado Creek - Time Trace of Concentration

7
•"R
-i
~-


?,',

r
*t



° * * " ~^ " 8 B





s 'i ': 4 , S , fi ? 6
LjiOi.iriO b^mpie type ~ io1:is



,Ex_^
^^*^X^-^*il_ "XS

i ; i 4 s _ 6 ? a
Rjisrci ^riftiGift Ivoe s To'ai
o
.-G
s
*£•
3
fe
!JS
O

CM
O
In
g=,
c
Ol

""" e °" "^ B & "" fl





2 J,^^ 5 _ , 6 ? A
Round, Sample iype ^ Oi^so»y»o
s,
/ X
f n
' N
/\


1 2 S _ 4 S . 6 ? 8
Figure 3^. Temporal variation of field parameters and metals.  Silver and zinc.




                               26

-------
                    Time Trace for River Conditions, Ester Creek
o
CO-
or
co
•oo

a'
Ho
  oo"

  o
  <£>'
   B.
        B
             B
                            B
        246
         Hound. 5amnle Tvne = Total
                                       B
  o
  CO-
CD*"
CO
T3O-
feT_


To
  oo
                                                B
B
                             "B
         2          4         Q         8
        Round. SamDle Tvne = Dissolved
irv
CM'
O
CM'
o-
                  4
                  Round
  O)-
                                             oo-
                                             to-
                                             LO
                                                                                    B
                    i         6
                    Round
       Figure 3h. Temporal variation of field parameters and metals,  Hardness. TSS, and pH.



                                           2?

-------
                     Time Trace for River Conditions, Ester Creek
CL

E
03



 If)
                     ound
         B
                                              o
                                              CO
                                              LO
                                              CM
                                             1"
                                             1—0,
ounri
                     ound
  Figure 3i.  Temporal variation of field parameters and metals. Conductivity, temperature, and turbidity.



                                            28

-------
                     Ester Creek - Time Trace of Concentration
                                                p
                                                c
                                                B
                                                         •B	
                                                               Fiound, Sampie type - Qis
            Round, Sample !ype - Tata
                                                               Round, Ssrtipte lype r Di&soived
     •B	 &•-•
                •"B	ft	B""  --&•••	B
            Ruund, Sa,rnp!e !ype ^ Total
                                                Sa
                                                 ~
_j.          _j           g


      Royndp Sample type ^ Lhssolved
Figure 3j,  Temporal variation of field parameters and metals.  Aluminum, antimony, and arsenic.

-------
                        Ester Creek - Time Trace of Concentration
1
                            ^ Tytai
   "T	~~™  &~~~~—   g"l^~~~™5"
                Round, bampig )ype = Tola
                                                  »=!
                                                  r

                                                  B
                                                  o
                                                                Tound, Sample type"^ Dissolved
                                                                                 "-B""
                                                                Hound, Sample type = Dissolved
                                                                    , Sample tvp© -•
    Figure 3k, Temporal variation of field parameters and metak. Cadmium, calcium, and chromium,


                                                30

-------
                        Ester Creek - Time Trace of   Concentration
e?
                         ; type = ^olt
                          .6-..
               "Round, bample lype = ToSal
                Round, Sample !ype = Total
                                                   i
                                                      B,
                                                                 Hound, Sample typs*4 i
                                                           -B	B	O	B	B	—&—	B
                                                                 Hound, SampEe type = Dissolved
, Sample typ'e =
                                                                                          7      B
      Figure 31. Temporal variation of field parameters and metals. Copper, lead, and magnesium,




                                                 31

-------
                   Ester Creek - Time Trace of   Concentration
              io. Ssn-.pffe type - Total"
                          .. 6-.
           Round, Sample lypo ^. Tots!
                                 •-B.
                                              If
                                              f'
                                              3"
                                                             Tound, Sample type ~ Dissolved
                                                             Round, Sample ?ype^ Dissolved
                                                            -B	B-
                                                                 , Sample typ^ =
Figure 3m.  Temporal variation of field parameters and metals. Mercury, nickel, and selenium.

                                            32

-------
                         Ester Creek - Time Trace of Concentration
*
cp
   &	B-
                    -	B	B-
               ~5	3—!—£
                R&und, os
                      ample type - Total
   g	B	B	g	g_
•r^	TT	g™	T' ^	

 " Round, Sample lype = Tolal
                                      -B	-B

                                                      6	&-
                                                   »«•
                                                                       -B	B	--B	0—	—B
                                                   <^   j ^ •* ,  .   S _.  .6,
                                                   Hound, Sample type = Dissolved
                                                                 -B	e-
                                                                      _  ^
                                                                      Round,
                                                                          —f-
             Figure 3n, Temporal variation of field parameters and metals. Silver and zinc.



                                                 33

-------
                     Time Trace for River Conditions, Faith Creek
 o
 OQ
 O
 CO'
w
w
O5
co
I
 o
 CM
 o
 o
 co
 o
 o
 C£>
73
—O
                              E----E
         2
          H
                   48
           ounri Samnle Tvne ~ Total
                   4
                   Round
                                              o
                                              GO'
                                              O
                                              CO"
w
w
                                             CO
                                             "'
                                             TO
                                             X
                                              o
                                              OJ
                                              o-
                                              O3-
                                              QO
                                              CO-
                                                                            — E
         2         4         Q         8
        Round. Samnie Tvne - Dissolved
                                                    '*•&---&
                - - -&'i
                                                                4
                                                                R
                     ound
         Figure 3o, Temporal variation of field parameters and metals. Hardness, TSS, and pH,


                                            34

-------
                     Time Trace for River Conditions,  Faith Creek
 o
 o-
 CM

o
3

?0
§0

  "
 o
 ID
         E- - - -c
 to
                    4          6
                    Round
            ,-E-
         2          4          6         8
                    Round
 o
 o
 o

 o
 CD-
 CD


tg
I— O-
                                              o
                                              o-
                                              CM
                                              o-
                                 - -E
              Q    D	D    P -"fr
                     ound
  Figure 3p. Temporal variation of field parameters and metals.  Conductivity, temperature, and turbidity



                                            35

-------
                     Faith Creek - Time Trace of Concentration
                 , barnpie Sype - Total
f"
':Ai.'
c*3
&
E
c5*>^
<
- - "*^
_Jlr' v
-• %
^ %
^ *" ^
/ ^
B •• • --B 	 H 	 t+ 	 b 	 8 	 -"B 	 B
            Hound, Sample type -• Total
            Round, sample type - Tola!
                                                fa.
                                                   E	
                                                                                 .-&--..
                                                                                       '••6.
                                                               nound, Sample lype "^
                                                2*
                                                •S3

                                                E
                                                               Round, Sampte lype =
                                                               Round, Sample type ^ Dissolvect
Figure 3q, Temporal variation of field parameters and metals.  Aluminum, antimony, and arsenic.



                                              36

-------
                      Faith Creek - Time Trace of Concentration
&^=^,fr - - - $	0	«	u-

0	B-
            ""F;;ourid, Sample type
             ^ounrt, sample type ~ Tsla!
                  _g	e—	g-	_e-
             " Round, Sample lype = Toial
                                                 JO

                                                 f
                                                 e*.
                                                 ^^

                                                 4

                                                 *•'
                                                    B	a-
                                                                     -a	-a	B	B-
                                                    T	r
Tourid, SamrJe lype = Dissolved
                                                 E".


                                                 ^?,
                                                 C-Xs
Kound, Sampis typo ^- Dis&oiwd
                                                    a	B-
                                                    T	r
                                                                noundj Sampifi* typ^ = i
                                                                                  -a	e	B
Figure 3r. Temporal variation of field parameters and metals.  Cadmium, calcium, and chromium,



                                               37

-------
                        Faith Creek - Time Trace of   Concentration
3*4
                          -£»•
         E- ---
                                     " -e
                          -o—-
                    —f
                Round, Sample type ~ Total
                                                  SH
   «X-
t
                                                                 Tound, Sample typ^ °~
                                                                 -&	0	0^	-e-
                                                      1      2
                                                                 ^456
                                                                 HTouHEi, Sample (ype -•% DsssoiyiiO
                                                               •- •&,
                                                                  B-
                                                                 Tound, Sampie typa =
      Figure 3s.  Temporal variation of Meld parameters and metals. Copper, lead, and magnesium.



                                                 38

-------
                 Faith Creek - Time Trace of Concentration
jfi



£2%,
M
:>


^
....




.«"

O

C
E
fe

r/i
0

<* v F^.




f
/




2 3R™«Mf,|anlpiS«^
r s


/
_-€--- - ^

Round, barnpie Eype






Round, bampie lyp'8


- -a



v v




	 T 	 s 	 t " • 's
= Toiai


_
~-B.^^


J 	 ~a'g 	 > 	 J5m






T , 6 t 8
i Total
*

-^>


o
£r
3^

2
o

a'

H|
se

O

f
tp-
o
fe

*
3}












1 2 r$^c-^, Snife
Hound, Samp!© type ™ Dissolved






Round, Sample iypa'= Dissolved






i—j j_ __^_^^4 ^_j g^ _
HourKi, samptg lyp^ — Uis^iOlvso







"



} ^





— -flh-— — 	 0
7 8






T^ ff
Figure 3i. Temporal variation of field parameters and metals.  Mercury, nickel, and selenium.




                                     39

-------
          Faith Creek - Time Trace of Concentration
/
f \
•' \
^ '" ' \

i S- 3 r A 5 _ . 5 7 §
T- jt J ^jrtp » *>p- - T..!dl
,'-
/
/ ^
V


e
^


»
i
i
I
o



Hound, Sample !yp« ^ Dissolved




Figure 3u^ Temporal variation of field parameters and metals. Silver and zinc.




                               40

-------
                   Time Trace for River Conditions, Ketchem Creek
         246
          Hound Samole Tvoe - Total
                                            o
                                            CO
                                           0>
                                           c
                                           "OO
                                           ra"*
                                           r

                                            o
                                            cy
     ._-&-_.,--.£---&
        2468
      Round, Samnle Tvne = Dissolved
 o

 o
 o
 o
 CO

 o
 o
•J)
—o
 o-
 o
 o
 CM
 O
                   4         6
                   Round
o>
                 4
                 Round
        Figure 3v. Temporal variation of field parameters and metals. Hardness, TSS, and pH.
                                          4!

-------
 o
 C\J-
 o
 CM
 m.
E
 to-
                   Time Trace for River Conditions, Ketchem Creek
       •-E
                   4
                   Round
                   4

                   Round
o
o
o
eu

o
o

                                             o
                                             o-
                   ound
 Figure 3w.  Temporal variation of field parameters and meials.  Conductivity, temperature, and turhkliiy.



                                           42

-------
                               Ketchem Creek - Time Trace of Concentration
        eK

        ER
                     . - -e-
;f
?

5
&.
                        Hound.
                                  lrpu - Tuf.il
                                  dfc
                        Round, Sa*nple type = Total
                   _ - - t	6.
                        Round, Sarnplt* t
                                                            a
                                                            i
                                                            "JUT
                                                           r
                                                                           Round, Saropto lyps » Dissolved
                                                                          zfiz
                                                                           Roucid. Sample type = Dissolve
                                                                                 4           g

                                                                           Round, Sarrpte lype ^ Dissolved
:igure 3x, Temporal vanalion of field parameters and metals.  Aluminum, antimony, and arsenic.




                                                          43

-------
                  Ketchem Creek - Time Trace of Concentration
     ?     3_    .4     5  T -  ,6
            Hound Cample iype = Total
            Round. Sample !ype - Total
                                            3='
                                                              d, Sample
                                                           Round, Sarnpie type =.
                                                     -a	a-
                                                1      2
                                                           Round,. Sample type "i i
Figure 3y. Temporal variation of field parameters and metals. Cadmium, calcium, and chromium.



                                           44

-------
                 Ketchem Creek - Time Trace of  Concentration
    p..--
           ._--fi.
           Rourtfl S*imp(e iyp« ^ Tolai
                                             f
                                                           Ro
                                                             und, Sampie type
                                             |J

                                             8
                                             S-]
                                                           Round, Sarnpfe lype » Dissolved
           Round, Sample type * Tola!
                                                           Hound. Sample type = Dissolved
Figure 3z.  Temporal variation of Held parameters and metals.  Copper, lead, and magnesium.

                                           45

-------
                  Ketchem Creek - Time Trace of  Concentration
t5      I,
               hd, Simple Ivp* js Tola!
                -•€,
                     i lypfe ^ Total
           •e- •
           -a—
• *- .

-B~
                            -e	=:-B-
                 Sa
                   mple ty)>« a Tolas
                                                             Round,
                                                                 , Sample type
                                                  B	a	a-——e	&	a	B	a
                                 1     5     3  rf"r"»	,	,—5T~~~T
                                             Royndv Sample lyp^ * OsssvOlvea
  Figure 3aa. Temporal variation of Field parameters and metals,  Mercury, nickel, and selenium.


                                             46

-------
                     Ketchem Creek - Time Trace of Concentration
E:
JT
               Ftoytul Sample *yp3e c Totaf
                  .,6,
                                                l
                                                                   -a	B-
amp!« type « Dis&otvea
                                                                 Round,
                                                                                        ....e
                                                                                    7     8
           Figure 3ab.  Temporal variation of field parameters and metals, Silver and zinc,


                                              47

-------
Figure 4a - 4n.  Comparison of physical and chemical parameters. The following correlation
graphs are arranged by metal. Values for tola! recoverable metals are labeled T: values for
dissolved metals are labeled D. Axes are logarithmic.
                                           48

-------
                                 Giw**i 
-------





>r T T
jj|b 1[|p j '__,
j- 3 ^ D
IT OUBO!' D 0I3T GmBHDEK [BIT WE 11 FimJlMMQS^^MD DCI
CM
O
If'
Bo
3=,
er-
as"
o
o
1O





T ?T T
§fc s ""^ ,n% ,1 n O) D
f *
HUE' IMIDJJ DUD nnnBtm •[!••£ IDD D cB ffi
Bin
S,,,
6.

Co
             12
                    1 4     1,(i     1 8     2.0
                     Haidfiess  iog 10
                                                2.2
is          0°°°

  • OH)  UHID    D I
                  J   fuibtditj  log 10
                                I  1
    D III  IDEM D OP  UBimUHL)  IB ffli  D
                                                am
      '14      16    ,, 1.8 ,  ,  2-0,„
                     Uonduclivity fog 10
                                  0.5       1.0    ...  . O   .   .20
                                                  lol Slis - log 10
                                                              Ii) Q!    (HI) UK
                                                                             D) C0B
                                                                                    H9
                                                                   6,0
                                                                             6,5
                                                        , ,
                                                       pH
                                                                                        7 0
                                                                                              ' ID iMIHMl'' IWIDIID
                                                                                                  7,5
                                                                                                            8.0
                          4h. Comparison of physical and chemical parameters.  Antimony,




                                                        50

-------
-#4
                               fr T
                   It?
          ODD
                                   jfetrtJ
                  1 4.  .  1 6    18    20    2.2
                   Hrjroness - *oq 10
     0     Bi
                                         T Tflf



                              ?T  1^TTTTT


                             •J.  ^9    DD%
                   Turbidity • log 1C
                                     T   aO!
                            I
                  CcmdudivMy - Kg 10
                            T  T
        TT
                                 T  TT T
S
                                                                    OPf)     I
                                                                     ODD   ODD
0.5      1.0   , ..US   ....20      25     "30
             Tot S'ys • log to
                                                                                              80
               Figure 4c.  Comparison of physical and chemical parameters.  Arsenic,



                                                 51

-------

nnnmiifc  in:   j; tntmnl^Bn
    14    1.6 .  .1.8    2.0    2.J
      Har
        .  .   ..
    ardness - tog 111
                       T
                          T
                      'TTy'T



                      5^T   i-
                        o
   5   , .  .,1  .  l Sijs,
                                                                 .
                                                               uj 10
                                          6.0       6,5     U7.0      7.5       8.0
                                                          pH
Figure 4d.  Comparison of physical and chemical parameters.  Cadmium,



                                   52

-------
        12    14,16 ,  -1.8     20
               Hardness  loq 10
                Tufbjdity log
.
fto
                          10
    [01 ffl


•  1  I!8
                                                                      iO
                                                                     §8
                                                    05      10
                                              "ft




                                              ?
                                              5


                                              33
                                                                 To!
                T3~~ "To      T?T
                bus  log ID
                                                                                          30
   fi.O       65      .,70       7.5
                  pH
                                                                                         8.0
           Figure 4e, Comparison of physical and chemical parameters,  Calcium.



                                             53

-------
                     ss - log 1
                 Turbtdily- log 10
                                                                                     a.o
E !
fir
                   rt  f
 oL
            Figure 4f.  Comparison of physical and chemical parameters. Chromium.
                                            54

-------
                            T it T
$'
• l°9 n
                                   D0D
                  Turbidrty - log 10
                                       Oi
      14      ' 6
                                                                                 I  T
                                                                           I    »
                                                          T
                                                          D

                                                          T  'TT1
                                                             3D

                                                         5 DO
                                                                      D D
                                                     05      10
                                                   o  S
                                                                 Tol.'siis,  • log lB'°
                                                                                          30
                                           T


                                           D 0
                                                                                       i» ft)
                                        65    pH7.0      75
                                                                                         80
             Figure 4a. Comparison of physical and chemical parameters  Copper.


                                              55

-------
                                 fT

    T
                         .T tTf
                              TirVftD-jV T


                       CD    OTDUftUnHKOO
      10     12
              t 4.  ,  1.6 ,   JS     20
                Hardness - log 10
                                                            0-5
                                                                                              TT
                                                                           TT
                                                                                 D
                                                                               DD    D
                                                                    ! 0    _ ,15   ,   ,20      2,5      30
                                                                          Tot. Sus. - log 10
                   iidlty -
Turbidity- tog 10
                                                         T T





                                                         D
                                                           n
                                                           u
                                                              80
                                                                         f"?
                                                                                  T  T  T
                                                                        6.5      U7.0       7,S        80
                                                                               pH
t>
                 T_
    T  '




 T fTTT 1

'D §9)0
                     TH-W~'  s" Tcrfi-lynrr, '  TT

                              %     !•?..*- _
                           D  OD  D KMOnmCl
       1'4     16   C»Md,vily-SflO   22      2-4
                 Figure 41i.  Comparison of physical and chemical parameters.  Lead.



                                                    5ft

-------
y
                                  20    22
                                         Iff
                  1 urtiidtty • log 10  ''
                        * if f8
                        i»  *
                                                                                      D  (fl |)
                                                              10   To.Vk..|oB.6-0
                 Conductivity fog 10
60      6.S      U70       75
               pH
                                                                                          80
            Figure 4i.  Comparison of physical and chemical parameters. Magnesium.



                                               57

-------
_P>

"ar
                 fr
                 g oP
            raro
                 1.4.  j  16.  .18
                  Hairiness • log !Q
                      20
      Turbidity - log 10
            T TT





            f
                           _
                         iaiup OP
1'6  Conductivity  Eg 10
                                                  I
                                                  ii
                                                                              rr
                                                        D
                                                                        ?
                                                                                1
  T      "" fj  f ""               0


mummimmaDDso   Dm  o DO °  cP S*
                                     S
                                                     0 D
                                            60
                                                             -(0018°
                                                       T

                                                       TT T
                                                                   T  T
                                                                         pH
                                                              7.0
                                                                               8,0
 Figure 4j.  Comparison of physical and chemical parameters.  Mercury.



                                   58

-------
                          ,'
                            '*'
9'=J


                  Turbidity  log 10   **
                                                 .
                                                --o
                                                0
                                                                   r,  DD    -

                                                                   U
                                                             10    T  tS   .  2 0
                                                                  Tot sus  tog It)
                                                ,


                                                f5'
     ........ IT ....................... f
                    .
                 Conductivity  loo 10
                                       2,4

                                                        6.0       6,
#
               Figure 4k, Comparison of physical and chemical parameters.  Nickel.



                                              59

-------

a 	
Ifi! —
P4 ]
_Tg
DT
OMJ
•|5 DT TD
g~t CD T
g3 T D BID D
|g TT 0 OTOTJD
S T T P DT
O
o

OT QODOT 0 o o OX^^^^^^^Hu IBVT T pi IJIUKJU Bm^UH^ 0
10 1.2 \A, . 1.6 , ,1 8 2.0 2.2
Hardness - log 10
"I
CJ
to
"-B
cw
"§ji
£
CO
^**.
P
o
o
o

T
OT

D D T T
DTD
0 D B> D T
ID D nr ID TT
D ID T DT T T
JBP JR. ,a_BI_MtMJBinE_lP ,n> 	 _B_1 JG.IL
05 10 ..tJ.S0 25 30
Tal.sus. -tog 10

€*"i|
o
M
^§ T
0*4
3s
T DO T
DT
Jl DOC T D T
f^> BD ED Offi) TT
gl DtBT D TOT T T
04 m ^ jBamapiaBiiiiiapna KB MOB gpii gp
?*i
o
«
3$
I
™
WO
o
o
o


T
a
O T) T
D T
T DO D 0)
T TT ffi DD i DB CD D
T D T TtTPT CD
. .1 	 i. 	 _ 	 ^ MM*. 	 a fflDm ja • • • ••!' iiii^^niiiii i
° T"lV"i'"° 2 " ^^
o
i
£
Oil
"fflc
T
DT
T TJ
DDT
T D D • 0
T T D OBDE ID
3 TT D DDJD
0 ""^
^j mm mivim m rffi ItlHmMm^^^B !V MH EWftHimnrflilfi fl tV







Figure 41.  C'omparLson of physical and chemical parameters,  Selenium.




                              60

-------
3
'to
t»i
«

O
o
ro
1
03 '
rfP
m

O
o
^>
8) '
>
to
^7

r tf T
1 T \
p T '
T» T T T
1 ! T Tl T
10 1 ? 14. j 1 6 . .1.8 2.0 2,1
Haidite&s tog 10

T tf
T T T
f,T T
I T ' 7 ^ T
D [DBEnBBHBHHHBBflU DD OQQBD D DO D
1 " lurbidilj log 10

T Trf
T
IT^ 1 ^ 1
T T T n i i
Li Ul U 111 Ul L LUJ ,U1 .^Bi^B !• •• • lUUM^UHUUV •
"
1
o» *
^S

u"
-15 -lfV%.^tf.O






I
r ' ' T
TT / '
T T T *T\
FT T T ,
am mm m mm/asm m)ntunD oa v u D ID on
05 1.0 , . t-5 , ,20 25 30
Tot. sUs log 10

TT T T
T
T 1
T /r 1 T
, T TIT T T
6.0 6:5 ..70 75 8!0
pH





rr^r tTfT ,," ~?o,n" "^^
    Uonduetivrty - fog 10
 Figure 4m.  Comparison of physical and chemical parameters.  Silver,




                                61

-------
         '.I.'

                 t   0


D

T ° Tf

uBD •ED ¥ ODD til
T I
11 J T *
t T'
IT 1
T T T T T
DD D ib
• isoaBttl DID D DD ° 03 ffl)
                                                   10   T , La      2.0
                                                        Tot bus, • loq ID
                            -rf
                          T T
     D


     7   T
                                    fit,
                                                  T
                                                    T

                                                  D  D
J  Turbicftiy - tog 10
                                             5:0

'
             •• ff
                              QD
FT ............. ..... 1*6   ~ 1ST    F
              onduelivrty - fcg
  Londuelivrty - fcg 10
                                                                   T  T
Tl
'T


  T

T  y
                                                                        ° f
                                                                                   3.0
                      T


                      ij' »r
                                                                                  e:o
 Figure 4n.  Comparison of physical and chemical parameters.  Zinc.




                                   62

-------
List of Tables
       i. Placer mine .sites,                                                         64
       2. Source of placer gold deposits.                                             65-67
       3. List of analytical data                                                     68-75
       4, Summary statistics of data by mine and sampling location.                    76-89
       5. Alaska water quality criteria,                                               90
       6, Linear correlation  coefficients for comparison of measurement parameters.     91

-------
Table i. Placer Mine Sues,  Sample locations ai three ot'the mines are bused on uncorrected GPS
readings: the general location ot'the mine at Eldorado Creek was determined by map
Mine Owner Receiving
Water
Tod Bauer
Eldorado Creek
Site
Mine
Location
62"45'35"N 149° 36' IO"W

Large n Claims
Ester Creek
Background
Downstream
64° 50' 55.32"N 148° 05' 05"W
64° 50' 36,38"N 148" 01' 37.59'
W

Sam Koppenberg
Faith Creek
Downstream
Upstream
Effluent
Background
65"21'21.33"N 146" 17' 13"W
65° 21' 38 "N 146° 17'03"W
65"21'38"N 146° 17'03"W
65"23'43"N 146" 17'03"W

John McClain
Ketchem Creek
Downstream
Upstream
Effluent
Background
65° 28' 48"N 144° 44' 43 "W
65°28'47.55"N 144° 44' 36.25'
65° 28' 44.38"N 144° 44' 39.93'
65° 28' 16.81"N 144° 44' 48.90'
W
W
W
                                           C.4

-------
Table 2.  Source of Placer Gold according to summaries of Nokleberg,  1996 (I) and Cobb, lc>73 (2)
(MiniiiL1 District designations are from Cobb)

IW7 Sampling

       IL* \\.iiei         Mining District and No,  Gold Source, Host Rock' "       Source Mineralization Type       Assoc. Minerals'.        Husi'
                       Fairbanks Disinci-50    Gold skurns and/or polymetallic veins              8. V                   Q, P, C         I, M
                                             associated with Cretaceous plutons (1.2)
2. Qnari/Creek          Hoi Springs Disinct -5?   Possibly related to granitic intrusions (1)           —                     —             I'
^ American Creek       Hot Springs Disirrct-5.^   Quari/.-carbonate veins assoc. with shear           V                     Q. C           I1'
                                             /one, possibly rel. to granitic intrusions (1)
4. Tol.nlanika Ri\er      Bonniticld DiMnu-44    Gold-bearing quart/or polymetallic  veins          V, M                  Q, P           M
                                             and massive sulfides in rnetaniorphic rocks,
                                             recycled through Tertiary gravels (1,2)
5, llomesiake Creek      Bonnilield Districl-44    (see Tolatlanika River, above)                     V, M                  Q, P           M
ft. Plan Creek            Bonnilklcl Distncl-44    (see Tolatlanika River, above)                     V, M                  Q, P           M
1 Hamsun Creek               Circle Disirici-47        Gold-bearing quartz veins, polymetallic veins.      V. S. M                0-P. C M
                                             skarns, porphyry lode  deposits, and volcanogenic
                                             massive sultlde deposits in metamorplm: r*K:ks.
                                             recycled through Tertiary conglomerates (1,2)
S Kelcliem Creek        Circle Distnct-47        (See Harrison Creek, above)                      V. S, M                Q, P, C         M
'i Switch Cieck          Circle Disinci-47        (See Harrison Creek, above)                      V. S, M                Q, P, C         M
Id. Crooked Creek       Circle Disinci-47        iSee Harrison Creek, above)                      V, S, M                Q, P, C         M
        (IJor.e :  description  (.•: mineralization type,  associated mineralogy,  and  host  rock may apply  to  thi;
       particular deposit.  •••! ..irainage,  but  many are  less  specific  and  apply to entire  district)

                                     :>:;,  P-  polymetallic,  —  = unknown

                                     itary,  M=  metainorphic,   —  = unknown

                                                                   65

-------
                              u Disii'K't
                        Gold Source. Host Rock
I I  Bnnan/a Creek
12. Trili m ClierrvCk.
i J, Turk Creek
14. Canyon t reek
I v tiniiita Creek
In, Hatiiitttmil  River
I / Boulder Geek7
IX Cultnado Creek

\'-> l.iulc Creek

2D. GaiK'< Creek

11. Timber Creek

22. Swifi Creek
23. Prince Creek

24. Solomon River

25. Col lee Creek
2h.  Koiiiiarok Rivet
27.  Diek Creek
2X.  Mtnt Creek
Circle DiMnu-47
Fitrivmtlc Disinct -51
Fuilyiitfle Oisincf-5 I
ForlymiJe Distnci-5 i
Koyukuk District-?1)
Koyukiik Disinci-51)
Koyukiik Disinet-Sy
Innoko Disinct-5fi

lilil;iri)il Disiru.1-55

iniiukn

Ruhy Di
                                         M i iieral i/uu ont ync
Ruhy
Idtlarod DisLnct-55

Nome Dislncl-31

Kouuarok Dis)ne(-2'-)
      trok Disi.nci-29
Serpeniuie District-33
Fairliavcn Disirict-2X
Assoc. Minentls         Ijosl

        Q. P, C         M
        Q, P            I
(Sec Harrison Creek, above)                       V, S, M
Golcl-quari/ and polymeiallic veins in mela-         V
morphic rocks near contacts with Cretaceous
 or airly Tertiary pinions (1,2)
(Sec fnh to Cherry Creek, above)                   V                       Q, P             I
(See inh to Cherry Creek, abtwe)                   V                       Q. P             t
Source ol'pold unknown (1,2)                     	
Gold-quart/ and quartz-stibmle veins               V                       Q, P             M
(See Emmii Creek, above)                          	                     	              	
Qnaru-stibnite cinnabar vein (2) or  granite                 Vs'                      Q.P'1    I
porphyry and mon/onite (1)
Vein deposits in  morizonilic intrusives              V                       Q.P             I
and from other mineralized contact zones (1,2)
Mineral i/.ed basalt and rhyolite dikes               V'.'                     P. Q'.'            1
 in swarms intruding Cretaceous slate (1,2)
Polymciallic vein and skam deposits assoc.          V                       P. C             I
willi granitic intrusives (1)
(See Timber Creek, above)                         V                       P. C             i
Vein deposits in  mon/onitic intrusives              V                       Q.P             t
and from other min. contact zones (1,2)
Gold-bearing quartz vein deposits in               V                       Q               M
 metaniorphic rocks (1)
Low-sulfide, gold-bearing quartz veins in           V                       Q.P             M, I
metamorphic rocks and from  tin lode deposiis
assiK. with granitic plutons (1)
(See Coffee Creek, above)                  V                       Q, P            M.I
Source of gold unknown, (2)                      	                     	
Polymciallic vein lode deposits assoc. with          Q.'                     Q''              I.1, NT:
Cretaceous granitic plutons or alternatively
Irorn gold-hearing quaru veins m met. rocks (1)
                                                                        66

-------
Recciviiii! Water

2«-*. C.ui.f Run
                        Mimim District          Gold Source, Host Rock   Source Mineralization Type       Assoc. Minerals

                        Fairliavt-u Disinci 2.H     (See Mud Creek, above!                   Q?                       Q?
                                                                                                           Hosi
                                                                                                           I'.'. M
1998 Sampling

3(t, Lldmadii Creek
31. Ketclicm Creek
32. Faiili Creek
33
         Creek
                        Vaiikv Creek
Circle Distnei-47
Riirhanks Districted

Fairbanks Dislricl-5(i
hil>Tiietallic veins associated              V
ttitJi Cretaceous plulons
intruding rnetasedimentary rocks (1)
(See Harrison Creek, above)               V, S, M
 Polyinetallic veins associated              V
with Cretaceous plutons (2)
(see Faith Creek, above)                   V
                                                                                          Q, P
Q. P. C
Q.P.

Q.P.
                 l.M
                                                                                                                                   M
massive Millide any muss ol'unusually abundant metallic sulfide minerals (in contrast to more localised vein deposits).
pulymeialhc deposits thai contain economically important quantities of three or more metals.
porphyry-an igneous rock with a texture ol" larger crystals set in a finer-grained matrix.
skarn- a rtck of complex mineralogy formed where igneous rocks intrude carbonate rocks,
                                                                        67

-------
Table 3  List of Analytical data. Shading indicates detection limit values. Outlines indicate exceedances of aquatic criteria for Alaska.



 Stream      Type   Hardne TSS   AiuminvAntimo ArseniiCadmiuCalctu  Chroi Coppe Lead Magnesi Mercur N»ekel Seleni Silve  Zinc   pH    DO  Cond  Turbid Set. So Temp
                   mg/L  mg/L  ng/L   M9/L   C3/L  M3/L-   ycjft.   MS'U H9/L  jig/L ng/L    ng/L   (ig/L  ng/L  (ig/L  ^ig/L        mg/l  nS   NTU   ml/L degC

 Eldorado Creek - Round 1
Downslream tot rec
Downslream diss
Efllueni tot rec
Efllueni. diss
Upstream tot rec
Upstream diss
Background tot rec
Background diss
Eldorado Creek - Round 2
Down si ream tot rec
Downslream diss
Effluent tot rec
Effluenl diss
Upstream tot rec
Upstream diss
Background tot rec
Background diss
Upstream tot rec
Eldorado Creek - Round 3
Downslream tot rec
Downslream diss
Effluent tot rec
Effluent diss
Upstream tot rec
Upstream diss
Background tot rec
Background diss
Effluenl D' tot rec
Effluenl D1 diss
Eldorado Creek - Round 4
Downstream tot rec
Downstream diss
Effluent lol rec
Effluent diss
Upstream, tot rec
Upstream etiss
Background tot rec
93.7
96,9
114
118
94.5
96.7
83.1
85.2

108
112
128
131
108
(11
94.8
97.5
149

152
155
156
160
152
155
137
139
154
160

104
104
131
132
104
105
92.8
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4

4
4
12
12
4
4
4
4


4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4

2.5
2.5
2
2
105
105
2
52.1
24.5
42.6
279
58.5
19.3
49.8
23

40
20.1
51.2
21.7
39.5
18.8
30.6
17.9
371

30.3
17.2
67.1
23
35
16.9
20.1
15.7
44.2
22.5

327
19
39.9
16.5
31,4
te.9
28.8
0.5
0,5
3.1
0,5
0.5
0.5
5.5
O.S

0,6
0.5
2
0,5
0.5
0.5
0.97
O.S
05

0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5

0.5
0.5
0,5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0,7
0.53
0.62
0.6
0.62
0.6
0.73
0.65

0.71 '
0.65
0.75
0.68
0.66
0.66
0.68
0.66
2.2'

0.61
0.66
0.75
0.63
0.66
0.59
0.72
0.74
0.66
0.6

0.63
0.65
0.6
0.59
0.6
0.57
0.65
0.04
0,04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0,04
0.04

0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04

0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04

0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.042
0.04
0.04
20200
21500
28000
30000
20200
21400
18000
19200

23200
24900
31500
33200
22900
24500
20500
21900
37900

32500
33300
37100
39000
31900
32900
29000
29700
37000
39200

22500
22400
32200
32600
22100
22500
20000
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

t
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1.7
0.9
0.87
0.65
0.64
0.5
0.72
0.55

0.6
0.51
0.55
0.54
0.77,
0.54
0.54
0.92
2.6

0.5
0.5
0.52
0.5
0,5
0.5
0,5
0,5
0,53
0.5

0.55
0.53
0.52
0.6
0,5
0.55
0,5
0.1
0.1
0.5
0.1
0.5
0,1
0,5
0.1

02
01
0.5
0.1
OJ»
0,1
0.5
0,1
0.79

0.5
0.1
0.5
0.1
0.5
0.1
O.S
0.1
0,5
0.1

0.1
0.1
0.15
0.1
0.38
0.1
0.1
10500
10500
10700
10500
10700
10500
9260
9040

12200
12100
11900
11700,
12300
12100
10600
10400
13300

17300
17500
15400
15200
17500
17600
15600
15800
14900
15000

11700
1 1 700£
12300
12400
11800
11800
10400
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10

10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10

10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10

10
16.6]
10
10
10
10
10
1.22
0.94
1,4
1.09
1,14
086
1.16
0.85

1.13
0.87
1.37
1.2
1.1
0.88
1
0,8
3.93

1.27
.01
.66
.25
.38
.07
.14
.03
,54
.26

1.05
0,85
1.3
1.09
0,92
0.9
1.03



1.2

1.

1.2

1
1.2
1.3
1.3
1
1.3
1
1,1
1.1

1
1.2
1
1.2
1.1
1
1.1
1.1
1
1.1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0,03
0,03
0,03
0.03

0.03
0,03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0,03
0,03
0,03

0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0,03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0,03

0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
4
4
4
4
4
4.7
•i
13

4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4.1

4
14
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4

9.7
4
6.3
4
4
4
4
7,55
7,55
7,34
7,34
7,27
7,27
7.78
7.78

8,01
8.01
7.93
7.93
7.91
7,91
8
8


781
7,81
762
7.62
6.77
6.77
8,05
8,05



7,9
7.9
7.22
7.22
7.66
766
784
139
139
180
tso
138
138
125.5
125.5

165.2
165.2
190.7
190.7
146.8
146.8
138.2
138.2


213
213
223
223
208
206
199
199



164
164
194.6
194.6
147.3
1473
140.8









0.6
0.6
1.5
1.5
1.75
1 75
1.5
1,5


1.5
1.5
2.8
2.8
2.4
2.4
2
2



1.4
14
2.5
2.5
1.2
1.2
<0,5
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T

l
T
T
T
T
T
T
i


l
T
T
1
T
T
•
T



T
T
T
T
1
i
i
8
.-.
7
7
7
7
.
7

10
10
10
10
to
10
1 1
11


10
la
9
a
\
9
:<
9



8
B
B
8
8
B
B
                                                                           6.3

-------
Table 3  List of Analytical data. Shading indicates detection limit values. Outlines indicate exceedances of aquatic criteria for Alaska.
Stream Type Hardna:TSS Alumim.Antimo Arsenii Cadmiu Calciu Chroi Coppe Lead Magnesi Mercur Nickel Selem Silve Zinc
mg/L mg/L pg/L
Background diss
Eldorado Creek - Round S
Downstream tot rec
Downstream diss
Effluent tot rec
Effluent diss
Upstream tot rec
Upstream diss
Background tot rec
Background diss
Eldorado Creek - Round 6
Downstream lol rec
Downstream diss
Effluent tot rec
Effluent diss
Upstream tot rec
Upstream diss
Background lol rec
Background diss
Eldorado Creek - Round 7
Downstream tot fee
Downstream diss
Effluent tot rec
E (fluent diss
Upstream tot rec
Upstream diss
Background tot rec
Background diss
Eldorado Creek - Round 8
Effluent D' lot rec
EHIuent D* diss
Downstream lol rec
Downstream diss
Effluent tot rec
Effluent diss
Upstream lol rec
Upstream diss
Background tot rec
93

125
126
139
137
125
127
119
120

143
142
149
150
142
142
133
136

146
143
152
149
145
144
122
135

172
171
192
188
174
174
193
189
178
2

2
Z
';
..'
2
2
2
2

51.4
51.4
6.8
6.8
42.8
42.B
8.2
8.2

8.6
8.6
13.7
13.7
11.5
11.5
3.7
3.7

20.5
20,5
5,2
5,2
17,8
17,8
4
4
3.6
165

42.1
17.4
50.5
13.9
61
16.1
29.1
15.2

440
21.9
95
15.3
369
17.7
62.9
20.8

83.3
17,5
135
26,4
127
19.7
47.5
20.4

506
15.7
63.6
17.5
253
15
53
12.8
30.1
.ig/L M9/L M9^
0,5

0.6
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0,5
0,5
0.5

0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0,5
0,5
05
0.5

0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0,5
0,5
0.5

05
0.5
0,5
0.5
0.5
0,5
0.5
1.3
0,5
0.66

0.65
0.68
0.71 .
0.57
0.69
0,63
0.69
0.65

2.5
0.61
1 1
0.57
2.3
0.62
1
0.69

I
0.68
1 3
0.59
1.2
0.68
0.76
0.69

1.7
0.66
0.84
0.67.
1.9
0.61
0.95
24.7
0.83
0.04

0.04
0.04
004
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.055
0.04

0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04

0,04
0.04
0.04
0,04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0,04

0,04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
jg/L tig/L ;ig/L
20100

27000
26600
34400
33500
27000
26600
25900
25500

29900
30100
37600
37800
29900
30000
28200
28900

30300
30800
38900
38900
30100
31000
25400
29000

44700
45500
39700
39800
45200
48300
39500
39900
36500
1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

1.3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

t
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

1.2
1.4
1
1.1
1
1.1
1
1.7
1
0.5

1.5
3.7
1.4
0.5
0.69
0.5
0.54
0.83

3
0.5
1.5
0.5
2.5
0.5
0.68
0.53

0.86
0.5
1,3
0.5
2
0.51
0.54
n s

1.8
0.5
0.61
0.5
2.1
0.5
1.4
2.6
3.6
^9/L t
0.1

0.15
0.1
0.21
at
0,27
o.t
0.57
o;t

0.67
0.1
0.39
0.1
0,73
0-1
0.17
0.1

0.22
0.1
0,43
0.1
0,32
0.1
0.1
0.1

0.55
0,1
0,21
.0,1
0.64
0.1
019
0,1
0.16
ig/L ng/L ng/L ng/L ng/L jig/L
10400

14000
14400
12800
13000
14100
14600
13200
13700

16500
16200
13500
13500
16400
16400
15200
15400

17100
16100
13400
12500
17000
16200
14300
15100

14600
13900
22600
21500
14800
14100
22800
21800
21000
10

10
10
10
so
10
10
10
10

10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10

10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10

10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
0.87 1

1.28 1
1,13 1.3
1.37 1,3
1.12 1.1
1.3 1
1.06 1.2
1.17 1.2
1.08 1,2

3.91 1 1
1 21 1
2.47 ) 1
1.23 1
3.5 1
1.25 1.1
1.71 1.2
1.29 1.2

1.98 1.2
1.24
2.28
1.32
2.33
1.27
1.46
1.3

2.98
1.56
1.82
1.41
33
1.55
i.es
.4
.2
.2
.5
.3
.2
.4

.a
_4
.4
.5
.5
.3
.7
3.48 1
1.69 1.8
0.03

0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03

0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0,03
0.03

0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0,03
0.03

0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
4

4
4
4.2
6.7
4
4
4
B

5.8
4
4
4
4
4
4
4

4
4
12
2l>
4,1
4
4
4

4.6
4
4
4
5.8
4
4
4
4
pH

7.84

7.13
7.13
6.67
6.67
7.27
7.27
7.47
7.47

7.56
7.56
7.05
7.05
7.37
7,37
7.6
7.6

6.77
6.77
7.12
7.12
7.37
737





7.24
7.24
7.21
7.21
7.6
76
7.59
                                                                                                      DO  Cond Turbid Set, So Temp
                                                                                                      mg/L  uS   NTU   ml/L  dagC

                                                                                                          140.8  <0.5    T    B
165.6
165.6
188.5
188.5
168.5
168.5
159
159
190.9
190.9
IBS
188
215
215
186
186
212
212
211
211
188
188
177
177
270
270
261
261
264
264
248
0.84
0.84
3.6
3.6
2.52
252
0.43
0.43
n,
16
1 025
10.25
12.4
12,4
1.3
1.3
2.8
2.8
3.5
3.5
1 32
1 32


3.83
3.83
19.3
19.3
4.6
4.6

T
T
T
T
T
T


0.1
0.1
T
T
T
T
(
T
f
1
T
T
T
i
T
1
T
T
CT
0'
T
I
[
a
•:
8
S
!:•
>:
/
7
6
6
8
8
6
'
7
7
9
9
7
7
•
6
6
1
7
7
.
7
',
•
,-'

-------
Table 3  List of Analytical data. Shading indicates detection limit values. Outlines indicate exceedances of aquatic criteria for Alaska.



 Stream       Type   Mardne TSS  Alumini Antimo ArsenitCadmiuCalciu   Chfoi Coppt Lead Magnesi Mercur Nickel Seleni Silve  Zinc   pH    DO   Cond Turbd 5el. So Temp
                   mg/L   mg/L  jjg/L   (ig/L  ^ig/L  jigrt.   ng/L    \iglL fig/L  (ig/L  ^9"-   "9/L   ^g/L  |jg/L  ^ig/L  ng/L        mg/L   tiS   NTU   rnl/L degC
 Background   diss
176   3.6    175   0,5   071   0.04  37100   1   0.5  0.1  20300     10  1.47   1.7   0.03
                                                                                                                7,59
                                                                                                                           248
Ester Creek •
Downsiream
Downstream
Background
Background
Ester Creek -
Downsiream
Downstream
Background
Background
Ester Creek -
Downstream
Downstream
Background
Background
Eater Creek -
Downstream
Downstream
Background
Background
Ester Creek •
Downstream
Downsiream
Background
Background
Ester Creek •
Downsiream
Downsiream
Background
Background
Ester Creek -
Downsiream
Downsiream
Round 1
tot rec
diss
tot rec
diss
Round 2
to! rec
diss
tot rec
diss
Round 3
tot rec
diss
tol rec
diss
Round 4
tot rec
diss
tot rec
diss
Round S
tot rec
diss
tol rec
diss
Round 6
tol rec
diss
tot rec
diss
Round 7
tot rec
diss

154
161
114
119

146
150
80.9
65

150
152
89.1
92.6

154
159
101
106

122
124
68.2
68.5

90.6
91.7
46.7
48.8

117
116

a
A
4
4

;
4
4
4

2.3
2.3
2
2

2.1
2.1
2.1
2.1

?.
2
4.7
4,7

6.6
6,6
24.3
24.3

2
2

20.7
13.6
43.3
31.3

20.8
14.9
99.9
57,7

19.7
10.6
68.6
42,6

202
to
48.6
33.9

66.6
14.1
175
101

418
37.5
440
171

38.1
15.1

1.6
1.6
0,5
0.5

1.6
1.7
0,5
0.5

1.3
1,4
0.5
0,5

1.3
1.2
0.5
0.5

2
1.9
0.52
0,5

2
1.6
0.5
0.5

1.5
: •!

24.3
19
4
3.8

22.7
19.6
3.7
3.3

31.4
24,8
3.8
3.6

33.5
24.9
4.1
3.6

17,2
13,2
3.6
3.2

20.6
6.71
4.2
2.6

19.4
16.8

0.04
0.04
0.066
0,04

0,04
0.04
0.04
0.04

0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04

0,04
0.04
0.04
0.04

0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04

0.04
0.041
0.04
0.04

0.04
0.04

34400
36900
25000
26800

32700
34200
16000
19200

33600
34400
19900
20900

34600
36500
22500
24000

27800
27500
15900
15600

19900
19900
10800
11100

25900
26800

1
1
1
1

1
1
I
1

1
1
1
1

1
1
1
1

1
1
1
1

1 3
1
1.2
1

1
1

3
2.4
1.3
1.1

3.4
2.8
1.6
1.4

3
2.4
t.3
3.5

3.2
2.3
1.2
1.1

4.5
3.2
2,2
1.7

5.22
3.7
2.7
2.1

3.9
3

04,
0.1
0.9
" Oil

0^5
0.1
O.S
0,1

0.1
0.1
0.1
0.1

0.16
0.1
0.1
0.1

0.31
0.1
1.44
0,1

0.79
0,1
o.ee
0.1

0.19
0.1

16500
16800
12500
12600

15300
15700
8730[
8990F

16000
16000
9S70[
9820

16500
16600
10800
11100

12800
13500
692Q[
7170[

9980[
10200
4800[
5080

12600
11900

to
to
10
10

10
10
1361
18.5|

10
10
" 14 61
10

10
10
11.3
10.13

10
^0
1681
~lj"^l

16.6|
10
16.31
• 10

10
10

272
3.75.
1.73
2.6

2.97
3.62
1.69
2.53

2.84
3.48
1.57
2.63

2.98
3.8
1.63
258

3.1
3.23
1.91
2.44

4.59
3.69
2,36
2.66

3.26
3.27









1

1
1
1
1

1
1
1
1

1
1
1
1

1
1
1
1

1
1

0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03

0.03
0.03
0.03
0,03

0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03

0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03

0.03
0.03
0.03
0,03

0-03
0.03
0,03
0.03

0.03
0.03

4
4
4
4

4
4
4
4

4
4
4
4

4
4
4
4

4
4
4
4

4.1
8.2
4
4

A
A

7.31
7,31
7.53
7.53

712
7 12
7,36
7.36

7.32
7.32
7.63
7.63

7.3
7.3
7.63
7,63

707
7,07
7.25
7.2S

7,09
7.09
6.94
6.94

6-95
6.95

6.5
6.5
10.39
10.39

9.85
9.85
13.04
13.04

7.65
7.65
11.34
11.34

6.91
6.91
10.4
10.4

772
7.72
11.4
11.4

12.95
1295
15.54
15.54

10.23
10.23

306
306
221
221

295
295
162
162

303
303
178
178

2.95
295
191
191

234
234
124
124

180
180
88
es

240
240

2.3
2,3
t.9
1,9

2.1
2,1
5.B
5.8

2.95
2.95
1,85
1.85

3.81
3.81
3.04
3.04

4.14
4.14
3.44
3.44

25,4
25.4
8.96
8.96

4.63
4.63

0
0
Q
0

0
0
0
a

Q
0
0
d

Q
0
0
0

0
0
0
Q

0
0
0
0

0
0

8.2
8.2
7.3
7.3

8.9
fi 9
5.8
S ft

8.6
8.6
4.9
4.9

9
9
Li.':,
5.5

9.6
9.6
3.7
3.7

6.7
6.7
2.8
2.8

8.2
82
                                                                             70

-------
Table 3 List of Analytical data. Shading indicates detection limit values. Outlines indicate exceedances of aquatic criteria for Alaska,
Stream

Background
Background
Backgroun D*
Backgroun D*
Ester Creek -
Downstream
Down stream
Downstrea D"
Downslrea D*
Background
Background
Faith Creek -
Downstream
Downstream
MIXING
MIXING
Eflluenl
Eftluenl
Background
Background
Upmixing
Upmixing
Upmixing D"
Upmixing D*
Faith Creek •
Downslream
Downstream'
Effluent
Eflluenl
Upmixing
Upmixing
Background
Background
Faith Creek -
Oownslream
Downslream
Type

lol rec
diss
tot me
diss
Round 8
lot rec
diss
lot rec
diss
lol rec
diss
Round 1
lot rec
diss
lOt (BG
diss
lot rec
diss
tot rec
diss
tot rec
diss
lot rec
diss
Round 2
tot rec
diss
lot rec
diss
tot ree
diss
lot rec
diss
Round 3
tot rec
diss
Hardne
mg/L
77.9
77.4
77,2
77.7

127
129
127
128
92
93.4

27.6
28.9
44.3
46.5
45.2
48.7
21.2
22
31.5
33.8
31.9
33,5

34.2
35.9
74,9
78,1
32.9
34.2
24.4
25.2

33.8
35.7
TSS
mg/L
4.2
4.2
2.8
2.8

2
2
2.6
2.6
2
2

2
2
4
4
4.4
4.4
2
2
4
4
4
4

11.2
11.2
3.9
3.9
9.5
9.5
4
A

2.2
2.2
Alumint Antimo Arsenii Cadmiu Caleiu Chroi Coppc Lead
Uflfl.
95.9
53
103
58.9

21 7
16.9
20,7
12.5
59.6
382

90.6
55
219
31.5
189
32.2
76,6
53.2
42.9
28.2
49.2
27.3

149
21.9
50
33.7
181
22,4
31.5
28.2

42.6
20.4
H9/L tioA ug/L pg/L ug/L jig/L ng/L
0,6 3.6 0.04 17600 1 1.4 0.22
0.5 3.2 0.04 18400 1 1.3 0.1
0.5 3.5 0.052 17600 1 1,5 0,12
0,5 2.9 Q.Q4 17700 1 1.4 0.16

1.3 25.8 0.04 28600 1 3.3 0.1
0.5 0.63 0.04 29600 1.4 0.5 0.1
1,3 26.4 0.0* 28400 1 4 0.1
1.2 24.1 0,04 29400 1.7 2.5 0.1
0.5 3.4 0.04 20800 1 1.2 012
0.5 3.4 0,04 21700 1.5 1,6 0-1

1.7 2.1 0.072 8610 1 1.6 0,17
1.7 1,3 0;04 9190 1 2.3 0,1
2.5 3.7 0.06 13700 1 2,8 1.14
2.1 1.2 OJM' 14700 1 1.7 0.1
2.5 3,6 0.044 14000 1 2.8 1.09
2.1 1.2 . (ftM 1S400 1 1.8 0,1
0,5 0.62 0.073 7100 1 1.1 0.1
0.5 0,66 0,04 7450 1 I 0.1
£4 1.4 0.04 9820 1 1.4 0.5
2.3 1.2 0,04 10700 1 11 0,1
2.3 1.5 0.04 9930 1 2.1 0.5
2.4 1.3 0,04 10600 1 1.2 0.1

3,2 3.8 0.04 10600 1 1.sfp9
3.1 1.4 0,04 11200 1 0.95 0.1
0,5 1.8 0.069 22700 1 2.9 0.5
0.5 1.7 0.041 23800 1 1.7 0,1
3.2 4.1 0.04 10200 1 1.8JTT9
3.2 1.5 0.04 10700 1 0.92 0,1
0.5 0.57 0,04 8240 1 0.5 0.5
0.5 0.65 0.04 8520 1 0.67 0,1

3.1 1.8 0.04 10500 1 1.8[T8B
2.9 1.3 0.04 11300 1 1 1 0,1
Magnesi
J19/L
8120
7650
8070
8140

13600
13300
13600
13300
9730
9520

1480
1450
2440
£370
2480
2480
853
830
1690
1720
1720
1700

1870
1920
4420
4530
1800
1810
926
948

1650
1820
Mercur
ng/L
11.5
16,4
12.4
14

10
10
10
10
10
10,6

10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10

10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10

10
10
Nickel Seleni Silve
ug/L ng/L [tg!L
1.56 1 0.03
1.88 1 0.03
1.73 1 0.03
2.13 1 0.03

3.02 1 0.03
1,38 1,5 0.03
3,16 1 0,03
3.16 1 0.03
1.52 1 0.03
2,07 1 0.03

1.77 1 008
2.62 1 0.03
2.36
2.81
2.26
2.85
1.5
2.88
0.83
2.16
0.86
t.99

1.37
1.78
5,84
6.5
1.35
1.78
0.66
1.76
0.03
0.03
0.11
0,03
0,03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03

0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0,07
0.03
0.03
0.03

0.77 1 0,03
1.89 1 0,03
Zinc
Mg/L
4
4
4
4

4
4
4
4
4
4

4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4

4
4
4
4
7.2
4
4
4

4
4
pH

7
7
7.41
7,41

6.77
6,77
6,79
6,79
7,08
7,08

77
7.7
7.61
7.61
7,58
7,58
7.44
744
7.78
7-78
7.65
7.65

7.67
7.67
7,08
7.08
7.57
7.57
7.54
7.54

7,61
7,61
DO
mg/L
15.03
15.03
17.92
17.92

8,28
8,28
8.1
8.1
13.18
13.18

8.18
8,18
1 0.85
10.85
1099
10.99
13.14
13.14
11.8
11.8
11.95
11.95

13.85
13.85
11,66
11 66
13.95
13.95
12.67
12.67

11.02
11.02
Cond
us
157
157
156
156

266
266
266
266
187
187

62
62
102
102
105
105
50
50
71
71
71
71

78
78
162
162
76
76
59
59

77
77
Turbid Set
So Temp
NTU ml/L degC
3,11
3,11
2,85
2.85

2.7
2.7
2.38
2.38
2,26
2.26

1.08
1.08
16.8
18.8
19,7
19.7
0.44
0.44
0.97
0.97
1.4
1.4

8.8
8.8
2,4
2.4
5.2
5.2
1
1

1 91
1.91
0 3.5
0 3.5
0 3.5
0 3.5

o a
0 S
0 8.1
0 8.1
0 3.1
0 3.1

0 6.9
0 6,9
0 11.3
0 11.3
0 11.5
0115
0 6.3
0 6.3
0 8
0 8
0 8.1
0 8.1

0 8.9
0 8.9
0 9,6
0 9,6
0 9.S
0 9,9
0 9.9
0 9.9

0 9.4
0 9.4

-------
Table 3  List of Analytical data. Shading indicates detection limit values. Outlines indicate exceedances of aquatic criteria for Alaska.
 Stream
Type   HardneTSS  Alumini. Anfimo Arsenii CadmiuCalciu  Chroi Copp« Lead Magnesi Mercur Nickel Seleni Silve  Zinc   pH    DO  Cond  Turbid Set. So Temp
       mg/L   mg/L  (ig/L   ng/L   ug/L  M9"-   M9A-    HflA. ug/L  ug/L jig/L   ng/L   (ig/L  (ig/L  ug/L  ug/L        mg/L  ^S   NTU   ml/L degC
Effluent
Effluent
Effluent O'
Effluent D'
Upmixing
Upmixing
Background
Background
Faith Creek -
Downstream
Downstream
Upmixing
Upmixing
Effluent
Effluent
Background
Background
Faith Creek -
Downstream
Downstream
Ellluent
Effluent
Upmixing
Upmixing
Background
Background
Faith Creek -
Downstream
Downstream
Effluent
Effluent
Upmixing
Upmixing
Background
Background
tot rec
diss
tot rec
diss
lot rec
diss
tot rec
diss
Round 4
tot ree
diss
tot rec
diss
lot rec
diss
lot rec
diss
Round 5
to! rec
diss
tot rec
diss
tot rec
diss
tot rec
diss
Round 6
tot rec
diss
tot rec
diss
lot rec
diss
tot rec
diss
72.2
77.1
72.8
77.8
33.9
35.1
24
24.6

35.7
36
36.3
36.8
61.5
50.8
26,7
26.3

33.8
33.S
59.7
50.6
34.1
33.8
23.5
23.8

26.8
27.6
53.3
47.8
27.9
281
25.6
26.3
"j
2
2
2
2.2
2.2
2
2

2.2
2.2
2.1
2.1
243
243
2.1
2.1

17.9
17.9
249
249
19.6
19,6
2
2

20.2
20.2
171
171
16
1
2.1
2.1
56.8
28.4
49.3
28.5
58
19.6
31
22,6

52.3
17.4
65,7
16,7
9520
23,3
29.1
24,7

186
21.2
6380
21,8
205
21.3
44.6
26.7

180
257
4390
26.7
197
29.9
70.6
33.2"
0.5
0.5
0.92
0,5
2.9
2.9
0,5
0.5

2.9
3
2.8
2.B
5.57
2.3
0.5
0,5

2.7
2.4
8.51
2.4
2.6
2.2
0.5
0.6

2
O.S
9.84
2.2
2
1.4
0.5
0,5
2
1.7
1.9
1.8
2
1.4
0.53
0.55

1.6
1,4
1.9
1.3
48.3
1.2
0.58
0.59

4.1
1.2
51
1.4
4.1
1.3
0.54
O.S7

4,1
0.57
485
1.7
3.6,
1.2
0.93
0.5
0,076
0.054
0,073
0.059
0.04
0.04
0.04
0,04

0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.54
0,04
0.04
0.04

0.055
0.04
0.39
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04

0.04
0.04
0.43
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
21700
23700
21900
23900
10500
11100
8130
8380

11400
11500
11600
11700
16700|
15100
9190
8910

10800
10600
16400
15000
10900
10700
8060
8070

8360
8620
15000
14000
8750
8930
8280
8520
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

1
1
1
1
12.7|
1
1
1

1
1
9.16J






1
I
6I

1
1
1
1
2.3
1.6
2.2
1.9
0.76
0.85
0.5
0.62

07
1
0.73
0.73
47.4J
0.94
0.76
0.68

vs[
0.71
27.e|
0.79
1.4[
0.71
0.5
0.56

1.S[
0.66
21 9|
O.B9
1 5[
0,86
1
077
0.1
0.1
0.3
0,1
0.22
0.1
0,1
0.1

0.24
0.1
0,43
0.1
40.5|
0.31
o.i a
0.1

TIT!
~oT
327J
0.36
Tos]
0.1
0.16
0.1

~n7i
0.1
43S|
0.75
"ass]

0.26
0.1
4370
4350
4410
4410
1860
1790
891
893

1750
1780
1790
1830
4820r
3170
920
987

1660
1710
4550f
3200
16BO
1720
820
883

1440
1470
3850^
3130"
1470
1420
1190
1210
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10

10
10
10
10
34]
10
10
10

10
10
26-6[
10
10
10
10
10

10
10
23.2[
10
10
10
10
10
5.93
6.33
5.92
6.72
0.75
1.85
0.6
1.56

0.77
1.83
0.76
1.85
45
2.2
0.48
1.95

1.24
1.06
22.4
1.64
1.28
1.15
0.7
1.14

1.88
2
17.5
1.11
1.75
1.25
1.2
1.46
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

1
1
1
1

1
1
1







1
1

1
1
1|





0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0,03
0.03

0.03
0.03
0.03
0,03
0.28|
0.03
0.03
0.03

0.03
0.03
051|
0,03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03

0.03
0,03
1.04|
0,03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0,03
7.5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4

4
4
4
4
66|

4
4

• !
4
53|

4
4
4
4

4
4
47I
4
4.8
4
4
4
7J2
7.12
7.35
7.35
7.68
7.68
7.64
7.64

7.8
7.8
7.73
7.73
7.29
7.29
7.69
7.69

7.49
7.49
6.9
6.9
7.03
7.03
6.43
6.43

7.05
7.05
7
7
7.33
7.33
72
7.2
8.98
8.98


10.81
1061
11.2
11.2

10.8
10.8
10.34
10.34
8.13
8.13
10.B1
10.81

11.33
11,33
7.5
7.5
1088
10.88
11.05
11.05

11 89
11.89
8.62
8.62
12.2
12.2
12.17
12,17
158
158
159
159
76
76
58
58

74
74
76
76
103
103
59
59

70
;o
103
103
73
73
48
48

57
57
103
103
62
82
58
58
3.2
3.2
3.03
3,03
1.65
1.65
0.05
0.05

7 39
1.39
2,73
2.73
798
798
027
0,27

4.61
4.61
564
564
5,5
5.5
0.46
0.46

7.5
75
372
372
6.67
6.67
1.83
1.83
0 10.6
0 10.6
0 10.4
0 10.4
0 9.3
0 9.3
0 9,1
0 9,1

0 8.2
0 8,2
0 8.8
0 8.8
0 9.4
0 9.4
0 8.3
0 8.3

0 6.7
0 6.7
0 8.8
o e.e
0 6.9
0 6.9
0 64
0 64

0 
-------
Table 3  List of Analytical data. Shading indicates detection limit values. Outlines indicate exceedances of aquatic criteria for Alaska.
Stream       Type    Hardne:TSS  Alurnini. Antimo ArseniiCadmiuCalciu
                     mg/L   mg/L  ug/L   |ig/L   ug/L  ug/L   ug/L

Faith Creek- Round 7
Downstream   tot fee
Downstream   diss
Discharge     tot rec
Discharge     diss
Upmixing     tot rec
Upmixing     diss
Background   tot rec
Background   diss
Effluent       tot fee
Effluent       diss
Faith Creek - Round 8
Downstream   tot rec    31.3
Downstream   diss        32
Background   tot rec    24.3
Background   diss        25
Downstream   tot rec    36.6

Ketchem Creek - Round 1
Downstream   tot rec
Downstream   diss
Upmixing     lot rec
Upmixing     diss
Effluent       tot rec
Effluent       diss
                                                                     Chroi Coppe Lead Magnesi Mercur  Nickel Seleni Silve  Zinc
                                                                     ^g/L jjg/L  jig/L (jg/L    ng/L    ug/L  ug/L   ug>L   jjg/L
                                                                                                     pH     DO  Cond Turbid Set, So Temp
                                                                                                           mg/L    MS   NTU   ml/L  degC
 Background   tot rec
 Background   diss

 Ketchem Creek • Round 2
                        17.6
                        15.2
                        15.7
                        13.7
                        37.2
                        31.2
                        9.96
                          8
 Downstream
 Downslream
 Upmixing
 Upmixing
 Ellluenl
 Effluent
 Effluent    C
 Effluent    D
 Background
 Background
             tot rec
             diss
             tot rec
             diss
             tot rec
             diss
             tot rec
             diss
             tot rec
             diss
 27.9
 24.3
 19.8
 19.9
 72.2
 37.4
 70.3
 37.8
10.02
 9.64
                                2.2    38.1
                                2.2    20.3
                                2.1     29
                                2.1     24
                                       936
       46.8   2150
       46.8    635
       36.8   1830
       36.8    680
       58.7   7110
       58,7    181
       58.8   1870
       58.8    758
47.5  4170
47.5    373
19,4  1500
19,4    487
673 28900
673    147
624 27300
624    132•
   4    724
   4    589
                                              2
                                             1.9
                                             0.5
                                             0.5
                                             3.9
                            1.5
                            1.1
                           0.48
                           0.47
                           15,7
0.04
0.04
0.46
1,044
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.18
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.12
9320
9660
13400
11400
9130
9550
7670
7930
15000
15100
9840
10200
8210
8530
11200
1
1
3,73|
1
1
1
1
1
25I
1
t
1
1
1.9[
0.67
23.3J
1,3
0.83
0.64
0.57
0.7
12.9|
0.9
0.67
0.69
0.84
0.5
5.61J
1 .671
0.1
31 .SJ
0.9
0.38
0.1
O.t
14|
0.23
0,19
0.1
0,18
0,1
5.99|
                                                                                        1610
                                                                                        1470
                                                                                        3740[
                                                                                        2180
                                                                                        1470
                                                                                        1440
                                                                                         861
                                                                                         833
                                                                                        3420[
                                                                                        2900"
1630
1590
 923
 901
2100
                                                                         10    18
                                                                         10  0.76
                                                                       "HJBJ 20.5
                                                                         10  2.08
                                                                         10  0.96
                                                                         10  1,02
                                                                         10  076
                                                                         10  1,04
                                                                       12JJ   8.6'
                                                                         TO  1.41
                                                                  10  0.83
                                                                  10  1.15
                                                                  10  1,65
                                                                  1D  1.01
                                                                 10.2  437
1450
1060
1300
990
3200
1940
945
640
39.7
46.6
§55
46.1
38.3
19.3
43.4
28
3.51
3.4
3.24
3.34
9,03
3.41
5,19
2.87
1 0.03
1 0.03
5
4
1| 0.4| 49|
1 0,03
1 0.03
1 0.03
1 0.03
1 0,03
1 0.1
1 0.03
1 0.03
1 0.03
1 0.03
1 0.03
1 0.04
1 0,05
1 0.03
1 0.05
1 0 03
1| Q.261
1 003
1 0.04
1 0,03
lfTTn
1 0.03
1 0.05
1 0.03
1 1| 1,12|
1 0.03
1 1[ 1.051
1 0.03
1 0.03
1 0.03
4
4,4
4
4
4
IB
4
4
4
4
4
77
14
E
12
7.3
40
4
19
6.2
24
4
8.6
4
160|
4
)5i|
4
6.1
5.2
                                                                                              7,13
                                                                                              7.13
                                                                                              7.46
                                                                                              7.46
                                                                                              7,24
                                                                                              7.24
                                                                                              7.19
                                                                                              7 19
                                                                                              6.84
                                                                                              6.84
                                                                                               67
                                                                                               6.7
                                                                                              6.71
                                                                                              6.71
                                                                                              5.69
                                                                                              5,69
                                                                                                                            6.97
                                                                                                                            6.97
                                                                                                                            6.95
                                                                                                                            6,95
                                                                                                                            6.57
                                                                                                                            6.57
                                                                                                                            6.57
                                                                                                                            6.57
                                                                                                                             6,2
                                                                                                                                   14.11
                                                                                                                                   14.11
                                                                                                                                   12.6
                                                                                                                                   12.6
                                                                                                                                   14,75
                                                                                                                                   14.75
                                                                                                                                   14.17
                                                                                                                                   14.17
                                                    6ft
                                                    65
                                                    85
                                                    »f,
                                                    'if
                                                    67
                                                    55
                                                    55
                    19.1
                    19.1
                   1050
                   1050
                    4,01
                    4.01
                    0.38
                    0.38
6,87   14.89
6.87   14.89
7.09   13.91
7.09   13.91
                                             8.7
                                             8.7
                                            9,11
                                            9.11
                                               B
                                               8
                                            13.03
                                            13.03
                                             10.3
                                             103
                                             13.6
                                             13,6
                                            10.15
                                            10.15
                                             9.75
                                             9.75
                                             12.6
                                             18.6
72   0.66
72   066
60   0.35
60   035
               38
               38
               33
               33
               87
               R7
               ,:'l>
               20
               62
               62
               49
               49
              108
              108
              111
              111
               30
               30
     54.4
     54.4
     31,9
     31.9
      251
      251
     16.4
     164
      170
      170
       34
       34
     1800
     ISOO
     1600
     1600
      5.7
      57
              D
              0
            1.2
            1.2
              0
              0
              0
              0
01
0 1
o i
0.1
  0
  0
01
0 i
      4.8
      4,8
       7
       7
       5
       5
       5
       5
                                                                                              6.97   8.72   106   384    0.2    7 1
                                                                                              6.97   8.72   106   384    02    7.1
      3.8
      3,8
      3.8
      3.8
6,9
6,9
5,7
5.7
 17
 17
27
2,7
     10.9
     10.9
     107
     10.7
     16.6
     16.6
     16.9
     169
      4.6
      4.6
                                                                                     .73

-------
Table 3 List of Analytical data. Shading indicates detection limit values. Outlines indicate exceedances of aquatic criteria for Alaska.
 Stream       Type   Hardne TSS  Alumint Antimo Arsenic Cadtniu Caiciu  Chrot Goppe Lead  Magnesi Mercur Nickel Seleni Silve  Zirtc   pH
                    mg/L  mg/L  yg/L    jjg/L  |.ig/L  (ig/L   ^ig/L   jig/L  jig/L  jig/L  yg/L    ng/L   tioA  jig/L   ng'L  jig/I.
                OO  Cond  Turbid SBI.
                mg/L   jiS  NTU  ml/L degC
 KetcKem Creek - Round 3
Downstream
Downstream
Effluent
Effluent
Upmixing
Upmixing
Background
Background
lol rec
diss
tot rec
diss
tot rec
diss
tot rec
diss
32.1
25.9
73.5
32.1
23.4
22,4
12
11.2
'.,7
57
680
680
16-4
16.4
2,2
2,2
5910
309
30700
(59
1770
397
588
494
0.5£
0.5
056J
0,5
0,5
0.5
0.5
0.5
543]
6.8
202]
504
17.4
6.83
0.71
0,66
0.26
0.11
1 .341
015
0,15
0.11
0.1
01
Kelchem Creek - Round 4
Downstream
Downstream
Downstrea D'
Downstrea 0*
Upmixing
Upmixing
Effluent
Effluent
Background
Background
tot rec
diss
lol rec
diss
tot rec
diss
tot rec
diss
tot rec
diss
28,6
28.8
29.2
25
21.8
22.3
86.7
37,2
12.3
1 1,9
36.1
36.1
50.8
50.8
4
4
922
922
4
4
3480
410-
3780
419
1030
441
34100
149
626
524
0.5
0.5
0-5
0,5
0.5
0.5
0.56J
0.5
QS
OJS
35.3
6.34
34.5
6.46
10.6
5.26
201 [
4.6
0.71
0.69
0,22
0.15
0.23
0,13
0,12
0.11
1.81]
0,15
0.099
0.13
Ketchem Creek - Round S
Downstream
Downstream
Upmixing
Upmixing
Effluent
Effluent
Background
Background
lot rec
diss
lol rec
diss
tol rec
diss
tot rec
diss
21,8
19,8
16,7
16.9
69,2
36,3
9.99
10.3
19.6
19.6
17.1
17.1
379
379
24.4
24.4
2160
637
1260
653
23200
255
1020
701
0,5
03
OS
O.S
0.5]
0.5
0.5
OJ
16.2
4.2
6.12
3.2
156]
6.66
0.93
0.6
0,17
0.13
0,12
0.12
1.6 1]
0.15
0.12
0.11
Ketchem Creek - Round 6
Downstream
Downstream
Downslrea D"
Downstrea D*
EMIuenl
EHIuenl
tot rec
diss
tot rec
diss
tol rec
31.9
24.6
32.4
24.6
68.9
27.7
53.5
53.5
62.3
62.3
620
620
5290
463
5150
451
26300
261
0.5
O.S
0.5
0.5
0.5
41,2
5.63
41.9
566
182|
7 13
0,3
0.14
0.32
0.13
t 47]
0.17
7770 5.39
8190 1
7900 5.46
7340 1
6220 1.5
6390 1
7,94
5.4
8.1
3.8
4.3
3.6
19300^49.4J 51.6
10900 1
3410 1
3320 t
4.4
4.3
3.6
11.8
1.3
12.2
1.55
2.63
0.71
122
1.35
0.34
0.12
6120 3.2
5660 1.2
4630 1.9
4770 1.1
16500^35/1
10600 t
2630 4.6
2790 1.2
5.91
3.9
47
638
34.9
3.9
4.2
3.5
5.54
0.87
2.51
0.5
80.7
2.21
2.51
0.14
2770
1670
8450
2120
1730
1500
882
816
2240
2020
2300
1630
1520
1550
9360
2430
915
879
1590
1370
1260
1210
6790
2390
830
815
36.7
29.6
804
17 1
24.9
30.8
28
41.4

31.6
184
31.1
21.4
25.7
21.4
152
811
3,13
36,6
3,66
3.29
3,13
1.71
2.84
5.57
3.09
5.85
3.28
2,61
2,86
40.6
10.6 3.53
32.8] 1,74
25.81 2.71
36.1
22. 3
33.8
26.6
89.2
3.52
2.71
2.46
2.46
27,8
503 3.97
38.51 3.41
^9.4| 2,18
1| 0.1 8|
1 0.03
1 2[ 1.13|
1 0.03
1 0.05
1 0.03
1 0.03
1 0.03
1 0.03
1 0^03
1 0.03
1 0,03
1 3| 1.33]
1 0,03
1 0.03
1 0.03
1 0.05
1 0.03
1 0.03
T 0.03
1| 071|
1 0,03
t 0.03
1 0.03
34
4
184]
4
11
4
5,5

-------
Table 3  List of Analytical data. Shading indicates detection  limit values.  Outlines  indicate exceedances of aquatic criteria for Alaska.
 Stream        Type   Hafdna TSS   Alumim. Antimo ArseniiCadmiuCalciu   Chroi Coppe Lead Magnesi Mercur Nickel Seleni Silve  Zinc
                     mg/L   mg/L  (jg/l    ug/L   Mg/L   \i&L   ^g/L    jig/L ng/L  (ig/L jigl    ng/L   ng/L   \ig/L   ^g/L  jjg/L
                                                                                                          pH    DO   Cond Turbid Set. So Temp
                                                                                                                mg/L   pS   NTU   ml/L  degC
 Upmixing      tot rec    20.8    4.4   1020    0.5   8.73   0.11
 Upmixing      diss        20    4.4    481    0.5   4.31   0.12
 Background    tot rac      11     2    632    0,5   0.63   0.11
 Background    diss        11     2    608    0,5    0.6   0.12

 Ketchem Creek - Round 7
                                                5970   1.6
                                                5810    1
                                                3010   1.2
                                                3010   1.1
7.95
4.6
3.4
3.5
^^^^^m
2.19
0.71
0.45
0.11
 Downstream
 Downstream
 Eftluenl
 Ellluenl
 Upmixing
 Upmixing
 Background
 Background
tot rec
diss
tot rec
diss
tot rec
diss
tot rec
diss
27.5   16.9   1310
27.3   16.9   385
45.5   28.4   5950
39.8   28.4   157
26.6     66   2810
24.5     66   351
9.71      2   619
10.2
 Ketchem Creek - Round 8
 Downstream
 Downstream
 EHIuem
 Upmixing
 Upmixing
 Background
 Background
tot rec
diss
lot rec
diss
tot rec
diss
tot rec
diss
0.5
0-5
0.5
0.5
0.5|
0.5
0,5
05
49.2
5.77
32.1
2.7
79.4]
6.25
0.51
0.35
0.42
0,13
0.36
0.24
0.65]
0.14
0.099
0.11
                       639    0.5   0.51  0.091   2820    1   3.3   0.1
1850
1730
3340
2400
2050
1590
762
776
21
19.4
26.8
10
26.6
21.8
24.8
32.2
3.35
2.42
8.44
2.97
4.6
2.5
2.75
2.15
                                                                                      0.03   6.8
                                                                                      0.03   86
                                                                                      0.03   6.1
                                                                                      0.03   5.4
0.048   9.9
            6.93  14.32
            693  14,32
            6.06  15.47
            6.06  15.47
51
51
27
27
14.5
14 5
1  44
1.44
58
59
  3
  i
             0   58
             0   58
             0  101
             0  10.1
             0     7
             0     7
             0   27
                                                                                                                                                        2.7
                                                                                                                                4.4
                                                                                                                                4.4
                                                                                                                                64
                                                                                                                                6.4
                                                                                                                                5.C
                                                                                                                                5.6
                                                                                                                                1.5
                                                                                                                                ) S
                                                                                   75

-------
Table 4.  Summary .statistics of data hy mine and by sampling site-


Faith Creek
Total
Dissol.
Ketehem Creek
Total
Dissul.
Eldorado Creek
Total
Dissol
Ester Creek
Total
Dissol.
Aluminum (ug/L)
Overall




Baekcround





Upstream





Effluent





Downstream





Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Sid Dev.
Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max
Min.
Sid. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Meats
Max.
Min.
Sid, Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.

972
14$
9520
29
2280
43.3
39.9
76.6
29
19.4

119
100
205
42.9
71.8

321
832
9520
50
3700

147
107
435
38.1
131

15.4
26,0
58.2
16.7
9.36
30.9
29,5
58.2
22.6
5.77

23.1
22.9
29.9
16.7
4.64

26.4
25.7
33.7
18.6
5.52

25.5
24.0
55
17.4
12,1

6K40
2960
M ! 00
588
9920
H44
776
1X70
5HX
437

2700
1910
10400
1020
3 1 60

1 2000
15100
34100
3660
1 2400

3830
3400
6130
1.310
1850

427
379
75 H
143
189
615
617
75 X
494
K6.3

466
447
6gQ
239
147

1S2
178
261
143
48.6

447
433
637
309
124

Sl.O
57.2
4-40
20.1
96.0
37.4
35.5
62.9
20.1
14.4

96.8
66. 1
369
31.4
114

91.8
74.1
2,53
39.9
72.6

98.0
61.7
440
30.3
139

IS K
1X5
27,9
12. K
3.49
18.4
IK. 2
23.0
15.2
2.75

17,5
17.4
19.7
12.S
6.64

20.0
19,5
27.9
13,9
5.50

19,4
19.1
24,5
17.2
2.64

103
5R.9
440
29
134
116
79.4
440
20.2
129


N/A





N/A




86.5
40.7
418
19.7
147

41.3
29.1
171
10
41,9
59.9
45.7
171
10.0
48.5


N/A





N/A




17.5
16.2
37.5
10.6
9.01

Antimony (ug/L)
Overall




Backgroud




Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.
Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Sid. Dev.
2.6
1.76
0.73
0.5
2.30
0.50
0.50
0,50
0,50
0
1.71
1.36
3.2
0.5
0.98
0,50
0,50
OJO
0,50
0
0.51
0.51
9,84
0.5
0,04
0,50
030
0.50
0,50
o
0.50
0.50
0.50
0,50
0
0,50
0.50
0,50
0,50
0
0.80
0.61
5.5
0.5
1. 01
1.18
0,74
5.50
0,50
1,75
0.53
0.52
1.3
0,5
0,14
0.50
0,50
0.50
0.50
0
1.04
0,88
2
03
0.59
0.59
0.56
1.30
0,50
0.27
0.96
0.82
1,9
0.5
0.55
0.58
0,55
1.20
0.50
0.23
                                             / b

-------
Table 4 (com.) Summary statistics of data by mine and by sampling site.


Upstream





Effluent




Downstream




Arilhmeiit Mean
Geometric Me, in
Max
Mm.
Sul. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Sid. Dev
Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Sul. Dcv.
Faith Creek
Total
2.00
2.51
3.20
2.00
0.45

4.65
2.82
9.84
0,50
3.70
2.50
2.45
3.20
1.70
0,56
Dissol
2.34
2.23
3.20
1 .40
0.67

1.77
1.48
2.40
0.50
0.88
2.15
1.91
3.10
0,50
0.88
Keichcm Creek
Total
0.50
0.50
0 50
0.50
0

0.55
0.54
0 73
0.50
0.08
0.50
a. so
0,50
0.50
0
Dissol.
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0

0.50
0.50
0.50
0,50
0
0.50
0.50
0,50
0,50
0
Eldorado Creek
Total
0.50
0.50
0.50
0.50
0

1,01
0.74
3.10
0.50
0.99
0,50
0.50
0.50
0,50
0
Dissol
0.60
0.56
] .30
0.50
0.2K

050
0.50
0.50
0.50
0
0.50
0,50
0.50
0.50
0
Ester Creek
Total

N/A





N/A



1.61
1.58
2.00
1.30
0.29
Dissol.

N/A





N/A



1,44
1.35
1.90
0.50
0.45

Arsenic (ug/L)
Overall




Background





Upstream




Effluent



Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Sid. Dev.
Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max..
Min.
Std. Dev.
8,87
2.8
53.6
0.43
16.4
0.59
1.74
0.93
0.43
0.15

2.74
2.51
4.10
1.40
1.15

25.4
11.2
51.0
1.80
23.5
1.14
1.04
2.8
0.44
0.49
0.55
0.55
0,66
0.44
0.08

1.29
1.28
1.50
1. 10
0.13

1 .40
1.38
1.70
0.91
031
46,7
12.9
202
0.51
64.8
0.72
0.69
1.10
0.51
0.20

20.3
13.8
79.4
5.42
24.5

134
no
202
32.1
74.7
3. 87
3.81
7.13
0.35
2.25
0.58
0.56
0.69
0.35
0.11

4.82
4.68
6.R3
2.70
1.42

4.85
4 68
7.13
2.70
1 45
0.91
0.84
2.5
0.6
0.47
0.76
0.76
1.00
0.65
0.11

0.96
0.85
2.30
0.60
0.58

0.97
0.89
1.90
0.60
0.45
1.39
0.71
24,7
0.53
4.25
0.68
0.68
0.74
0.65
0.03

3.63
0,98
24.7
0.57
0.28

0.61
0.60
0.68
0.57
004
14.08
9.50
33.5
3.4
11.3
7,10
4,79
33,5
3.40
9.90


N/A




N/A


9.52
6.03
24.9
0.63
8.65
5.72
4.17
24.9
2.50
7.20


N/A




N/A



-------
Table 4 (conl.) Summary statistics of data by mine and by sampling .site


Downstream





Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Mix.
Mm.
Sid. Dev,

Failh Creek
Total
3.14
2.82
5.93
1.50
1.5H

Dissol.
1.17
1 15
1 40
0,57
0,26

Keiehem Creek
Total
320
26.3
54.5
8 6
17,5

Dissol,
5.23
5.08
6 SO
3,00
1,26

Eldorado Creek
Total
0,96
O.R5
2.50
O.M
0.64

Dissi.l
0.64
0,65
0.6X
0.53
0.05

Ester Creek
Total
23.1
22.9
31.4
17.2
4,70

Dissol.
14.4
9,77
24. S
0.63
8.29

Cadmium (ug/L)
Overall




Background





Upstrream




Efflueni




Downstream




Arithmetic Moan
Geometric Mean
Max.
Mill.
Slcl. Dev.
Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
MM.
Mm.
Sid. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.
0.10
0.06
0.54
0.04
0.14
0,04
0,04
0.07
0.04
0.01

0,04
0.04
0,04
0,M
0

0.25
0.1?
0.54
0,04
0.20

0.05
0,04
0.07
0,04
0.01
0.04
0.04
0.05
0,04
0
0,04
0,04
0,04
0.04
0

0.04
-0.04
0,04
0.04
0

0,04
0.04
0.05
0,04
<0.01

0.04
0.04
0.04
0.04
0
0,39
0.25
1.81
0.1
0.46
Oil
0.69
0.14
0.10
0.15

0.21
13. S
0.65
0.1!
0,18

1-01
110
1.81
0.36
0.54

0.24
26.3
0.42
0.16
0.09
0. 1 3
0.13
0.24
0.09
0.03
0.11
0.11
0.13
0.09
0.01

0.12
0.12
0.14
0,11
0.01

0,16
0.16
0.24
0.12
0,04

0.13
0.13
0.15
0.11
0.01
0.04
0.04
0.06
0.04
<0.01
0,04
0.04
0.06
0.04

-------
Table 4 (com.) Summary statistics ol'data by mine and by sampling sue.


Background





Upstream




Effluent




Downstream




Arithmetic Mc;in
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. [)cv.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric' Mean
Max,
Min
Std Dcv.

Arithmetic Mean
Gcomciric Mean
MM.
Min.
Sid. Dcv.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.
Chromium (ug/L)
Overall




Backgroud





Upstream



Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max
Min.
Std. Dev.
Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dcv.
Faith Creek
Total
S110
X I 30
9! 90
7100
590

10100
10000
1 1 600
8750
991

1 7400
17000
22700
14000
3440

9930
9770
11400
8360
1090

2.07
1.35
12.7
1.00
2.86
1.00
LOO
1.00
1.00
0

1,00
1.00
1,00
1.00.
0
Dissol.
8290
8320
Ryio
7450
453

10500
1 0500
1 1 700
X930
939

17400
17000
23800
14000
4330

10300
10200
11500
8620
1060

1.00
1.00
1,00
1.00
0
LOO
1.00
1,00
LOO
0

1.00
1,00
LOO
1.00
0
Kctchcm Creek
Total
2X|0
2750
3410
2230
42.3

6330
ft 170
1 0300
4160
1 H90

1 4900
14800
19300
9610
2850

7390
7240
8660
4660
1350

10.3
4.63
49.4
1,00
14.8
1.76
1.48
4.60
1 00
1.33

3.86
2.S2
14.6
1.50
4.41
Dissol.
2760
2730
"20
2150
424

59SO
5H60
7490
3S60
1 200

1 0700
10600
1 4600
ROOO
2000

6930
6800
8190
4320
1310

1 .03
1 .03
1 20
i 00
0.06
1.06
1,06
1,20
1.00
0.07

1 .03
t .02
1.10
1.00
0,05
Eldorado Creek
Total
25400
25100
36500
1 HOOO
6000

28000
25100
39500
20200
6300

35600
35500
45200
28000
5300

28200
27500
39700
20200
6340

1.01
1.01
1.30
1.00
0.05
LOO
LOO
LOO
LOO
0

LOO
LOO
LOO
LOO
0
Dissol
26400
25700
37H«)
! 9200
5990

2K600
2X200
39900
21400
6140

36400
36300
46300
30000
5 1 70

28700
28200
39800
21500
6110

1.03
1.02
1.70
LOO
0.13
LOO
1.00
1.00
LOO
0

1.09
1.07
1.70
\m
0.25
Ester Creek
Total
20600
195(10
M600
10SOO
6640


N/A




N/A



29000
28800
34400
19900
5130

1 .03
1 .03
1.30
1.00
0.09
1.02
1.02
1.20
1.00
0.07


N/A


Dis^.l.
2 1 600
20400
36500
1 I 100
72200


N/A




N/A



29900
29500
36900
19900
5820

1 .06
1.05
1.50
LOO
0.16
1.06
1.05
i .50
LOO
0. 1 7


N/A


                                          79

-------
Table 4 (com.) Summary statistics ot'daia hy mine and by .sampling silo.


Efflucm




Downstream




Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Mm.
Std. Dev,

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Ski. Dcv.
Faith Creek
Total
4.77
2.88
12.7
1.00
4.68

1.00
1,00
1.00
1,00
0
Dissd.
1.00
1. 00
1 .00
1.00
0

1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
0
Ketchcin Creek
Total
29.7
22.3
4 1) ,4
5.22
18.7

561
5.01
8.68
2.00
2.63
Dissol.
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0

1 .05
1 .05
1 ,20
1.00
0.08
Eldorado Creek
To! ill
1.00
1.00
1.00
1 00
0

1,04
1 .02
1.30
1 .00
0.11
Dissol
1.01
1.02
I 10
1 00
0.04

1.01
! .02
1 1(1
i .00
0.04
Ester Creek
Total

N/A



1.04
1 .0.5
1,30
1 .00
0. i 1
Dissol.

N/A



1.06
1.05
1,40
LOO
0.15
Copper (ug/L)
Overall





Background





Upstream




Effluent




Downstream





Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Mm.
Std. Dev.

529
1.87
47.4
0.5
10.4

0.72
0.69
1.10
0,?0
0.24

1.20
1.15
1.80
0.73
0.42

16.8
9.55
47.4
2.30
16.8

1.41
1.32
1.90
0.67
0.47

0. 97
0.90
2.3
0.5
0.42

0.69
0.68
1.00
0.50
0,15

O.S3
1.70
1.10
0.64
0.15

1.23
1.17
1.80
0.79
0.-14

1.01
0.91
2.30
0.66
0,55

13.4
8.84
51.6
3.4
14.9

4.07
3.98
5.86
3.40
0.80

7.78
6.92
20.0
4.70
5.09

32.9
26.9
51.6
8,74
18.8

8.80
8.32
14.0
4.80
3.19

4.01
3.95
6.38
3.1
0.73

3.58
3.57
3.80
3.30
0.18

4.25
4.17
6.38
3.30
0.95

3.91
3.89
4.60
3.10
0.49

4.30
4.22
5.87
3,20
0.90

1 .08
0.89
3.6
0.5
0.80

0.95
0.72
3.60
0.50
1.07

1.13
0.9.3
2,50
0.50
0.76

1.10
0,95
2.10
0.52
0.58

1.17
0.95
3.00
0.50
O.X7

0.72
0.61
3.7
0.5
0.66

0.60
0.59
0.92
0.50
0.17

0.7R
0.64
2.60
0.50
0.74

0.54
0.54
0.65
0.50
0,06

0.96
0.70
3,70
0.50
1 12

2.65
2.37
5.22
1.2
1.26

1.79
1.66
3.20
1.20
0.74


N/A




N/A



3.76
3.72
5,22
3.00
O.K4

2.13
1.90
3,7
0.5
0.94

1.79
1.66
3.50
1.10
0.76


N/A




N/A



2.57
2.24
3.70
0.50
1 .02

Lead (ug/L
                                           80

-------
Table 4 (cont.) Summary statistics ol data hy mine and hy .sampling site.


Overall





Background





Upslrream




Effluent



Downstream




Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.

.Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Mm.
Sal. Dcv.

Arilhmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max,
Min.
Sid. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.
Arithmetic Mean
Geometric mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.
Faith Creek
Total
5.67
0.82
43.2
0.1
12.4

0 20
0. 1 7
0.50
0.10
0. i 3

0,67
1.15
1.19
0.22
0.38

IS. 9
4.57
43.2
1.00
19.5
1.32
0.74
4.88
0.17
1.56
Dissol
0. 1 6
0 1 1
1) 9
0.10
t.fts

0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0

0.10
0,10
0.10
O.JO
0

0.2X
0.21
0.75
0,10
0.23
o.io
0.10
0,10
0,10
0
Ketchem Creek
Tola!
23, (t
6. 1 9
122
0.27
36.2

O.X7
0 59
2.51
0,27
0.91

9.31
5.24
35.6
2.19
12.0

70.7
51.3
122.0
11.7
45.8
11.2
9.12
20.4
3.14
6.63
Dissol.
0.85
0 59
2.26
0.10
0.61

0 13
0.13
0.19
0.10
0,03

0 82
0,74
1.68
0.36
0.41

1.37
1.25
2.26
0.54
0.60
i.08
1.01
1.45
0.46
0,39
Eldorado Creek
Total
0.37
0.11
0.73
0,1
0.19

0.33
0.26
0.57
0.10
0.21

0.42
0.39
0.73
0.19
0,17

0.42.
0.38
0.64
0.15
0.16
0.31
0.24
0.67
0.10
0.22
Dissol
0.10
0 10
0,10
O.iO
0

0.10
o.io
0.10
0.10
0

OfO
0.10
O.IO
0.10
0

0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0
Ester Creek
T.rtal
0.39
0.2K
1,44
0.1
0.36

042
0.28
1,44
0,10
0,44


N/A




N/A


0.36
0.2K
0.76
0.10
0,26
Dissol.
0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0

0.10
0.10
0.10
0.10
0


N/A




N/A,


0,10
0.10
0.10
0,10
0
Magnesium (ug/L)
Overall





Background




Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max,
Min.
Std. Dev.
2080
1790
4820
820
1220

923
1000
1190
820
114
1900
1700
4530
830
950

935
1000
1210
830
123
2750
2020
9360
680
2460

828
832
945
680
89.0
1500
1380
2580
640
581

769
764
879
640
88.9
14300
14000
22800
9,260
3430

13700
13200
21000
9260
3780
14200
13800
21SOO
9040
3240

13800
1 32,00
20300
9040
3710
1 1 500
11000
16500
4800
3540

9740
9330
16500
4800
3360
11600
11100
16800
5080
3560

9840
9330
16600
5080
,3360
                                           81

-------
Fable 4 (cunt.) Summary suttisiics ol' data by mine and by sampling silo.


Upstream




F.fflucnt




Downstream




Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Mm.
Sid. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.
Faith Creek
Total
1 680
1590
1 860
1470
157

3990
3980
4820
24SO
812

1660
1590
1X70
1440
157
Dissol
1 680
2510
1 830
1420
173

3390
3160
45 30
2480
757

1 A50
1 590
1920
1450
182
Ketchcm Creek
Total
1R10
1 700
374(1
1260
822

62 i 0
5620
9360
3200
2560

2165
2089
2770
1450
489
Dissol
1400
13HO
1 690
990
230

2260
2250
2580
1870
254

1570
1 540
2020
1060
278
Eldorado Creek
Tola!
15300
14X00
22X00
10700
3950

13100
1 2900
1 5400
1 0700
1530

15200
14800
22600
10500
3950
Dissol
15100
1 4HOO
21800
10500
3690

1 2900
1 2900
15200
10500
1450

1 5000
14800
21500
10500
3600
Ester Creek
Total

N/A




N/A



13X00
1 3800
16500
4800
2300
Dissol.

N/A




N/A



I 3900
1 3X00
16800
10200
2390
Mercury (ng/L)
Overall




Backgroud




Upstream




Effluent



Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
M«tt.
Min.
Sid. Dev.
Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.
Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min,
Std. Dev.
12.5
11.5
34
10
6.72
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
0
10.0
10,0
10.0
10,0
0

18.1
15.9
34.0
10,0
9,8
10
10
10
10
0
10,0
10.0
10.0
10.0
0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
0

10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
0
42.5
35.6
152
15.5
31.3
31.3
30.2
43.4
16.2
8.51
30.1
20.2
56.2
15.5
12.8

76.6
61.7
152
17.2
47,5
22.0
19,4
46.6
10.0
11.4
30.1
28.0
45.7
10.4
10.6
22.7
20. i
46.1
10.0
12.0

12.5
12.1
19.3
10.0
3.64
10
10
10
10
0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
0

10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
0
10.3
10.2
18.6
10
1.52
10.0
1 0.0
10.0
10.0
0
100
10.0
10.0
10.0
0

10.0
10.0
10.0
1 0.0
0
11.9
11.7
16.8
10
2.69
12.7
12.3
16.8
10.0
2.73

N/A




N/A


11.3
11.0
18.5
10
2.68
12.3
12.0
18.5
10.0
3.31

N/A




N/A


                                           82

-------
Table 4 (conu Summary statistics ul'data by mine and by samphns: site,


Downs ire ,irn




Ariihmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dcv.
Faith Creek
Total
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
0
Dissol.
1 0.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
0
Ketchein Creek
Total
31 .9
30.9
39.7
21.0
7.34
Dissol.
227
20.7
46,6
10.0
11,1
Eldorado Creek
Total
10.0
10.0
10.0
10,0
ft
Dissol
11.1
IO.H
IX. 6
10.0
3.13
Ester Creek
Total
10.9
107
16, ft
10.0
2.49
Dissol.
10.0
10.0
10,0
10.0
0
Nickel (ug/L)
( Jvtrall




Backeround





Upstream



Effluent



Downstream





Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dcv.
Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dcv.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max,
Min.
Std. Dev,
Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.
Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.

4.8S
1.92
45
0.48
9.30
0.9
0.85
1.7
0.5
0,4

1.1
1.05
1.8
0.8
0,4
15.4
10.2
45.0
2.3
1.5
1,3
1.23
1.88
0.8
0.5

2,00
1,75
6.5
0,76
1.29
1.6
1.58
2.9
1.0
0.6

1.6
1.58
2.2
1.0
0,4
3,1
2,51
6.5
I.I
2,3
1.6
1.58
2.6
0.8
0,6

9.19
5.51
40,6
1.57
11 1
2.49
0,36
5.19
1.57
1.27

4,63
3.89
14,0
2,46
3,84
23.9
19,1
40.6
6.03
13.9
5,81
5.37
8,89
3,35
2.18

2.98
2.93
3.97
2,11
0.51
2,48
2.46
2,89
2.1!
0.37

2.98
2.95
3.60
2.46
0.42
3,41
3.38
3,97
2.51
0.48
3.04
3.02
3,40
2.42
0,33

1.65
1.53
3.91
0.92
0.75
1.30
1.25
1.71
1.00
0.29

1.69
1.55
3.50
0.92
0.86
1.89
1.78
3.30
1.30
0.72
1.71
1.55
3.91
1.05
0.95

1.19
1 14
3,48
0.8
0.46
1 .09
1 .07
1.47
o.so
0.25

1 .35
1.20
3.48
0.86
0,88
1.24
1.23
1,55
1 .09
0.15
1.08
1,07
1.4]
0.85
0.20

2,47
2.33
4.59
1.52
0.87
1.88
1,82
2.9S
1.52
0.63


N/A



N/A


3.21
3.16
4,59
2.72
0,49

2,86
2,77
3.8
1.38
0.72
2.60
2.57
3.80
1.88
0.54


N/A



N/A


3,20
3.09
3.75
1.38
0.83

Selenium (ug/L)
Overall




Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min
Sid, Dev.
] ,00
1 00
1.1
1
0.02
1
i
1
i
0
1.03
1.02
1.3
1
0.07
1
1
1
I
0
1.15
1,14
1.8
i
0.22
1,18
I 17
1.7
1
0.17
1
1
1
I
0
1.03
1 .03
1,5
1
0.13
                                          83

-------
Table 4 (corn.) Summary statistics ol'daia by mine and by sampling site.


Background





Ups dream




Effluent




Downstream




Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Mstx
Mm.
Sid. Dev

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dcv.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.

Mean
Geometric mean
Max.
Miti.
Std. Dev.
Faith Creek
Trtal
1,0
1,0
1.0
1.0
0

1,0
1,0
1,0
1.0
0

1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0

1.0
1,0
LQ
1,0
0
Dixsol.
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0

1.0
1.0
1,0
1,0
0

1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0

1.0
LO
1.0
1.0
0
Ketchem Creek
Ttrt a I
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0

1,0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0

1.0
1.0
1.0
1.30
0.12

1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0
Dissol.
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0

1.0
1.0
LO
1.0
0

1.0
10
to
LO
0

LO
LO
LO
LO
0
Eldorado Creek
Total
1.19
1.17
1.80
1.00
0.26

1.16
1.15
1.70
LOO
0.28

1.18
1.17
1.50
1 .00
0.18

1.09
1,07
1.40
1.00
0.15
Dissol
1.24
1.23
1 70
1,00
0.22

1.13
1,12
1.30
LOO
0.13

1.16
1,15
1,30
LOO
0.19

1.20
1.17
1.50
1.00
0.19
Ester Creek
Total
1.0
1.0
LO
1.0
0


N/A




N/A



1.0
LO
LO
LO
0
Dissol.
LO
LO
1.0
1.0
0


N/A




N/A



1.10
1,07
1.50
1,0
0,19
Silver (ug/L)
Overall





Background





Upstream



Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dcv.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Mm.
Sid. Dev.
0.10
0.05
1.04
0.03
0.20

0.03
0.03
0,03
0.03
0

0.04
0,03
0.07
0.03
0.02
0,03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0

0.03
0.03
0.03
G.03
0

0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0
0.025
0.10
1.33
0.03
0.38

0.03
0.03
0.04
0.03
<0.01

0.09
0.06
0.42
0.03
0. 1 3
0,03
0.03
0.03
0,03
0

0.03
0,03
0.03
0.03
0

0.03
0,03
0,03
0.03
0
0.03
0.03
0.03
0,03
0

0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0

0:03
0,03
0.03
0.03
0
0.03
0,03
0.03
0.03
0

0,03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0

6.03
0.03
0,03
0.03
0
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0

0,03
0.03
OMB
6.03
0


N/A


0,03
0.03
0.03
0,03
0

0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0


N/A


                                            84

-------
Table 4 (com.) Summary statistics u! data by mine and by sampling site


Kf fluent




Downstream




Anlhmt'tic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Mm.
Sid. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.

Faith Creek
Total
0.30
0.15
1.04
0.03
0.37

0.04
0,03
o.ox
0.03
0.02

Dissol
0.03
0 03
0.03
0.03
0

0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
(I

Kelchcm Creek
Total
0.74
0 ^6
1J3
0. 1 3
0.48

0.12
0 10
0.25
0.05
0.07

Dissol.
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0

0.03
0,03
0.03
0.03
(J

Eldorado Creek
Tixijl
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0

0.03
0.03
0.03
0,03
0

DlS.M.I
0,03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0

0.03
0,03
0.03
0.03
0

Ester Creek
Total

N/A



0.03
0,03
0.03
0.03
0

Dissol.

N/A



0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0

Zinc (ug/L)
Overall





Backgroud





Upstream




Effluent




Down strewn




Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Sid. Dtv,

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Sid. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Mm.
Std. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.
1 0.9
6. II
66
4
16.9

4.0
4.0
4.0
4'.0
0

4.6
5.01
7.20
4.0
1.2

28.5
15.9
66,0
4.0
2.6

4.1
3.98
5.0
4.0
0.4
4
4
4
4
0

4,0
4.0
4.0
4.0
0

4
4
4
4
0

4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
0

4.0
4.0
4.U
4.0
0
42.3
20,5
215
5.5
59.5

K.36
7.41
19.0
5.5
4.9S

16.8
12.0
64.0
6.10
19.3

1 20.6
93,3
215
25,0
75.3

23.4
21.4
38.0
9.9
10.3
5.05
4.88
8.6
4.0
1.47

5.50
5.37
7.20
4.0
1.18

5.49
5.20
8.60
4.0
2,00

4.16
4.15
4.90
4.0
0.33

5.06
4.87
8.40
4.0
1.64
4.62
4.42
12
4
1.76

4.0
3.98
4.0
4.0
0

4.01
3.99
4.10
4.0
0.04

5.54
5.13
12.0
4,0
2.77

4,94
4,68
9.70
4.0
2.02
5.50
4.79
25
4
4.31

5.63
5.01
1 3.0
4.00
3.29

4.09
4.07
4.70
4.00
0.24

7.39
5,59
2.5
4
7. S3

5.25
4.68
14.0
4.00
3.53
4.01
4.01
4.1
4
0.03

4.00
4.00
4,00
4:00
0


N/A




N/A



4.01
3.98
4.10
4.00
0.04
4,26
4.18
8,2
4
1 .05

4.00
4.00
4;
-------
Table 4 (com.) Summary statistics of data by mine and by sampling site.


Overall





Background





Upstream





Effluent




Downstream





Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max,
Min.
•Sid. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max,
Min.
Std, Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.
Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.

Faith Creek
Total
37,0
34.7
74,9
21,2
14.4

24.1
1.38
26.7
21.2
1.68

32.2
1.51
36.3
27.9
2.99

59.8
1.77
74,9
45,2
10.9
31.6
1.50
35,7
26,8
3.28

Dissol.
36.7
34.7
78.1
22
13.7

24.6
1.38
26.3
22
1.49

33.1
1.51
36.S
28.1
3.05

57.5
1.77
78.1
47.8
13.8
32,5
1.50
36
27.6
3,33

Ketchem Creek
Total
30.9
24.7
86.7
8.37
21.8

10.4
i.oi
12.3
8.37
f.29

23.2
1.35
41.1
15.7
8.02

62.7
1.78
H6.7
37.2
16.9
27.4
1.43
32.1
17.6
5.19

Dissol.
22.6
20,3
47.1
8
10.3

10.0
1.0
11.9
8
1.41

20,7
1.31
25,7
13.7
3.95

36.1
1.55
47,,!
27.7
5.95
23. g
1.37
28.8
15.2
4.35

Eldorado Creek
Total
132
129
193
83.1
28.7

120
2.07
178
83.1
30.6

133
2.11
193
94.5
32.1

143
2.15
174
114
18.8
133
2.11
192
93.7
32.0

Dissol
133
131
189
85.2
27.3

123
2,08
176
85.2
30.2

134
2.12
189
96.7
30.3

144
2.16
174
118
18.0
133
2.12
188
96.9
30.1

Esier Creek
Total
108
103
154
46.7
32.6

91.5
1.94
156
46.7
30.3


N/A





N/A



129
2.11
156
90,8
22.3

Dissol.
Ill
106
161
48.6
33.S

94.4
1.95
159
48.6
31.8


N/A





N/A



132
2.11
161
91.7
24.2

Total Suspended Solids
Overall





Background




Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.
62.7
8 4(1
876
T
1*7

2.29
2 22
4
"?
0,69
127
29,9
922
?
240

12.6
5.40
58.X
i
20, 1
11.0
5.56
105
1
20.2

3.93
3.60
8.2
1
1.92
4.52
3.36
24.3
2
5.36

5.49
3 72
24.3
1
51 0
                                          86

-------
Table 4 (com.) Summary statistics ot'duia by mine and by sampling site.
Upstream




Effluent





Downstream





Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min,
Std. Dev.
Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
MM.
Min.
Sid. Dev,

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.

9.72
6.98
19.6
2.1
7.18
137
37.2
283
2
129

10,4
6.21
25,5
2
9.66

31.7
19.5
89,5
4
30.8
425
222
922
28.4
350

37.8
,34.5
57
16.9
15.8

22 2
8,47
105
2
36.3
7.79
5.80
17.8
2
5.97

10.2
5.40
51.4
•>
S6.8



N/A




N/A



3,72
2.95
6.6
2
2.99

Turbidity
Overall





Background





Upstream





Effluent





Downstream





Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Mm,
Std. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min,
Std. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
MM.
Min.
Std. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max,
Min.
Sid. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max,
Min.
Sid, Dev

103
4.76
1050
0,05


0.60
0.40
1.83
0.05
0.57

3.82
3.19
6.67
0.97
2,12

306
71,6
798
2.4
312

5,63
3.20
19.1
0.66
6,25

335
52,9
2180
0.85


4.78
3,04
16,4
11
30.9

60.8
34.5
278
33
22,7

1 150
724
2180
30
13.5

125
102
210
36
21.5

3.94
2.34
19.3
0.43
4.91

1,15
097
1
0.43
0.67

3,74
2.67
12,4
1.2
3.99

6,21
4.28
19.3
1.5
6.45

3.85
2.10
16
0.6
54S

6.51
4.31
25.4
1.85


406
3.41
8,96
1,85
2,83



NA





NA



9.65
5.82
25.4
2,3
10.8

PH
                                          87

-------
Table 4 (com.) Summary statistics of data by mine and by sampling site.
Overall





Background





Upstream





Effluent





Downstream





Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Sid. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Sid. Dev,

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std, Dev.

7.34
7.33
7.8
6.43
0.33

7.28
7.27
7.69
6.43
0.41

7.48
7.47
7.78
7.03
0,28

7.13
7.13
7.58
6.9
0.23

7.42
7.89
7.8
6.87
0.35

6.63
6.62
7.14
5.69
0.39

6.06
6.06
6.23
5.69
0.20

6.96
6.96
7.14
6.7
0.15

6.67
6.67
6.78
6.57
O.OR

6.84
6.84
7.09
6.52
0.20

7.47
746
8.05
6.67
0.38

7,76
7.76
S.05
7.47
0.22

7.10
7.40
7.91
6.77
0,34

7.27
7.26
7.93
6.67
0.38

7.50
7.49
S.01
6.77
0.42

7.20
7.20
7.63
6.77
0.28

7,2.9
7.29
7.63
6.94
0.31



NA





NA



7.09
7.08
7.32
6.77
0.19

Temperature
Overall





Background





Upstream




Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std Dev

.Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
3rd. Dev.

.Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Ski. Dev.
75
/ .2
11.5
3.8
T 1

6.69
6.36
9.9
3.S
2.21

7.49
7 20
9.9
4.5
2.10
7.2
6.3
17
1.5
3.7

3.2
3.05
4.6
1.5
097

72
6.99
10.7
5.6
1.96
7.9
7.8
11
6
1.4

7.75
7.62
11
6
1.58

7.5
7.37
to
h
1.51
5.9
5.5
9.6
2.8
2 2

4,34
4.12
7,3
2.S
1.55



NA


                                          88

-------
Table 4 (com.) Summary statistics of data by mine and by sampling site.
Effluent





Downstream




Conductivity
Overall





Background




Upstream




Effluent





Downstream





Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Mm.
Sid. Dev,

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Mm.
Std. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std, Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.
Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
M«.
Min.
Std. Dev.
Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Min.
Std. Dev.

Arithmetic Mean
Geometric Mean
Max.
Mm.
Std. Dev.

9.14
9.01
11.5
7
1.68

6.6
6.26
9.4
' 3.8
2.18

79.1
75.5
162
48
27.0

55.9
55.7
60
48
4.52
71.6
71.4
76
62
5.38
120
118
162
103
27.4

69.4
69.0
7H
57
7.44

11.3
10.8
17
6.4
3.82

7,15
6.87
10.9
4,4
2.18

60.9
53.1
135
20
30,9

25.5
25.3
30
20
3.25
52
50.7
70
33
12,3
105
104
135
87
15.1

60.9
59,7
72
38
12.0

8
7.94
10
7
1.07

8.25
8.14
10
6
1.39

188
184
270
126
38.0

172
168
248
126
40.0
185
ISO
264
138
43.2
205
203
26!
iso
26,7

190
186
270
139
41,2



NA



8
7.94
9.6
6.7
1.03

196
185
306
88
64.0

158
151
221
88
47.9


NA




NA



244
239
306
1RO
51.8

                                          89

-------
Table 5. Alaska Water Quality Criteria.  Values used for comparison with measurements are t'oi
chronic effects to aquatic life except where noted.
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium (+6)
Copper
Lead
Magnesium
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
No criterion used for comparison.
Lowest Observed Effect Concentration (LOEC): 610 ng/L
Alaska criterion for public water supplies: 50 (ig/L
exp(0.7852*ln(hardness) - 3.490) study range 0. 16
- 1 .90 ng/L
No criterion used for comparison.
1 1 .0 fig/L
exp(0.8545*ln( hardness) - 1 .465) study range 1 ,37
exp( 1 .266*ln(hardness) - 4.661 ) study range 0. 13 -
- 32.90 Mg/L
7.40 ^g/L
No criterion used for comparison.
12ng/L(0.012Mg/L)
exp(0. 76*ln( hardness) 4- 1.06) study range 14.02-
157.5ng/L
Sug/L
0. 1 2 jjg/L
47.0 ng/L

-------
"fable 6. Linear correlation coefficients for comparison of measurement parameters.
Metal
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Magnesium
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Ziru.
H ardness
Correlation Coefficients (r)
Total vs. Dissolved
0.14
n = 112
0.48
n = 29
0.24
n = 112
0.39
n = 36
0.99
n= 112
-0.24
n= 17
0.36
n = 95
0.59
n= 3K
0.98
n= 112
-0.23
n = 34
0.33
n = 106
0,(iK
11 = 23

-0.22
n = 70
0.98
n = 1 I 2
Total vs. Turbidity
0.9634
n= 112
0.08
n = 38
0.946,
n= 1 ! 2
0,95
n = 53
-0.05,
n = 112
0.96
n = 40
0.95
n = 40
0.97
ri = 83
-0,02
n= 106
O.H7
n - 47
0.92
n = 9K
0.04
n = 24
--
0.97
n =54
-0,04
n= 106
Dissolved vs. Turbidity
0,0314
n = 112
0.25
n=31
0.079,
n- 112
0.24
n = 40
-0.182,
n= 112
-0.15
n = 29
0.28,
n=95
0.49
n = 40
-0.21
n= 106
0.36
11 = 36
0.25
n= 106
-0.12
n= 22
--
-0.24
11= 23
-0.20
n= 106
Turbidity vs. TSS: r = 0.95.11 = 106
                                          91

-------
Appendices
      A. Quality Assurance Project Plan
      B. Field Reports
      C, Description of placer mining districts, from Nokleberg and others (1996).
      D. Laboratory Report of Data
                                         92

-------
         Appendix A
Quality Assurance Project Plan

-------
      United States Environmental Protection Agency
Region 10,1200 Sixth Avenue, Seattle WA 98101
                                     FINAL
                     QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN
                                   FOR THE
                      ALASKA PLACER MINING SURVEY
                  Project Code:

                  Account Code:
June 1997

 TEC-311G
 9798B10PFEX
Week of Sampling
August 18, 1997
August 25, 1997
Sample Numbers Assigned
97344550-4699, 97344300-4474
97354700-4999
Approvals: .

Project Officer:

QA Officer:

Organization Manager:
                         Date:.

                         Date:.

                         Date:
Prepared By The

Region 10 Quality Assurance & Data Unit
Office of Environmental Assessment
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

-------
                                Table of Contents

1.0   Project  Organization  and Responsibility  	1

2     Project Description	1
      Objective and Scope: 	1
       1997 Schedule of Sampling Tasks and Milestones	1

3     QA Objectives	2
      3.1    Data Usage:  	2
      3.2    Monitoring network/sample collection design and rationale  	3
      3.3    Sample Types	4
             Table 1: Analytical Methods, Containers, Preservation, Holding Time and
                    Detection Limits	4

4     Data Quality Objectives	6
      Table 2: Quantitative Objectives for Precision and Accuracy  	6
      4.1    Precision and Accuracy	7
      4.2    Data Representativeness  	7
      4.3    Data Comparability	7
      4.4    Data Completeness	7

5     Sampling Procedures 	8
      	*=	»	
      5.1    Total Metals Sampling Procedures	;	8
      5.2    Dissolved metals sampling procedures  	8
             5.2.1   Filtration method  	9
      5.3    General sampling procedures  	9

6     Sample Custody Procedures	12

7     Calibration Procedures and Preventive Maintenance  	12

8     A nalytical Methods	13

9     Documentation. Data Reduction, and Reporting	13
      9.1    Documentation	13
      9.2    Data Reduction and Reporting	14
      9.3    Data Assessment/Analysis  	14

10    Performance/System Audits	14

11    Corrective Action	14

Apendix A      Alaska Placer Mining Survey
Apendix B      Analytical Statement of Work

-------
Alaska Placer Mining Survey QAPP
       Revision 1, August 12, 1997   Page 1  of 14
1.0    Project  Organization  and Responsibility

The following is a list of key project personnel and their responsibilities:
             Organization Manager:
             Project Officer:
             Study Design:

             QAPP Preparation:
             QAPP Review:
             Field Sampling:
             Laboratory Arrangements:
             Laboratory Operation:
             Data Validation:
             Data Assessment/Analysis:

             Report Preparation:
Bob Robichaud
Phillip North
Phillip North, Carla Fisher, Data Assessment
Personnel and Patricia Cirone
Laura Castrilli
Donald Matheny
Jim Corpuz, Joseph Goulet and USGS and/or
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
personnel
Laura Castrilli
Gerald Muth, ESAT Deputy Project Officer
Jim Ross, Metals Chemist, Washington Department
of Ecology (WDOE)
Manchester Laboratory (TSS data), Quality
Assurance and Data Unit (QADU - metals data)
Joseph Goulet and David Frank

Joe Goulet and Carla Fisher
2      Project  Description

Objective and Scope:

See the June 10, 1997, Placer Mining Survey document, attached - Appendix A, for a description
of the project and it's objectives.  This Quality Assurance Project Plan is for the collection and
analysis of field samples during 1997 in support of the Placer Mining Survey. An addendum to
this plan will be prepared next year for the 1998 sampling season.
1997 Schedule of Sampling Tasks and Milestones:
Activity
Q A Plan Review
Summer of 1997
Field Sampling
Estimated beginning and ending dates
6/15-
6/29/97
X

8/18-
8/3 1/97

X
8/25-
10/17/97*


09/22 -
10/27/97*


10/27/97-
01/31/98


1/31/98



-------
Alaska Placer Mining Survey QAPP
Revision 1, August 12, 1997   Page 2 of 14
1997 Schedule of Sampling Tasks and Milestones:
Activity
Lab Analysis
Data Validation
Data Analysis
Report Preparation
Estimated beginning and ending dates
6/15-
6/29/97




8/18-
8/31/97




8/25-
10/17/97*
X



09/22 -
10/27/97*

X


10/27/97-
01/31/98


X

1/31/98



X
* Depending on the actual number of samples shipped, there will be between six and seven total
metals data packages and six and seven dissolved metals data packages.  Starting Monday,
September 22, a minimum of two  packages are to be delivered to the EPA QADU each Monday.
The last data packages are to be received by Monday, October 20. The schedule of at least two
data packages per week (more some weeks so that all packages are received by October 20)
needs to be maintained so that data validation can start in time for the data assessment/analysis to
be completed in time.  TSS analyses will be validated by the EPA Manchester laboratory.  All
validated TSS data must be delivered to Joe Goulet by October 27, 1997.

All field reports will be completed within one  month of sample collection. Laboratory results and
interpretation (if necessary) will be appended.

3      QA  Objectives

       3.1    Data Usage:

       The data from the Summer of 1997 (broad sampling of all active sites and half of the
       inactive sites) will be used to see if a relationship between metals and other general
       parameters such  as TSS  and/or settleable  solids and/or hardness can be established for the
       placer mining operations in Alaska. If a relationship can be established, an extensive
       second round of sampling will occur in the summer of 1998.  The data from the extensive
       round of sampling will be used to determine temporal trends in the relationship between
       metals and other general parameters.

-------
Alaska Placer Mining Survey QAPP               Revision 1,  August 12, 1997   Page 3 of 14

       3.2     Monitoring network/sample collection design and rationale:

       The sampling team will take chemical and physical measurements in August 1997, at
       approximately 75 active  mines in the Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Nome mining areas..
       Remote mines on the Trinity Islands, Shumagan Islands and the lower Yukon River will
       not be included in this  survey.  Where a mine is discharging waste water, four samples will
       be taken, one from each of the following:

       1) upstream of any disturbance (i.e., "natural background"),

       2) immediately upstream of the discharge1,

       3) the effluent,

       4) downstream of the point of mixing (determined visually). If the state of Alaska
       indicates the physical location of the edge of the mixing zone, EPA shall take samples at
       the edge of the mixing zone. However, if the state indicates a dilution factor, EPA shall
       sample the effluent and calculate the concentration after dilution (without taking a
       downstream  sample).

       Where  a mine is not discharging, samples will be collected upstream of any disturbance
       and immediately upstream from the site.

       EPA anticipates visiting approximately 40 to 50 mines that will have discharges. There are
       likely to be another 50 that do not have a discharge.  Samples will be collected at all mines
       that have a discharge and approximately half those that don't, for a total of up to 250
       sample locations (corresponding to 500 metals samples when total and dissolved metals
       are counted).

       Turbidity, temperature, pH, electrical conductivity, and settleable solids will be measured
       in the field. All dissolved and total recoverable mercury and total suspended solids
       analyses will be done by the EPA Region 10 Manchester Lab. A private or State lab will
       be procured by EPA to do the remaining total and dissolved metals analyses.

       Containers collected from a given sampling point  will be assigned a common EPA lab
       number which will be marked on the container cap and on the side of the container.  Each
       sampling point will receive a separate EPA lab number. Field duplicates and blanks will all
       be assigned separate unique EPA lab numbers.  In addition, dissolved (filtered) metals
       aliquots will  be assigned  a separate unique EPA lab number as most labs cannot use the
       *If there are no disturbances upstream from the discharge, only one upstream sample (the
"natural background" sample) will be taken.

-------
Alaska Placer Mining Survey QAPP
Revision 1, August 12, 1997   Page 4 of 14
       same sample number to report two sets of similar data (in this case total vs. dissolved
       metals).

       The analytical parameter name or abbreviation will be marked on the cap and on the side
       of the container.  Abbreviations may include:  TM for total metals; DM for dissolved
       metals; Turb for turbidity; and Set Sol. for settleable solids.

       Turbidity and settleable solids analysis will be performed in the field with a portable
       turbidity meter (LaMotte Model 2008) and an ImhoffCone, respectively.

       3.3     Sample Types:
Table 1: Analytical Methods, Containers, Preservation, Holding Time and Detection Limits
Media
Type
Analyte
Container
Method
Detection
Limit
(MS/L)*
Preservation
Holding
Time
Metals**
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Magnesium
Mercury
Nickel
1 Quart
Cubitainer*
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
EPA 200.7
and/or 200.8
EPA 200.7
and/or 200.8
EPA 200.7
and/or 200.8
EPA 200.7
and/or 200.8
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.7
and/or 200.8
EPA 200.7
and/or 200.8
EPA 200.7
EPA 245.1
EPA 200.7
and/or 200.8
85.0
140.0
0.15
0.35
1000.0
50.0
3.5
0.5
1000.0
0.01
10.0
HNOjto
pH<2, Iceb
HNOjto
pH<2, Ice"
HNOjto
pH<2, Ice"
HNOjto
pH<2, Ice"
HNOjto
pH<2, Iceb
HNOjto
pH<2, Iceb
HNOjto
pH<2, Ice"
HNOjto
pH<2, Iceb
HNOjto
pH<2, Iceb
HNOjto
pH<2, Iceb
HNOjto
pH<2, Ice"
180 days
180 days
180 days
180 days
180 days
180 days
180 days
180 days
180 days
28 days
180 days

-------
Alaska Placer Mining Survey QAPP
Revision 1, August 12, 1997   Page 5 of 14
Table 1: Analytical Methods, Containers, Preservation, Holding Time and Detection Limits
Media
Water
Water
Water
Type
Grab
Grab
Grab
Analytc
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
Container
a
a
a
Method
EPA 200.7
and/or 200.8
EPA 200.7
and/or 200.8
EPA 200.7
and/or 200.8
Detection
Limit
0
-------
Alaska Placer Mining Survey QAPP
Revision 1, August 12,  1997   Page 6 of 14
Media
Type
Analylc
Container
Method
Detection
Limit
Preservation
Holding
Time
         Table I; Analytical Methods, Containers, Preservation, Holding Time and Detection Limits
 a - All total metals will be collected in the same 1 quart cubitainer. For dissolved metals, a field
 filtration procedure developed by Andy Hess at the EPA Manchester laboratory (consisting of
 a disposable filter/two pieces of connective tubing and a 'tap' cap) will be used for dissolved
 metals sample collection. See the section on sampling for further discussion of the sample
 containers.

 b - All water samples for metals analysis should be acidified, in the field when the sample is
 collected, with nitric acid to a pH less than 2. Further, samples should be acidified for at least
 16 hours prior to analysis. Icing of the  metals samples is not required by CFR Part 136, Table
 IB.  However, if preservative cannot be immediately added to the samples, the samplers will  be
 icing the samples if they are to be preserved later in the day. Footnote 2 to Table IB allows for
 preserving with ice 24 hour automatic composite samples when it is impossible to immediately
 preserve each aliquot.  The metals samples will be iced during shipment in the event TSS
 aliquots are shipped in the same cooler.  Dissolved metals samples will be filtered through a
 0.45 um filter prior to acidification to a pH less than 2 with nitric acid. See the section on
 sampling for a contingency discussion.

 c - hardness will be measured as the sum of the calcium and magnesium as measured by
 Method 200.7 (See notes in Table IB, 40 CFR Part 136).

 * Metals detection limits (except for calcium and magnesium) have been set to the lowest level
 aquatic life criteria based on a sample hardness of 25 mg/L.

 ** In the event of equipment  failure or  unavailability, 200 series Graphite Furnace Atomic
 Ahsorntion Snectroscnnv procedures mav he substituted for ICP-MS method 200 8	
       Data  Quality  Objectives
Table 2: Quantitative Objectives for Precision and Accuracy
Analyte Group
Metals
Conventionals
Samples/Matrix*
262-264 total Water, 262-
264 dissolved Water
256 Water (no blanks)
RPD
±20
±20
% Recovery
75-125%
75-125%

-------
Alaska Placer Mining Survey QAPP                Revision 1, August 12, 1997   Page 7 of 14

       4.1     Precision and Accuracy:

       Precision: Precision will be evaluated by the relative percent difference (RPD) between
       matrix spike/matrix spike duplicate samples or between laboratory duplicate samples (or
       between field duplicate analyses for field measurements). The precision required for the
       analyses involved with.this project are in Table 1.  The dispersion of these samples will
       represent the various sampling areas identified in this plan (i.e., upstream, downstream and
       effluent). In addition, the initial assessment of the field duplicates will be tied to those
       areas (especially where divergent analyte concentration ranges are realized between
       sub-groups of sample duplicates).

       Accuracy: Accuracy will be evaluated by the use percent recovery (%R) of the target
       analyte in spiked samples and/or laboratory control samples, where applicable. The
       accuracy requirements are presented in Table 1.

       4.2     Data Representativeness:

       The samples will be grab samples. They do not represent temporal trends in the metals
       concentrations around placer mining operations.  This is an instantaneous representation
       of water quality conditions around placer mining operations at the time of sampling.

       4.3     Data Comparability:

       Data will be reported  according to established EPA Regional Laboratory protocols and to
       the requirements specified in the contract laboratory statement of work (SOW) for metals
       analysis (Appendix B).. Samples will be analyzed according to approved analytical
       procedures.  This set of data may be compared to other data. There should not be a
       comparability problem for TSS as the EPA regional lab has analyzed a lot of the past
       samples. For the contract lab metals analyses, comparison to past data may not be
       possible. However, future metals .analyses will be conducted  following the same SOW
       (unless problems occur that require alteration of the SOW). This set of data will be
       compared to the summer of 1998 sampling. Therefore, equivalent methods must be used
       for both studies

       4.4     Data Completeness:

       All samples collected  are to be analyzed with appropriate supportive documentation. Field
       problems sometimes result in not all planned samples being collected.  Laboratory
       problems sometimes result in loss of samples or loss of data due to qualification. The
       overall completeness goal for the summer of 1997 sampling is 80%. That is, a loss of
       20% of .the planned data should not fatally impact the data usability for the 1997 sampling.
       For each mining operation, the field completeness goal for sample collection is 100% (that

-------
Alaska Placer Mining Survey QAPP               Revision 1, August 12, 1997    Page 8 of 14

       is, effluent should not be collected/submitted if an adequate background sample cannot be
       obtained).
      Sampling Procedures

      5.1    Total Metals Sampling Procedures:

      To the extent possible, the samplers will attempt to follow sampling procedures in Method
       1669: Sampling Ambient Water for Trace Metals at EPA Water Quality Criteria Levels.
      Project specific QA procedures are specified in this QAPP.  The limited budget may
      preclude the use of some sampling precautions outlined in this method. However, the
      collection of field and equipment blanks should document whether or not the sample
      collection methods have biased the sample results.

      Each mining operation potentially will have up to four samples collected around  it. The
      sampling will start at the sampling point the farthest down stream and will proceed in
      order up to the farthest up-stream sample point so that silt stirred up by wading into the
      stream will not end up in the sample containers and positively bias the data.

      Cubitainers should be held by hand when collecting samples.  Samples should be taken
      from a well mixed location by pointing the neck of the cubitainer upstream and
      downwards - submerging the neck below the surface of the water. The bottom of the
      container should be pushed down under the water as the  container fills. If sampling
      requires the sampler to enter the stream,  the sampler should be downstream of the sample
      location. Should it be  necessary to use a clean unused cubitainer as a 'scoop' to obtain
      sufficient sample, it should be thoroughly rinsed with stream water and used only for
      sample taking purposes at one location.  To prevent sample cross-contamination due to
      'dirty hands', disposable talc free gloves  will be used at each sample collection point prior
      to collection of metals samples. In accordance with Method 1669, containers (collection
      chambers for filtration apparatus) will be pre-rinsed at least once with the sample and then
      submerged and filled with sample. For un-filtered samples, the container cap will be
      affixed while the container is still submerged (unless it is necessary to use successive
      scoops of water from shallow streams to obtain sufficient volume).

      5.2   Dissolved metals sampling procedures:

      Prior to field work, the EPA samplers will make arrangements to visit the EPA laboratory
      in Manchester, WA and will practice the filtration method that will be used in the field.
      They will also practice the clean hands/dirty hands sampling technique.

-------
Alaska Placer Mining Survey QAPP                Revision 1, August 12, 1997    Page 9 of 14

              5.2.1   FiI/radon method:

              A field filtration method developed at the EPA Manchester Laboratory is the
              filtration method that will be used.  This filtration procedure is simple to implement
              but has not been fully tested for water quality criteria analyses.  An initial analysis
              of the filter cartridge and tubing has shown that metals (mercury was not analyzed)
              were not present at levels above the required detection limits.  Two clean
              cubitainers are connected by two disposable short pieces of tubing with a
              disposable 0.45 ym accordion folded filter cartridge in between the pieces of
              tubing.  The filter cartridge in this apparatus is unlikely to clog if there is some
              paniculate in the samples as there is more surface area to the filter. The first
              container is filled with unfiltered sample, a 'tap' cap is affixed to the filled
              container and then connected via tubing to the filter cartridge (which is connected
              by another piece of tubing to the receiving container) and then the water is forced
              through the filter by squeezing the cubitainer.  The filter cartridge, tubing, tap cap
              and first collection container are all disposed of after collection is completed at one
              location. No sample contact equipment is re-used at other sample locations.

              The tubing will be pre-cut and if possible attached to the filter, then  will be
              individually double bagged in zip lock bags and will be shipped to the samplers in
              the field (or will be taken as excess baggage by the samplers into the field).

              Potential problem/resolution: it is slightly possible that the filter will clog up on
              very turbid samples. It is anticipated that only effluent samples will be turbid and
              most likely only a sub-set of the effluent samples will be turbid. The cost per
              filtration apparatus is around $15.  It will not be economically possible to use
              multiple apparatus on  samples.  If this occurs,  a clean  cubitainer will be used to
              collect an un-filtered, un-preserved (but iced) sample aliquot that will then be
              shipped to the lab for lab filtration and preservation.

              It is understood that lab filtration and preservation will result in data that is not
              quite dissolved metals data.  The results will be of unknown bias. This is because
              some dissolved metals may adsorb  to the walls of the container and will not be put
              through the filtration process (low  bias). However, some metals adhering to the
              • particulates in the sample may through bacterial action go into solution, possible
              high bias in the dissolved metals data.
        5.3    General sampling procedures:

        All metals samples will be double bagged - the inner bag and container are only to be
        touched by a clean hands sampler. All metals samples will be chemically preserved in a

-------
Alaska Placer Mining Survey QAPP                Revision 1, August 12, 1997   Page 10 of 14

       controlled manner.  The two sampling teams will decide together, based on logistics, how
       this will be achieved.

       During preservation, the container should be kept within the bags - 'dirty hands' holding
       open the outer bag while 'clean hands' touches the inner bag and container and preserves
       the sample.  'Clean hands' will then re-cap each preserved sample and re-seal the inner bag
       after which  'dirty hands' re-seals the outer bag and places the sample in a cooler for
       shipment.

       Sampling for analytes other than metals: the clean sampling techniques described above
       are only necessary for the trace metals analyses. It is not necessary to double bag and
       handle the TSS aliquots in this manner.  The field crew may at their option take the same
       precautions but should they find the precautions too onerous, they may opt to use normal
       sampling  procedures or chose not to take corrective action (re-gloving  and/or re-
       sampling) should the clean  hands sampler accidentally 'contaminate' his gloves by
       touching his clothes or a 'dirty' outer bag.

       Example scenario:, at collection point one using normal sampling procedures, take field
       measurements and the TSS sample. Then re-glove and follow clean sampling techniques
       for metals collection.  Proceed to the next sampling point, take field measurements and
       TSS  samples.  Then re-glove and follow clean sampling techniques for  metals collection.

       All TSS and total metals sample containers will be supplied through the EPA Region 10
       Lab.  These will consist of quart/liter Cubitainers purchased as pre-cleaned containers.
       The bottle supplier will be required to supply analytical data showing that the supply of
       cubitainers, has been analyzed and shown to have no metals contamination above the
       required detection limits before supplying the containers. Exception, the selenium
       detection limit by the potential vendor (ESS) is 6 ug/L (1 ug/L above the required
       detection limit).  The EPA Region 10  Lab will  provide each sampling team with four
       individually double-bagged plastic rods (total of eight rods). The rods  will be of suitable
       diameter  and length for the samplers to use them as a cubitainer expanding device
       (cubitainers are supplied flattened and are difficult to open just with hands).  The rods
       should have smooth ends so that the cubitainers or sampler's hands will not be punctured.
       Eight rods are needed in the event one or more is dropped and contaminated.

       Each field crew will be responsible for double bagging individual un-used cubitainers for
       use in the field for metals sample collection.  Each evening, a sufficient supply of double
       bagged containers needs to be placed  in a 'clean' cooler for use the next day. During
       initial bagging, both samplers will don clean gloves but only one person ('clean' hands)
       will handle  the containers,  plastic rods and inner bags while the other person ('dirty'
       hands) handles the outer bags and opening the outer containers of the large supply of
       containers.  When the cubitainer is placed in the inner bag, clean hands should then
       remove a plastic rod from it's inner bag and use it to expand the cubitainer.

-------
Alaska Placer Mining Survey QAPP                Revision 1, August  12, 1997    Page 11 of 14


       Blank water will be suppled by the EPA or Alaska Department of Environmental
       Conservation laboratory in pre-cleaned 1 gallon cubitainers. Before the water is used, a
       blank sample from each batch of blank water will be composited from the 1 gallon
       cubitainers and submitted blind to the contract laboratory to determine if analyte levels
       are below the detection limits required for this project. Also, the composite blank water
       will be used to rinse the plastic rods to document whether any contamination was
       introduced to the samples by using the rods to expand the cubitainers.  The rod  rinse
       water will be preserved and submitted blind to the lab for analysis.

       A total of six transfer (total) blank and six equipment  (filtered) blanks will be obtained and
       sent blind to the lab. These blanks are expected to reflect the range of different  field
       conditions encountered during sampling.  All transfer  and filtration blanks are to be
       collected and preserved using procedures as close to actual sampling as possible.
       However, it will be unfeasible to exactly imitate stream sampling with blank water.
       Following the method 1669 blank collection procedure (submersing the container in
       standing blank water) is not representative of stream sampling.  Therefore, a transfer
       blank will be collected. The six transfer blanks does not include the one blank water
       sample and one plastic rod  rinse blank sample that will also be collected, preserved and
       submitted for analysis (discussed in the previous paragraph).

       Like the samples, the blank container must first be rinsed with blank water.  The clean
       hands sampler will hold the transfer blank bottle while the second  sampler (taking care not
       to handle the blank water supply around the opening)  pours blank water into the blank
       container.  So long as the blank water supply is never contaminated by handling around
       the opening, it can be used for all blanks.

       If a second cubitainer has to be used as a scoop during sample collection (or is used  as
       part of the filtration step), the blank water will be used to rinse one clean cubitainer
       (representing the scoop or  supply reservoir for the filter), the blank scoop (connected to
       the filter apparatus for equipment blans) will be used to rinse and then fill a second
       cubitainer (representing the field or filtration blank). If two methods for collection
       (intermediate collection device versus direct container collection)  are used, the samplers
       will collect a total of 8 total and 8 filtered blanks (proportioning the blanks  according to
       the approximate frequency of method use).

       Each sampling team will be responsible for collecting  half of the blanks. Additional  blanks
       may need to be added if field procedures are materially altered, field conditions warrant
       more blanks (e.g. windy/dusty/and/or rainy conditions) or if the blank water supply is
       changed (i.e. they run out and have to request more blank water).

       Depending upon the relative concentrations of contaminants observed, the data  for each
       type  of blank may be pooled for the purpose of discerning relative degrees of

-------
            Alaska Placer Mining Survey QAPP               Revision 1, August 12, 1997   Page 12 of 14

                  contamination (e.g., between sample teams, as sampling progresses, etc.) and/or all blank
                  results may be pooled to provide an overall contamination estimate for the entire sample
                  set.

                  Six TSS, six total metals, and six dissolved metals field duplicate samples will be collected
                  and submitted blind to the lab.  With the first shipment and at an overall frequency of one
                  per forty field samples,  a laboratory QC sample will be designated.  For dissolved metals,
                  this means an extra sample will need to be collected if the special filtration apparatus is
                  used as the sample container on the filtration apparatus is only 500  mL. No extra volume
                  for lab QC should be required for TSS or total metals.  Field analyses will be conducted in
                  duplicate at six  sample  locations. Each field team will be responsible for collection of half
**                 of the field QC  samples.
                  The dispersion of the duplicate samples will represent the various sampling areas identified
                  in this plan (i.e., upstream, downstream and effluent). In addition, the initial assessment of
                  the field duplicates will be tied to those areas (especially where divergent analyte
                  concentration ranges are realized between sub-groups of sample duplicates).
^
            6     Sample  Custody  Procedures

                  The samples will be in the custody of EPA personnel at all times. EPA Region 10 chain of
                  custody forms and procedures will be used. Each cooler of samples shipped to the
"*                 laboratory must stand alone on the custody documentation (i.e. only samples in the cooler
                  are to be on the custody form).

                  Minimally, every sample taken in the field  will be labeled and accompanied by a chain of
                  custody form when shipped to the laboratory for analysis. EPA Region 10 laboratory
**                 Analysis required forms for metals analyses will be completed (TSS can be hand-
                  written/requested on this form). These forms and/or labels will contain:

                  •  Sample identification number
                  •  Date  and Time of sample collection
«,                 •  Sample location identification number and/or description
                  •  Sample matrix type
                  •  Signatures  of samplers, sample handlers, and recorders
                  •  Type of analyses required
                  •  Number of containers representing the sample
^                 •  Method of Shipment
                  •  Signatures  and dates  indicating the transfer of sample custody

            7     Calibration Procedures and Preventive Maintenance:

^                 For all chemical analyses, calibration procedures, frequency and preventive maintenance
                  shall be performed in accordance with the analytical methods cited  and/or instrument

-------
Alaska Placer Mining Survey QAPP               Revision 1, August 12, 1997   Page 13 of 14

       manufacturer's recommendations.  Additional quality control parameters for water
       chemistry are given in Tables 1 and 2. The turbidity meter will be calibrated before each
       measurement in the field.

8      Analytical Methods:

       Where possible, monitoring/analysis shall be conducted in accordance with 40CFR part
       136.3 approved NPDES analytical procedures found  in the following references:

       •      Standard Methods, 18th Edition, 1992

       •      EPA Methods for the Analysis of Water and Waste Water, EPA EMSL-Cincinnati,
             EPA-600/4-79-020, Revised March 1983 and 1979 where applicable.

       •      Appendix C of part 136 (method 200.7)

       •      Region 10 Alternate Test Procedure for method 200.8 (revision 5.4 found in
             Methods for the Determination of Metals in Environmental Samples, Supplement
             I, EPA, EMSL-Cincinnati, EPA/600/R-94/111, May 1994.

       See Table 1 in the section on Sample Types for a list of specific method numbers. For
       analyses to be conducted by the contract lab, see the attached statement of work
       (Appendix B) and any pre-award alterations approved prior to award by EPA.

       For analyses conducted by EPA and/or ESAT, standard reporting formats/deliverables/
       approved method modifications routinely employed by the EPA Manchester laboratory are
       acceptable so long as the DQO's specified in this QAPP are met.  EPA Manchester
       laboratory work assignment managers and/or the Deputy Project  Officer will be
       responsible for overseeing the ESAT contract costs/supplying technical direction to the
       ESAT contractor in accordance with this QAPP. Just prior to field work, it was
       anticipated that only EPA will support the TSS analyses to be conducted at the
       Manchester Laboratory.

9      Documentation. Data Reduction, and  Reporting

       9.1    Documentation:

       A field data form will be developed and copied onto 'write in the rain' paper. Field data
       such as descriptive location information, global positioning satellite data, site observations
       etc. will be recorded on  field data forms for each mine location. The field data form will
       also assist the samplers in completing the chain of custody and analysis required form
       documentation.  The EPA field sample data sheet/chain of custody form and analysis
       required forms will be used to document the sampling activities. Optionally, dictation to a

-------
            Alaska Placer Mining Survey QAPP               Revision 1, August 12, 1997   Page 14 of 14

                  tape recorder and photos may be used to further document the sampling activities. There
                  is not a need for precise location description, however the samplers will be locating the
                  sample sites with GPS units.

                  9.2    Data Reduction and Reporting:

**                 The contract and EPA Regional labs will be responsible for entry into the laboratory data
                  management system. Electronic deliverables are requested for this project.  The EPA QA
                  office will be responsible for metals data validation. The EPA Manchester laboratory will
                  be responsible for TSS  data validation.  The validation of the data will be based on the
                  criteria outlined in the National Functional Guidelines for Inorganic Data Review (02/94)
'""*                 and criteria outlined in this QAPP .

                  9.3    Data Assessment/Analysis:

                  Validated laboratory data will be provided to the Project Officer, Joe Goulet and David
"*»                 Frank. Joe Goulet and David Frank are primarily responsible for analysis and
                  interpretation of the data.

            10    Performance/System Audits

™                 Routine performance audits results  for the Regional Lab are on record with the Regional
                  QA Officer. No system audit is planned for this investigation.

            11    Corrective  Action

^                 Corrective action procedures that might be implemented from QA results or detection of
                  unacceptable data will be developed when and where required by the field operations
                  personnel.

                  Sample Alteration Forms will be completed (by field, QA and/or lab personnel) in the
**                event it is necessary to document a  change in field and/or laboratory analysis procedures.

                  Blank Corrective Action and Sample Alteration Forms are attached.

-------
                      Sample Alteration  Form

Project Name and Number: 	

Material to be Sampled: 	
Measurement Parameter:
Standard Procedure for Field Collection & Laboratory Analysis
(cite reference):	
Reason for Change in Field Procedure or Analysis Variation:
Variation from Field or Analytical Procedure:
Special Equipment, Materials or Personnel Required:
Initiators Name:	 Date:

Project Officer:	 Date:

QA Officer:	 Date:

-------
                      Corrective Action Form



Project Name and Number: 	



Sample Dates Involved: 	



Measurement Parameter:
Acceptable Data Range:
Problem Areas Requiring Corrective Action:
Measures Required to Correct Problem:
Means of Detecting Problems and Verifying Correction:
Initiators Name: 	 Date:



Project Officer:	 Date:



QA Officer:                                     Date:

-------
               QAPP ADDENDUM - June 30,  1998 Revision 1.0
NOTE: this revision replaces the QAPP addendum for this project that was
dated June 19,  1998.  This revision changes the digestion.procedure for
metals and adds a second attachment.
Title of parent QAPP:    ALASKA PLACER MINING SURVEY	

Author/revision date of parent QAPP:  EPA/OADU (Laura Castrilli) Revision 1,
August 12. 1997 (date on cover page is June 1997)	

Sampling dates: June 23; June 30; July 7; July 17; July 22; July 27 or 28;
August 5; August 11; August 19; August 25;  and Sept 1 (1998).
Shipping dates:
same (or next)  day of sampling.
Analyses required:  This addendum is for samples to be collected each week
specified above by Cindy Godsey.  See attachment 1 for DQOs and individual
analytes excerpted from the parent QAPP.   For this part of the summer of
1998 sampling,  four un-filtered samples will be collected each week of
sampling and submitted for total recoverable metals,  and conventional
parameter analyses.  Also, each un-filtered metals sample collected will
have a corresponding filtered sample that will be collected and submitted
for dissolved metals analyses (plus calculated hardness).

Clarification note for total recoverable metals analyses:  the digestion
procedure for total recoverable metals analyses is required.   This
procedure is the same as the total metals digestion procedure (for aqueous
samples to be analyzed by ICP) that is in the CLP ILM04.0  statement of work
for inorganic analyses.  Change: the second acid (HCL)  may be omitted from
the total recoverable metals digestion procedure.  This change and it's
acceptance are discussed in attachment 2 (recent GroupWise memos) .

The summary of fixed lab analyses for all anticipated weeks of sampling by
Cindy Godsey is:
Parameter or group of
compounds
total recoverable metals
dissolved metals
Hardness (calculated)
TSS
# /MATRIX
S




W
44
44
88
44
Other




New sampling locations (if any):   Tod Bauer Placer Mine on Eldorado Creek
near Talkeetna, Alaska (only location for Cindi's part of the project).

Data due date: Data should be analyzed in batches throughout the project
period with the last data analysis due by September 18.

Data validation due date: Data validation can occur throughout the project
period with the final validation due by October 6.
Organization responsible for data validation:  Quality Assurance & Data Unit

-------
    (Laura Castrilli)  for metals,  Manchester Laboratory for conventionals.
    QADU can review the conventionals if necessary.
    Initiator's Name:    Laura Castrilli	 Date: June 30. 1998
    Project Officer:     Cindi Godsev	 Date: June 30. 1998
    QA Officer:    Bruce Woods	 Date: June 30. 1998
"*   RSCC:   Melody Walker	 Date: June 30. 1998

-------
ATTACHMENT 1 - June 30,1998 Addendum to the Alaska Placer Mining Survey QAPP Page 1 of 3
(NO CHANGES WERE MADE TO ATTACHMENT 1 SINCE THE JUNE  19,  1998 VERSION)
Table 1: Anal
Media
Type
Analyte

Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Magnesium
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Zinc

Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Hardness
pH
Temperature
Dissolved
Oxygen
Set. Solids
Conductivity
Total
Suspended
Solids
Turbidity
ytical Methods, Containers, Preservation, Holding Time and Detection Limits
Container

1 Quart
Cubitainer"
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
•a
a
a
a

a
Field
Measurement
Held
Measurement
Field
Measurement
Field
Measurement
Field
Measurement
1 quart
Cubitainer
Field
MM Q 1 1 rpmpn I
Method
Metals**
EPA 200.7 and/or 200.8
EPA 200.7 and/or 200.8
EPA 200.7 and/or 200.8
EPA 200.7 and/or 200.8
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.7 and/or 200.8
EPA 200.7 and/or 200.8
EPA 200.7
EPA 245.1
EPA 200.7 and/or 200.8
EPA 200.7 and/or 200.8
EPA 200.7 and/or 200.8
EPA 200.7 and/or 200.8
Conventional Parameters
c
EPA 150.1
EPA 170.1
EPA 360.1
160.5
EPA 120.1
EPA 160.2
EPA 180.1
Detection
Limit
(MS/L)*

85.0
140.0
0.15
0.35
1000.0
50.0
3.5
0.5
1000.0
0.01
10.0
5.0
0.35
30.0
Preservation

HNO3topH<2, Iceb
HNO3topH<2, Ice11
HNO3topH<2,Iceb
HNO,topH<2,Iceb
HNO,topH<2, Iceb
HNO, topH<2, Iceb
HNO,topH<2, Ice"
HNO,topH<2, Iceb
HNO,topH<2,Iceb
HNO,topH<2, Iceb
HNO,topH<2,Iceb
HNO,topH<2,Iceb
HNO,topH<2,Iceb
HNO,topH<2,Iceb
Holding
Time

180 days
180 days
180 days
180 days
180 days
180 days
180 days
180 days
180 days
28 days
180 days
180 days
180 days
180 days

10,000
1 unit
0°C
50.0
0.2ml/l/hr
1*/S
4,000-
5,000
<1NTU
HNO,topH<2, Ice"
none
none
none
ice if not
immediately
analyzed
ice if not
immediately
analyzed
ice
ice
180 days
immediate
immediate
immediate
48 hours
28 days
7 days
48 hours

-------
ATTACHMENT 1 - June 30, 1998 Addendum to the Alaska Placer Mining Survey QAPP Page 2 of 3
 (NO CHANGES WERE MADE TO ATTACHMENT  1  SINCE THE JUNE  19,  1998 VERSION)
Table 1: Anal
Media
Type
Analyte
ytical Methods, Containers, Preservation, Holding Time and Detection Limits
Container
Method
Detection
Limit
(Mp/L)*
Preservation
Holding
Time
  a - All total metals will be collected in the same 1 quart cubitainer.  For dissolved metals, a field filtration
  procedure developed by Andy Hess at the EPA Manchester laboratory (consisting of a disposable filter/two
  pieces of connective tubing and a 'tap' cap) will be used for dissolved metals sample collection. See the
  section on sampling for further discussion of the sample containers.

  b - All water samples for metals analysis should be acidified, in the field when the sample is collected, with
  nitric acid to a pH less than 2. Further, samples should be acidified for at least 16 hours prior to analysis.
  Icing of the metals samples is not required by CFR Part 136, Table  IB. However, if preservative cannot be
  immediately added to the samples, the samplers will be icing the samples if they are to be preserved later in
  the day. Footnote 2 to Table IB allows for preserving with ice 24 hour automatic composite samples when
  it is impossible to immediately preserve each aliquot. The metals samples will be iced during shipment in
  the event TSS aliquots are shipped in the same cooler.  Dissolved metals samples will be filtered through a
  0.45 um filter prior to acidification to a pH less than 2 with nitric acid. See the section on sampling for a
  contingency discussion.

  c - hardness will be measured as the sum of the calcium and magnesium as measured by Method 200.7 (See
  notes in Table IB, 40 CFR Part 136).

  * Metals detection limits (except for calcium and magnesium) have  been set to the lowest level aquatic life
  criteria based on a sample hardness of 25 mg/L.

  ** In the event of equipment failure or unavailability, 200 series Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorption
  Snectrosconv procedures mav he snhsHfntp.fi for TCP-MS method 200 8
1.0   Project  Organization  and Responsibility

The following is a list of key project personnel and their responsibilities:
            Organization Manager:
            Project Officer:
            Study Design:

            Addendum Preparation:
            Addendum Review:
            Field Sampling:
            Laboratory Arrangements:
            Laboratory Operation:
            Data Validation:

            Data Assessment/Analysis
            Report Preparation:
                         Bob Robichaud
                         Cindi Godsey
                         Phillip North, Carla Fisher, Data Assessment Personnel and
                         Patricia Cirone
                         Cindi Godsey and Laura Castrilli
                         Bruce Woods
                         Cindi Godsey and other federal or state personnel
                         Laura Castrilli for Melody Walker
                         Gerald Dodo, ESAT Deputy Project Officer
                         Manchester Laboratory (TSS data), Quality Assurance and
                         Data Unit (QADU - metals data)
                         :      Joseph Goulet and David Frank
                         Joe Goulet and Cindi Godsey
1.
Project Description

-------
ATTACHMENT 1 - June 30,1998 Addendum to the Alaska Placer Mining Survey QAPP Page 3 of 3
(NO CHANGES WERE MADE TO ATTACHMENT 1 SINCE  THE JUNE 19,  1998 VERSION)


Objective and Scope:

This Quality Assurance Project Plan addendum is for the collection and analysis of field samples
during 1998 in support of the Placer Mining Survey. This addendum supports the work that will be
done in the field out of Anchorage. A second addendum will be prepared for ESAT sampling
conducted out of Fairbanks.
1998 Schedule of Sampling Tasks and Milestones:
Activity
Addendum
Review
Summer of 1998
Field Sampling
Lab Analysis
Dita Validation
Data Analysis
!
Final Report Due
Estimated beginning and ending dates
6/19/98
X





6/23-
9/1/98

X




7/20-
9/18/98*


X



7/27-
10/6/98*



X


9/1-
11/30/98




X

1/31/99





X
2.    QA Objectives

      a.    Data Usage:

      The data from the Summer of 1998 sampling will be used to determine temporal trends in the
      relationship between metals and other general parameters. Sampling at one site will be done
      for 10 or 11 weeks between the week of June 22 and August 31. The last samples should be
      shipped no later than September 2.

-------
ATTACHMENT 2 - June 30, 1998 Addendum to the Alaska Placer Mining Survey QAPP Page 1 of 2

From:       LAURA CASTRILLI
To:          R10AOO.AOO.GODSEY-CINDI
Date:        6/24/98 2:58pm
Subject:     Alaska Placer digestion 'issue1
I've talked to the metals 'gurus' at the lab (Katie and Isa) and in my unit (Don). After these
discussions, I've come to the conclusion that for water samples, the difference between total (hard
digestion) and total recoverable (soft digestion) is negligible unless a colorimetric method is used to
analyze the digestate. Since we are not using  colorimetric methods, it should not matter whether one
or the other digestion procedure is used (i.e. the resulting data will be within the 20% relative percent
difference analytical precision of the method).  An exception (not expected to occur that often) would
be if there is visible precipitate in the digestate, then obviously the digestion is incomplete.

Isa was under the impression the digestion procedure used in the statement of work (basically we
allowed for the use of nitric acid only on the soft digestion technique specified in the ICP-MS method)
was followed for the first set - she will be checking on  this with Katie. Even if the hard digestion was
used,  it shouldn't  have made a significant difference in the data generated as a colorimetric method
wasn't used.

For this year's samples, if the HCL is required for the soft digestion, then be advised that:

1) the HCL's purpose is mainly to keep the silver and antimony in solution - if this isn't happening,
then the silver and antimony recoveries on the  matrix spike and/or blank spike sample analyses will
tell us.

2) If HCL use is mandated, then the higher arsenic detection limit on ICP-AES (40 ug/L) will have to
suffice as the HCL interferes with the ICP-MS analysis. The current plan calls for a detection limit of
0.15 ug/L.

Please let me know as soon as possible if the soft digestion without the second acid - HCL (basically
the total recoverable metals digestion without HCL) will be acceptable.  If that is the case, I'll need to
revise the addendum we did last week.  CC:   ROLAB.ADAMS-KATIE, MATHENY-DON,
ROLAB.CHAMBERLAIN-...

From:        CINDI GOOSEY
To:           R10SEA1 .ROHELENS(CASTRILLI-LAURA)
Date:         6/29/98 7:17pm
Subject:     Alaska Placer digestion 'issue' -Reply
Laura,

It sounds like it will work so please do whatever revisions you deem necessary. Thanks for looking
into this issue for  me.

-------
           QAPP ADDENDUM - July 9, 1998 Revision 1.0
NOTE: this addendum is related to the QAPP addendum for this
project that was dated June 30, 1998.  This addendum covers the'
samples that will be collected by the ESAT team.  Attachment 1 is
similar to the June 30, 1998 addendum but has been updated to
cover the ESAT work.  Attachment 2 is the same as the Attachment
2 for the June 30, 1998 addendum.
Title of parent QAPP:    ALASKA PLACER MINING SURVEY
Author/revision date of parent QAPP: EPA/OADU (Laura Castrilli)
Revision 1. August 12. 1997 (date on cover page is June 1997)
Sampling dates: July 10; weeks of July 13,  July 20,  July 27,
August 3, August 10, August 17, August 24,  and August 31 (1998).
Shipping dates:     same (or next)  day of sampling.

Analyses required: This addendum is for samples to be collected
each week specified above by ESAT.   See attachment 1 for DQOs and
individual analytes excerpted from the parent QAPP.   For this
part of the summer of 1998 sampling,  20 un-filtered samples will
be collected each week of sampling and submitted for total
recoverable metals, and conventional  parameter analyses.  Also,
each un-filtered metals sample collected will have a
corresponding filtered sample that will be  collected and
submitted for dissolved metals analyses (plus calculated
hardness).

Clarification note for total recoverable metals analyses:  the
digestion procedure for total recoverable metals analyses  is
required.  This procedure is the same as the total metals
digestion procedure (for aqueous samples to be analyzed by ICP)
that is in the CLP ILM04.0 statement  of work for inorganic
analyses.  Change: the second acid (HCL)  may be omitted from the
total recoverable metals digestion procedure.   This  change and
it's acceptance are discussed in attachment 2 (recent GroupWise
memos) .

The summary of fixed lab analyses for all anticipated weeks of
sampling by ESAT is:
Parameter or group of
compounds
total recoverable metals
dissolved metals
Hardness (calculated)
# /MATRIX
S



W
160
160
320
Other




-------
     TSS	I  160   |	

New sampling locations (if any):   Five sampling locations will
be determined that are located in areas near Fairbanks, AK.

Data due date: Data should be analyzed in batches throughout the
project period with the last data analysis  due by September 18.

Data validation due date: Data validation can occur throughout
the project period with the final validation due by October 6.

Organization responsible for data validation: Quality Assurance &
Data Unit
(Laura Castrilli) for metals,  Manchester Laboratory for
conventionals.  QADU can review the conventionals if necessary.
Initiator's Name:   Gerald Dodo    	        	 Date: July 9.
1998
Project Officer:    Cindi Godsey                   Date: July 9.
     1998
QA Officer:    Bruce Woods                         Date: July
1998
RSCC; Melody Walker                     	 Date: July
               1998

-------
Table 1: Analytical Methods, Containers, Preservation, Holding Time and Detection Limits
Media
Type
Analyte
Container
Method
Detection
Limit
(Hfi/L)*
Preservation
Holding
Time
Metals**
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Water
Grab
Grab .
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Copper
Lead
Magnesium
Mercury
Nickel
Selenium
Silver
Zinc
1 Quart
Cubitainera
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
EPA 200.7 and/or 200.8
EPA 200.7 and/or 200.8
EPA 200.7 and/or 200.8
EPA 200.7 and/or 200.8
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.7
EPA 200.7 and/or 200.8
EPA 200.7 and/or 200.8
EPA 200.7
EPA 245.1
EPA 200,7 and/or 200.8
EPA 200.7 and/or 200.8
EPA 200.7 and/or 200.8
EPA 200.7 and/or 200.8
85.0
140.0
0.15
0.35
1000.0
50.0
3.5
0.5
1000.0
0.01
10.0
5.0
0.35
30.0
HNO3 to pH<2, Iceb
HNO3 to pH<2, Iceb
HNO3 to pH<2, Iceb
HNO3 to pH<2, Iceb
HNO3 to pH<2, Iceb
HNO3 to pH<2, Iceb
HN03 to pH<2, Iceb
HNO3 to pH<2, Iceb
HNO3 to pH<2, Iceb
HNO3 to pH<2, Iceb
HNO3 to pH<2, Iceb
HNO3 to pH<2, Iceb
HN03 to pH<2, Iceb
HNO3 to pH<2, Iceb
1 80 days
180 days
180 days
180 days
180 days
180 days
180 days
180 days
180 days
28 days
180 days
180 days
180 days
180 days
Conventional Parameters
Water
Water
Water
Water .
Water
Water
Water
Water
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Grab
Hardness
PH
Temperature
Dissolved
Oxygen
Set. Solids
Conductivity
Total
Suspended
Solids
Turbidity
a
Field
Measurement
Field
Measurement
Field
Measurement
Field
Measurement
Field
Measurement
1 quart
Cubitainer
Field
Measurement
c
EPA 150.1
EPA 1 70.1
EPA 360.1
160.5
EPA 120.1
EPA 160.2
EPA 180.1
10,000
1 unit
0°C
50.0
0.2 ml/l/hr
1 MS
4,000-5,0
00
<1NTU
HNO3 to pH<2, Iceb
none
none
none
ice if not
immediately
analyzed
ice if not
immediately
analyzed
ice
ice
180 days
immediate
immediate
immediate
48 hours
28 days
7 days
48 hours

-------
 a - All total metals will be collected in the same 1 quart cubitainer.  For dissolved metals, a field filtration
 procedure developed by Andy Hess at the EPA Manchester laboratory (consisting of a disposable filter/two
 pieces of connective tubing and a 'tap' cap) will be used for dissolved metals sample collection. See the
 section on sampling for further discussion of the sample containers.

 b - All water samples for metals analysis should be acidified, in the field when the sample is collected, with
 nitric acid to a pH less than 2. Further, samples should be acidified for at least 16 hours prior to analysis.
 Icing of the metals samples is not required by CFR Part 136, Table  IB. However, if preservative cannot be
 immediately added to the samples, the samplers will be icing the samples if they are to be preserved later in
 the day. Footnote 2 to Table IB allows for preserving with ice 24 hour automatic composite samples when
 it is impossible to immediately preserve each aliquot. The metals samples will be iced during shipment in
 the event TSS aliquots are shipped in the same cooler. Dissolved metals samples will be filtered through a
 0.45 um filter prior to acidification to a pH less than 2 with nitric acid.  See the section on sampling for a
 contingency discussion.

 c - hardness will be measured as the sum of the calcium and magnesium as measured by Method 200.7 (See
 notes in Table IB, 40 CFR Part 136).

 * Metals detection limits (except for calcium and magnesium) have been set to the lowest level aquatic life
 criteria based on a sample hardness of 25 mg/L.

 ** In the event of equipment failure or unavailability, 200 series Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorption
 Spectroscopy procedures may be substituted for ICP-MS method 200.8.	
1.0    Project  Organization  and Responsibility

The following is a list of key project personnel and their responsibilities:

             Organization Manager:    Bob Robichaud
             Project Officer:           Cindi Godsey
             Study Design:             Phillip North, Carla Fisher, Data Assessment
                         Personnel and Patricia Cirone
             Addendum Preparation:   Cindi Godsey and Gerald Dodo
             Addendum Review:       Bruce Woods
             Field Sampling:           ESAT
             Laboratory Arrangements: Laura Castrilli for Melody Walker
             Laboratory Operation:     Gerald Dodo, ESAT Regional Project Officer
                                      Isa Chamberlain, ESAT Work Assignment
Manager
             Data Validation:           Manchester Laboratory (TSS data), Quality
                   Assurance and Data Unit (QADU - metals data)
             Data Assessment/Analysis:      Joseph Goulet and David Frank
             Report Preparation: Joe Goulet and Cindi Godsey

-------
1.
Project Description
Objective and Scope:

This Quality Assurance Project Plan addendum is for the collection and analysis of field
samples during 1998 in support of the Placer Mining Survey. This addendum supports
the work that will be done in the field out of Fairbanks, AK.
1998 Schedule of Sampling Tasks and Milestones:
Activity
Addendum
Review
Summer of 1998
Field Sampling
Lab Analysis
Data Validation
Data Analysis
Final Report Due
Estimated beginning and ending dates
7/07/98
X





7/10-
9/4/98

X




7/13-
9/18/98*


X



7/27
-10/6/98*



X


9/1-11/30
/98




X

1/31/99





X
2.    QA Objectives

      a.     Data Usage:

      The data from the Summer of 1998 sampling will be used to determine temporal
      trends in the relationship between metals and other general parameters.
      Sampling at five sites will be done for eight weeks between the week of July 13
      and August 31. The last samples should be shipped no later than September 4.

-------
 From:       LAURA CASTRILLI
 To:          R10AOO.AOO.GODSEY-CINDI
 Date:        6/24/98 2:58pm
 Subject:     Alaska Placer digestion 'issue'
 I've talked to the metals 'gurus' at the lab (Katie and Isa) and in my unit (Don). After
 these discussions, I've come to the conclusion that for water samples, the difference
 between total (hard digestion) and total recoverable (soft digestion) is negligible unless
 a colorimetric method is used to analyze the digestate. Since we are not using
 colorimetric methods, it should not matter whether one or the other digestion procedure
 is used (i.e. the  resulting data will be within the 20% relative percent difference
 analytical precision of the method). An exception (not expected to occur that often)
 would be if there is visible precipitate in the digestate, then obviously the digestion is
 incomplete.

 Isa was under the impression the digestion procedure used in the statement of work
 (basically we allowed for the use of nitric acid only on the spjLdigestion technique
 specified in the ICP-MS method) was followed for the first  set - she will be checking on
 this with Katie. Even if the hard digestion was used, it shouldn't have made a significant
 difference in the data generated as a colorimetric method wasn't used.

 For this year's samples, if the HCL is required for the soft digestion, then be advised
 that:

 1) the HCL's purpose is mainly to keep the silver and  antimony in solution - if this isn't
 happening, then the silver and antimony recoveries on the matrix spike and/or blank
 spike sample analyses will tell us.

 2) If HCL use  is  mandated, then the higher arsenic detection limit on ICP-AES (40 ug/L)
 will have to suffice as the HCL interferes with the ICP-MS analysis. The current plan
 calls for a detection limit of 0.15 ug/L.

 Please let me know as soon as possible if the soft digestion without the second acid -
 HCL (basically the total recoverable metals digestion without HCL) will be acceptable. If
 that is the case, I'll need to revise the addendum we did last week.  CC:
 ROLAB.ADAMS-KATIE, MATHENY-DON, ROLAB.CHAMBERLAIN-...

 From:        CINDI GOOSEY
 To:          R10SEA1.ROHELENS(CASTRILLI-LAURA)
 Date:        6/29/98 7:17pm
 Subject:     Alaska Placer digestion 'issue1 -Reply
 Laura,

 It sounds like it will work so please do whatever revisions you deem necessary.  Thanks
for looking into this issue for me.

-------
 Appendix B
Field Reports

-------
  *~
               UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                                  REGION 10
                                1200 Sixth Avenue
                             Seattle, Washington 98101
                              October 27, 1998
Reply To
Attn Of: AOO/A
MEMORANDUM
SUBJECT:   Alaska Placer Mining Survey Sampling Report
FROM:     Cindi Godsey
           Project Coordinator

TO:        Robert R. Robichaud
           Manager, NPDES Permits Unit
Alaska Placer Mining Survey
Sampling Trip Report

      During the summer of 1998, EPA collected a total of 120 samples from four
different mine sites located near Talkeetna and Fairbanks, Alaska. These four sites
were:

            Tod Bauer               Eldorado Creek (near Talkeetna)
            John McClain            Ketchum Creek (near Central)
            Sam Koppenberg         Faith Creek (near Fairbanks)
            Largen Claims           Ester Creek (near Fairbanks)
                                   (This site did not discharge during the course
                                        of the study.,)

      Sample collection for the Alaska Placer Mining Survey occurred between June
23 and September 2, see Attachment 1 for the Sampling Calendar.  Sampling at the
Talkeetna mine, conducted by Cindi Godsey (EPA) with other EPA and Federal
government staff, began on June 23 and continued through September 1, Sampling
near Fairbanks was conducted by Lockheed Martin contractors (ESAT) and began the
week of July 13 and continued through the week of August 31.

      The sampling plan was followed with some exceptions. Dissolved oxygen was
not measured at the Talkeetna mine due to limitations on time available in the field and
                                                                    * PrtnAHf on Recycled Paper

-------
availability of field equipment, Turbidity was not measured during the first week due to
problems with calibrating the turbidimeter.

      A total of 4 mines were sampled resulting in 120 samples including duplicates.
Attachment 2 contains the results of the field measurements for each week of sampling.
The only site which  was granted a mixing zone was the mine on Ketchem Creek. The
downstream sampling point was set to coincide with the edge of the designated Alaska
Department of Environmental Conservation mixing zone.

      Bad weather  resulted in the loss of a week of sampling in Talkeetna, A week
was also lost when the helicopter was being repaired. Heavy rainfall in the Fairbanks
area caused a washout of part of the Steese Highway during the first week of sampling.
Access to the Faith  Creek mine was impeded on several occasions due to high water
but the sampling crew was able to return later in each week to conduct sampling.

      EPA plans on completing a final written report analyzing the data by January 31,
1999.

-------
iD

98290339
98290335
98300377
98300373
98310443
983 1 0439
98320477
98320473
98330323
98330319
98340377
98340373
98350423
98350427
98350419
98360485
98360477
98360481
98290315
98290303
9829031 1
98290307
98290347
9829035)
98300393
98300381
98300385
98300389
98310435
98310419
98310423
98310427
98310444
9831043)
98320493
98320481
98320489
98320485
98330339
98330327
98330331
98330335
98340393
9834038 1
98340385
98340389
98350443
98350435
9835043 1
98350447
98350439
98360457
98360453
9829033 1
98290319
98290327
98290323
98300369
98300353
98300361
98300365
98300357
98310415
98310403
98310407
9831041 1
98320469
pH

7 53
7 31
7 36
7 12
763
732
7 63
730
725
707
694
709
700
741
6-95
7.08
677
6 79
7 44
7 70
758
761
7 78
765
7 54
7.67
708
757
764
761
7.12
735
7,71
768
769
7 30
7 29
7 73
6.43
7 49
6 90
703
720
705
7.00
733
7 19
7 46
7 13
697
? 24
709
6 *S7
569
6 8
-------
ID

•38320453
98320457
98320465
9832046 '
98330315
98330303
98330311
9833030?
98340369
98340353
98340357
98340361
98340365
98350415
98350403
98350407
983504H
98360473
9836046 1
96360465
98360469
98264950
98264952
98264954
98264956
98274958
98274960
98274962
98274964
98294966
98294968
98294974
98294970
98294972
98314976
98314978
98314980
98314982
98334984
98334986
98334988
98334990
98344950
98344952
98344954
98344956
98354960
98354962
98354964
98354966
98364970
98364972
98364968
98364S?4
98364976
pH

7 09
r or
6 68
704
S 8 1
6.77
657
679
606
666
676
670
693
620
6.82
677
701
6 17
6.52
6.78
7 14
755
734
727
778
801
793
791
8
781
7 62

6.77
8.05
7.9
7.22
766
7.84
7 13
667
7 27
7 47
7.56
705
7 37
76
577
7 12
7 37

724
7 21

7 6
7 59
DO
mg/L
106?
10 67
8 20
1098
1205
11 43
8.74
11 53
1547
13.89
1396
11 25
1432
1750
15 10
10.52
1330
5 72
14 16
9. 85
13.97


































Cond
urnhos
6T
64
107
52
27
47
108
39
27
64
64
87
51
25
72
109
65
22
68
135
70
139
180
138
125 5
1652
1907
146.8
1382
213
223

208
199
164
1 94, 6
1473
140,8
1656
1885
168,5
159
1909
138
215
186
212
211
188
177
270
261

264
248
Turbidity
NTU
!42
138
I?1 R[)
16 7
757
535
1000
127
1 44
162
195
1642
145
085
28.8
179
659
1 41
177
139
278




0,6
1 5
1 75
1 5
1 5
28

2,4
2
1 4
25
1 2
<0,5
084
36
2.52
043
16
10.25
124
l 3
28
35
1 32

3 83
19 3

4 6

Set Sol
ml/I
U
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
T
T
T
T
y
T
T
T
T
T

T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T

0 1
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
T
0'

y
"I"
ids
clegG
37
83
12 i
78
32
56
97
56
30
59
6.1
77
58
2.7
58
10 1
70
1 5
4 4
64
5.6
3
7
7
7
10
10
10
11
10
9

9
9
8
8
8
8
8
a
3
7
6
8
6
7
9
7
6
6
y
7

f.
f
Temp
i creek i
Kelchem
Ketchem
Kelchem
Ketchern
Ketchem
Ketchefti
Ketchem
Kelchem
Ketchem
Ketchem
Ketchem
Ketchem
Ketchem
Ketchem
Katchem
Ketchem
Keteham
Ketchem
Ketchem
Ketchem
Ketehem
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Eldorado
Location Poi

Downstream
Downstream
Effluent
Upmixmg
Background
Downstream
Eflluenl
Upmixing
Background
Downstream
Downstream
Effluent
Upmixing
Background
Downstj earn
Effluent
Upmixing
Background
Downstream
Effluent
Upmixmg
Downstream
Effluent
Upstieam
Background
Downstream
Effluent
Upstream
Background
Downstream
Effluent
Effluent
Upstream
Background
Downstream
Effluent
Upstream
Background
Downstream
Effluent
Upstream
Background
Downstream
Effluent
Upstream
Background
Downstream
Effluent
Upstream
Background
0 own stt earn
Effluent
Effluent
Upstream
Background
                                                          Dup
T = Tiace-                    D' - Duplicate sent to lab for analysis
0* = actually no measure of settleable solids
    Fairbanks team only differentiated between
    measurable ana not thus designating
    anythinq less than 0 1  as 0

-------
Summary of IVJ8 ESAT field work for ihe Alaska Placer Mines Project.

The ESAT .sampling team met with Cindi Godsey (US EPA-AOO) and Jim Corpuz (US EPA-
Seattle) to discuss site reconnaissance, during the week of July 5-10.  ESAT and C. Godsey
conducted field reconnaissance of each mining site by helicopter. The ESAT sampling team was
directed to begin sampling each of three sites on a weekly basis. ESAT was directed by EPA to
take one field duplicate sample per week (beginning with the effluent, and/or based on a ram
event) and not to take field blanks throughout the study. Moreover, if any designated mixing
zones were obsei"ved  (where effluent and creek water mix),  the downstream sample was to be
taken at end  of the zone. If there was no designated mixing zone,  ESAT was instructed to
estimate the  location of the downstream sample, If there is no effluent discharge into the creek.
the sampling team was directed  to take a downstream and background sample, as well as a sample
at the  point where the discharge would "normally" enter the creek
Alaska Placer Mining Study
July 13-19, 1998
Sampling Week #}

General Issues:

       Vendor/supplier shipped nitric acid sample vials with no nitric acid in them. ESAT
logistics staff immediately notified the supplier and nitric acid was expedited to Fairbanks
immediately. The ESAT sampling team leased a cellular phone with voice mail to ensure all
outside communications were received,

Faith_Creek:

       To get to  the downstream sampling locale, ESAT was required to either walk across Faith
Creek, or drive the vehicle through the creek (no bridge was available).  Since it is estimated that
two people crossing on foot is as disturbing  as one vehicle, and lor safety reasons, the truck was
used to cross the  creek

       The downstream sample was to be secured below the rapids (as per overflight
reconnaissance),  This location was sampled -751) feet downstream ot the effluent discharge
point,
ESAT erroneously sampled the mixing zone, not immediately upstream of the mixing zone
(referred to as upstream sample)  on July  13, However, ESAT returned to Faith Creek on July 17
to locate ihe proper upstream location and took both a sample and a field duplicate  All field
instruments requiring initial and/or weekly calibrations were calibrated at the site on July I 3

       It was noted thai the effluent discharge stream forked and entered the creek at two
locutions -50 ft apart. ESAT chose the lower of the two forks to sample. It was at this site thai
the sampling team realized that the nitric  acid (HNOj was missing from  the sample vials. ESAT

-------
kept the samples on ice until Jim Corpuz (I'SEPA) provided ESAT with surplus acid lhai
evening.  The samples were preserved prior to shipping to the laboratory.

       The turbidity meter provided to IKS on the evening of July 16 by Alaska Department oJ
Environmental Conservation (ADEC) (via J. Corpuz) was used on the field duplicate upstream
sample pair collected on July 17.  The meter had not been calibrated, but was accurate when
reading the 1.0 and  10.0 NTU standards. To ensure data confidence, additional I-quart cubitainer
samples were collected and shipped to the laboratory for turbidity measurements.  Active mining
operations were underway during this sampling visit

Ketchem Creek:

       There was no HNO, available to preserve the filtered and unfiltered metals fractions, so
extra ice was purchased and placed in double Ziploc bags to ensure the samples were kept at 4 "C
until received at the laboratory (the cubitainers. as well as the custody forms, indicated that acid
preservation was required. The sampling day was routine.

Ester Creek:

       There was neither an effluent discharge coming from the last settling pond nor clear
evidence that the second to last settling pond was feeding the last pond (C. Godsey suggested this
be sampled if no effluent was discharging).  Thus, only two sampling points were sampled this
day; background and downstream. Although maintenance operations were being performed, no
actual mining activities were  being conducted during this visit.

       The turbidity meter malfunctioned, so no field turbidity measurements were taken. Spare
cubitainers were tilled  and labeled for turbidity analysis in the laboratory  ESAT received HNO,,
and resumed the process of preserving all filtered and unfiltered metals fractions in the field.
Alti\ku Placer Mining Snulv
Jtii\ 20-26. /yy.v
Sampling Wt-ck #2

GeneralIssues:

       None.

Kgichem Creek.

       Spoke in John McClain (Jr.). who brought up the following issues:  t I) he said il was not
a good day to sample, as they had just hit some dark, iron-like deposil and groundwater. causing
the  water to turn murky; f 2) he was concerned (hat the discharge at Ketchem Creek, with its
relatively low  llov.. would be compared to nunint' activities and effluent discharges at Faith

-------
Creek, where the volume of the water is much greater; (3) he .stated that mining activities were
currently going on above his mine, but ESAT did not observe this. The sampling team said that
his concerns would be documented, but that the samples were being collected as directed by the
EPA and would continue unless otherwise instructed or if factors such ax reductions or increases
in effluent or creek flows required these changes

       The small diversion of Ketchem Creek water which  was flowing into the effluent  stream
had dried up. Although die effluent sample could now feasiblely be taken closer to where the
effluent discharges into Ketchem Creek, the original sampling point was not changed, as  per
instructions from Cindi Godsey (USEPA Project Manager).

       The effluent samples were extremely difficult to filter due to clogging of the tiller with
suspended solids. The effluent sample also had to be diluted 1:1  with distilled water in order to
get a turbidity measurement within the i  100 NTU range. Otherwise, field sampling and analysis
operations were routine. Weekly field duplicate samples were taken from  the effluent .sample
locale.

Ester Creek:

       The rain gauge read  1.3 inches.  No effluent water was discharging from the last settling
pond, although effluent water was present. The next-to-last settling pond  was dry and, therefore,
no effluent was flowing from the pipe into  the last settling pond.  As a result, only the
downstream and background samples were collected. The mine was not active when the  creek
was sampled, but began operating as ESAT left the  site.

Faith Creek:

       The downstream sampling site appeared to be visibly more turbid and water appeared to
be higher up on the bank than the previous week. Effluent discharge flow  was greatly reduced
from the previous sampling week. The effluent volume in the settling pond had lowered
.significantly and the discharge that had been flowing from a breach in the berm/earthen dam on
the downstream side of the pond  had stopped, The  effluent stream was relatively clear and the
flow appeared to be coming from water percolating  from and collecting in a catchment below the
settling pond, as well as from contributions of runoff from the steep .slopes and marshy ureas
around it.  The water level of the creek at the background site has lowered significantly (e.g..
during the previous week, the sampling team could not cross the creek wearing rubber boots, but
were able to this weeki. The mine was operating.
.4/f/.vto Placer Mining Snitl\
Juiv 27 - AUI;IIM <>2,
General Issues:

-------
 None.

 Ketchem Creek:

       At the downstream sample location, the creek volume was much less than in previous
 visits.  As a result, ESAT moved the sample location downstream ~2 rt and in the center of the
 creek channel in order to obtain a sample more representative of the Ketchem Creek flow.
 Additionally, the effluent stream was more shallow and flowing slower.  Again, the effluent
 samples were difficult to filter and had to be diluted 1:1  in order to get a turbidity measurement
 within the 1 K'KJ NTU range of the turbidimeter. The mine was operating at the lime the samples
 were collected

 Faith Creek:

       The effluent stream flow was greatly reduced from the  previous week. Although ESAT
 was able to collect a sample, this sample may have been water  seeping from the ground around
 the marshy (wetland) area surrounding this sample point. The  weekly field duplicate sample was
 taken from this  locale. The mine was not operating on the day  of sampling.

       The dissolved oxygen (DO) meter malfunctioned.  An attempt was made at using the
 backup Hach kit, but the results were unsatisfactory. Cubitainers were collected in the event this
 analysis could be performed at a later date, but this was later deemed as inappropriate. The Orion
 technical service staff was contacted and the malfunction was corrected. The sampling team
 returned to Faith Creek on July 31 and collected DO (and pH and conductivity) measurements ui
 all four sampling locations,

       While at the site on July 31, the sampling team observed a "slug" of murky, turbid water in
 Faith Creek.  This occurred at 10:00 am and lasted approximately 45 minutes, This event took
 place after the downstream measurements were taken, so the sampling team returned  to the
 downstream location; noticed that, although the creek bottom had been clearly visible prior to this
 event, even the boulders near the surface of the water were now obfuscated. ESAT proceeded to
 remeasure pH. DO, conductivity, turbidity, and collected a grab sample for total metals analysis,
 in the event the  EPA was interested in analyzing the sample. The event was over (i.e.. the creek
 was once again clean before the sampling team reached the next sampling site.

 Ester Creek:

 No  elflueni water discharge was observed. Only the downstream and background samples were
 collected.  No mining operations were noted during our site visit.
•\lii.\kn Phii ei Mining Sliul\
Att^'ltM 03 - III,  / WA
Siiini>linii Wf'ck  #-/

-------
General Issues:

       The LaMotie turbidimeter was malfunctioning: so the Hach Tiirbiilimeier (burrowed from
ADEC) was used. ESAT decided to perform all turbidity measurements off sue upon return to
our lodging location, as the increasing  rain events could compromise the data in the field.

Ketcjiem Creek:

       Weekly duplicate sample collected from downstream location. Effluent samples continued
to be difficult to filter. Spoke with John McCluin Sr. (miner). He requested and was provided
with Cindi Godsey's telephone number, He disagreed with the  logic  of the .sampling points
selected.  He said that the effluent being sampled wasn't from his operation. ESAT informed him
that we were directed by US EPA to sample these locations. The mine was operating at the time
the samples were collected

FaithCreek.

       C. Godsey was informed on  August 4 about the issues regarding the effluent stream's lack
of flow and the slug ofefflueni observed on July 31.  She directed the sampling team to send the
metals sample collected during the effluent event to the  laboratory for analysis. When informed of
the possibility that the effluent was now discharging from a settling pond ~ 1.5 miles farther
upstream from the current effluent sampling site, she directed the team to recon the site and
change the effluent, upstream, and downstream points if there is discharge from that pond; if not,
to continue sampling at the  current points [see Faith Creek map).

       ESAT performed the requested site reconnaissance. The settling pond adjacent to the
cabins exhibited a trickle of effluent  discharging into Faith Creek which was clear in appearance.
Mining operations had relocated downstream and across the creek from its previous location. A
final settling pond was identified, which had effluent discharging into Fairh Creek from a seep
below the berm/dam of the  final settling pond. Thus,  ESAT relocated the downstream, upstream.
and effluent sampling locales (the background sampling point remained the same). The mine was
active on  the day of sampling,

EstejiCreek".

       As wiih the previous weeks,  no olfluem water was discharging from the last settling pond.
Only the downstream and background  samples were collected.  Mining operations were not active
during the ESAT site visit.  ESAT Continued lu experience calibration problems with the field
turbidimeler.  In response, the Hach  turbidimeter was used and  quart cubitainers were collected
and sent to the laboratory for turbidity measurements,
Alti.fka PliJi'ri' Minnn; Snni\
August II - 17.  /w,s

-------
       g Week #5

Ketchem Creek:

       The mine was operating when sampling was performed,

Ester Creek:

       Site was very soggy and wet.  More than 1.3" of rain fell in the last week, however no
effluent discharge was observed. Background and downstream samples were collected. Mining
operations were active, including earth moving equipment and sluice box processing.

Fait.h_Creek:

       The weather is turning much colder, and rain events have been more frequent this week,
1.1  inches of rain fell at the background location. ESAT ordered a new pH triode as a backup
unit.
Alaska Placer Mining Simly
August 18-23, J998
Sampling Week #6

Ketchem Creek:

       The Steese Highway is getting fairly rough with many chuckholes and lots of
washboarding.  A duplicate sample was taken at the downstream sample point.. The weather was
cold, wet. and raining. The mine was in full operation.  The ground Is .saturated with many seep
points some of which were rather turbid.  None of these smaller flows were sampled. Several
hundred meters upstream of the background site someone had cleared about 1  acre with a tracked
excavator. It did not appear to affect the background sample as there was no continuous flow
from the cleared site to the background sample site.

Ester Creek:
       The site was very we! and soggy, and ambient temperatures were near freezing. Stream
tlows had noticeably increased, and were more  turbid. Both downstream and background
samples were secured.  No effluent discharge was observed.

Faith Creek:
       HSAT could not get to the sampling locations with vehicle. Failh Creek was too high and
swift to attempt a fording. HSAT hiked up the south side of Faith creek to get to the sampling
sites.  The \vater at the downstream site was loo deep and swilt to solely get to the actual

-------
.sampling site. Anothei site in approximaiely the same area was selected,  No stream depth was
taken at this site. The effluent, and upstream samples were taken in the same locations as in Week
5, Due to the walking distance upstream to the background site. ESAT decided to sample above
any current mining or road building activities, but at a point well downstream of the established
background sampling location. No rainfall measurement was taken this week.
Alaska Placer Mining Study
August 24-26, 1998
Sampling Week #7

Ketchem Creek:

       The entire mining operation has been moved several hundred yards upstream.  The creek
had been rerouted between the background sample location and the upstream sample locale.
Greater turbidity  was noted in the upstream samples,

Ester Creek.

       The mine  was not in operation today,  Secured the weekly duplicate sample at the
background location.

Faith Creek:

       ESAT was able to safely cross the stream with the field vehicle. It was noted that the
stream channel had changed due to recent flooding conditions. While sampling the effluent
sample from the normal location a plume of turbidity was observed in the main channel.  The
source of the turbid water was located  and sampled. This necessitated the moving of the
upstream sample  ahoui 150 feet upstream so that it was above the source of the turbid water.
Road maintenance activities were found 10 be the source of the "effluent" plume,  ESAT collected
an effluent sample from the maintenance activity area, labeled "discharge."
Alaxkn Placer Mining Study
August M'Septemher 2, iWh
Sumi'ltHK Week #Af

Faitli Creek:

The stream levels were down from Week 1.  Only 0.25" rain fell since.' die last sampling event.
The mine was not operating. No effluent was observed, so we did not lake an effluent or an
upstream sample.

-------
Ketchem Creek:

Mr. McClain (miner) informed ESAT that they were doing reclamation work today. The stream
was even more turbid than the effluent. The move to the upstream site appears to be complete.
Three new settling ponds had been constructed and no effluent was visible from any of them.
Most of the muddy water is flowing into the upper settling pond, however, some is escaping into
the creek.

Ester Creek:

The stream levels were down. Only 0.32" rain since last sampling event. Secured weekly
duplicate sample at downstream site. No mining operations were observed.

-------
                         Appendix C
Description of Placer Mining Districts, from Nokleberg and Others
                            (1996)

-------
Appendix  C.  Description of placer ruining districts, from Nokleherg and others (!4>%j,

No. 3- Valdez Creek District
Major commodities: Placer Au, Au, Cu, Pb

Summary Description:
 Valdez Creek placers exhibit a complex Pleistocene history  Gold produced from modem stream gravels and from
channels is ancestral to Valdez Creek and is buned by up to  60 m of till and glacio-ftuial deposits  Main pay
channels considered to be Sangamon (mtd Pleistocene) in age. District mined by open pii and sluice methods.
Heavy minerals are gold, magnetite, pyrite, zircon, sphene, sillimanite, kyanite, galena, realgar, orpiment, hessite (a
silver tellunde). Gold in district probably derived from poiymetailic  vein deposits associated with Cretaceous granitic
rocks. Extensive recent mining; currently the largest placer mine in Alaska. Other smaller placer mines in district
include White, Black, and Timberiine Creeks, and Lucky Gulch. Local bedrock is Late Jurassic or older
metasedimentary rocks, Mesozoic graywacke, and Cretaceous and early Tertiary granitic plutons.

References Chapin, 1918; Capps, 1919; Tuck, 1938; Smith,  1970; Cobb, 1973;  Bressler and others (1985);  Fechnerand
Herzog, 1990; Reger and Bundtzen, 1990; Bundtzen and others,  1996.

No, 27- Council District (Includes Solomon)   Note: Cobb places the Solomon area in the adjacent Nome District
Major commodities Au W.Hg.Cu

Summary Descnption;
District contains beach, modern stream, and rare bench gold placers. Heavy minerals dominated by arsenopynte,
magnetite, and scheelile. Mined mainly by dredging and sluicing. Gold in district probably derived from  Au-bearing
quartz vein deposits in metamorphic rocks of the Nome Group, such as the Big Hurrah Gold-Tungsten deposit.
Local bedrock is schist, marble, dolomite, and thin quartz veins.

References: Collier and others, 1908; Smith, 1910; Smith and Eakm, 1911; Cobb, 1973; Bundtzen and others, 1996,

No, 28- Fairhaven District (Includes Candle and Inmachuk)
Major commodities: Au, Pb, W, Pt, Ag

Summary Description:
District contains rich placer gold deposits on Candle Creek and Inmachuk River  Major streams extensively
dredged; substantial resources remain unmined in buried drainages in northern part of district. Buried gold-nch
channel gravel occur in vicinity of Mud Creek. Most production on  Candle Creek was from left limit bench
(paleo-Candle Creek) about 600 m  wide and 6 km long. Placers at Kiwalik Flat occur at  mouth of Paleo-Candle
Creek and were partially reworked by marine conditions. Auriferous bench deposits occcur 30 m above Inmachuk
River and are overlain by a 5.7 Ma basalt flow. Heavy minerals are galena, magnetite, scheelite, sphalerite, and
trace platinum metals. Gold probably derived from poiymetailic vein lode deposits associated with Cretaceous
granitic plutons or alternatively from Au-beanng quartz veins in metamorphic rocks, or alternatively from Au-bearing
quartz veins in metamorphic rocks.  Local bedrock consists of schist,  marble, granitic plutons, and Tertiary basalt

References.  Henshaw, 1909; Cobb, 1973, T.K Bundtzen, written cotnmun., 1991; Bundtzen and others, 1996.

No 29- Kougarok District
Major commodities: Placet Au-Sn, Au. 5ft  W

Summary Description:
District contains large gold resources iha> occur in Quaternary!'')  glacial outwash gravels of the Tertiary and
Quaternary;9) Kougarok Gravels. Buried Tertiary gravels and conglomerates may be  gold source  Most mining by
dredging  Heavy minerals are  gold,  pynle. magnetite, hematite, cassitente. scheelite, cinnabar, and lead sutfides.
Riches! areas in Iron and Taylor Creeks and near Coffee Dome. Placer gold derived mainly from low-sulfide
Au-beanng quartz veins in  metamorphic rocks and from  Sn (ode deposits associated with Cretaceous granitic
plutons. Local bedrock is schist, slate, marble, and granitic rocks.

References: Collier and others. 1908: Cobb, 1973: Eakins. 1981;  Bundtzen ana  others.  1996

No 33- Sepentine  District
Nokleberg el al does not include a description of the  Serpentine District.


No. 44- Bonnitield District

-------
MajOf commodities: Au, Ag. Hg, Pt, Sn  W

Summary Description.
Placer gold occurs in  sreams and a few benches  Thick glaciofluvial deposiis and loess cover much of district
Heavy minerals include various suifides. scheeiite cassilente and cinnabar. PGE are found in Daniels Creek.  Gold
in district probably derived from Cretaceous or early Tertiary Au-beanng quartz or pel/metallic vein (odes and middle
or older Kuroko massive sulfide deposits in Yukon-Tanana terrane, with probable recycling through Tertiary gravels.
Local bedrock is Paleozoic or older meiasedimentary and m eta volcanic rocks of She Yukon-Tanana terrane, and
Cretaceous granitic plulons.

References: Capps, 1912; Cobb, 1973, Gilbert and Bundtzen, 1979; Bundtzen and others. 1996.

No. 47- Circle District
Major commodities. Piacer Au. Au, Ag, Sn,  Sb, W, Pb, REE, Mo, Hg

Summary Description;
Gold occurs in alluvial and colluwal deposits  (2 to 5 m thick), frequently overlain by 1 to 2 m of muck.
Non-glaciated, broad  upland of nearly accordant  ndge crests. Large gold resource may occur in lower reaches of
Crooked and Birch Creeks, and in the topographic trough south ot Crazy Mountains. Largei deposits  are at
Mammoth Creek. Deadwood Creek, Eagle Creek, and Coal Creek.  Gold in district probably derived  from Cretaceous or
early Tertiary Au-beanng quartz vein, polymetallic vein, skarn, porphyry lode, and volcanogenic massive sulfide deposits in
region in mid Paleozoic or older metamorphic rocks of Yukon-Tanana terrane, with recycling through Tertiary
conglomerates.  Alluvial diamonds found in placer concentrates dunng the 1980's. Local bedrock  consists of middle
Paleozoic or older metasedimentary rocks of Yukon-Tanana terrane, and Cretaceous granitic plutons.

References; Prindle, 1913; Mertie, 1938; Hemerand Wolff, 1968; Cobb, 1973; Yeend, 1982,  1987, 1991, Menzie and
others.
1983; Lasley, 1985; Bundtzen and others, 1996

No. 50- Fairbanks District
Major commodities: Placer Au, Au, Sb, W, Sn, Ag , Bi

Summary Description:
Placer deposits occur in streams that radially drain three mineralized areas in Fairbanks District, Ester Dome,
Cleary-Pedfo Dome, and Gilmore Dome, Nearly  all placers consist of buned streams that  were ancestral to Cleary,
Goldstream, Fairbanks, Engineer, Dome,  Eldorado, Treasure. Little Eldorado, Ester, Cripple,  Gilmore, and
Smallwood drainage basins. Largest placer deposits in Cleary, Fairbanks, Goldstream and Cripple Creek drainages.
Deposits are buned by thick sections of frozen loess and mud. Recent stratigraphic and radiometnc age studies
suggest lhat most bench deposits in district are Pliocene. Over 30 heavy minerals are identified and include
stibnite, scheelite, bismuthinite, native bismuth, and galena. Stibnite and scheelite have been commercially
recovered from placers.  Placer gold derived from (1) sevetai hundred mineralized veins in Ester  Dome
and in the Cleary Hill-Pedro Dome area; (2) Au skams in the Gilmore Dome area; and (3) polymetallic veins
associated with Cretaceous plutons at Melba Creek, and Pedro, Gilmore, and Ester Domes

References- Smith,  I9l3a: Pnridle and Katz, 1913, Mertie  1918; Heiner and Wolff, 1968;  Cobb, 1973, Light and others,
1987; Metz, 1987, 1991;  Metz and Harrul,  1966. T.K.Bundtzen. written commun., 1991; Bundtzen and others, 1996,

No. 51-- Forty mile  District
Major commodities  Placet  Au, Au, REE, Pb Sn. VV Hg

Summary Description.
District mostly contains stream and bench placer deposits. Most of area not giacialed. Loess mantles much of
area. A  1 71 kg nugget was recovered from  Jack Wade Creek deposit. Gold 'meness ranges widely between
drainages Highest fineness is in Walker Fork and lowest fineness is in South Fork of Fortymile River.  Lode souice
probably polyrrn?iallic qiiaru-pynte veins. Mining by hydraulic, drift, dredge, and open cut methods  Gold derived
from s combination of Au quanz and polymetallic veins, that occur m metamorphic rocks near contacts with
Cretaceous or early Tertiary telsic pinions  that intrude middle Paleozoic or older mefarriorphic recks of
Yukon-Tanana  (enane Local btdiock consists oi mainly metasedimentary rocks, Cretaceous granitic plutons,
ultramalic and malic plutonic rocks, and Tertiary sedimentary racks

References Mert,e. i  y'JM. Col.it\ i'47'3 riurvttz-n


No. 53-- Hot Springs District

-------
Major commodities Placer Au-Sn-Nb, Au, Sn, Cr, REE. Cu, Pt, Ag. Ni. Hg. W. Bi. Nb

Summary Description;
Nearly all placer deposits in district consist of buried bench gravels that occur on old terraces or buried stream
deposits derived ?rorn older bench gravels. Thick deposits of frozen silt conceal placer deposits and make
exploration difficult. Area not glaciated. Principal deposits explored were those on Sullivan Bench. Gold fineness
ranges from 740 to 875  At American Creek, gold occurs in lower 1.1 m of gravels and upper 1 rn of bedrock. Gold in
quartz-carbonate veins associated with east-west-trending shear zone. Gold in district possibly related to granitic plutons in
area. Ni-bearing columbite and aeschynite occurs in tailings of drift placer mines near Tofty. Local
bedrock consists of Cretaceous sedimentary rocks and Tertiary granitic plutons.

References: Mertie. 1934; Waytend, 1961, Heiner and Wolff, 1968; Cobb, 1973: Southworth, 1984; Warner, 1985; Warner
and Southworth, 1985; Warner and others. 1986;  Bundtzen and others. 1996.

No. 55-- Iditarod District
Major commodities: Au, Hg, Sb, Sn, W, Cr, REE,  Ag

Summary Descnption:
District contains gold placer deposits that occur in modern stream gravels, residual concentrations, and benches.
All mining occurs within 14 km of Flat, Heavy minerals are chromite, scheelite, cassiterite, arsenopynte,
ilmenorutile. and heavy concentrations of cinnabar. Gold fineness ranges from 830 to 905 and averages 870.
Extensive dredging, Nonglaciaied highlands are mantled by residual material, colluvium, and silt; lowlands are
covered by thick alluvium. Placer deposits on Flat, Chicken, Prince, Happy, Slate, and Willow Creeks are radially
distributed around  Chicken Mountain. Gold derived from polymetallic vein lode deposits in Late Cretaceous
monzonitic stocks  such as the Golden Horn and Chicken Mountain deposits, and from other mineralized contact
zones m sedimentary and volcanic rocks of the Cretaceous Kuskokwim Group Local bedrock of  Early Proterozoic
schist and metagranite, Mesozoic clastic and volcanic rocks, and Cretaceous granitic plutons.

References: Cobb, 1973; Bundtzen and others. 1985, 1988. 1992a; Miller and Bundtzen.  1993; Bundtzen and others, 1996


No. 56- Innoko District
Major commodities: Au, Ag, Hg, Pt, Sn, W

Summary Description:
Bulk of gold from Innoko district placers occurs on bedrock benches on easterly or northerly Ml slopes. Minor
platinum and about 1% of gold content recovered from Boob Creek. Some dredging. Major heavy minerals are
chromrfe, scheelite, and arsenopynte. Most of district not glaciated. Gold derived from mineralized rhyohte and
basalt dike swarms and small monzonite plutons intruding the  Kuskokwim Group in the Yankee Creek, Ophir Creek,
and Spruce Creek areas. Largest dike swarm located along Ganes-Yankee Creek fault zone which parallels tditarod
Nixon Fault. Placer gold in Colorado. Cripple, and  Bear Creeks derived from both granite porphyry and monzonite.
Local bedrock aiso includes Cretaceous metasedimentary and metavolcanic rocks, chert, basalt, and felsic dikes.

References; Harrington. 1919;  Meitie, 1936; Cobb, 1973; Bundtzen and  Laird, 1980; Bundizen and others, 1985, 1987
1996,


No 59- Wiseman District (also known as Koyukuk district)
Major commodities: Au, Bi, Cu, W, pb

Summary Description.
Glaciation m pans  of district has caused disarrangements of drainage, resulting in complex placer deposits.
Gold-rich gravels occur in modern streams, bench, and buried stream deposits on bedrock  Large nuggels include
4.29 kg nugget on Hammond River and 1.28 kg on Nolan Cieek. Large nuggets more common than elsewhere in
Alaska, heavy minerals are gold, stibnite. native silver, native copper, native bismuth,  scheelite, pynte,
chaicopyrtte cinnabar, futile, cassilenle. nionazite. andalusile. and kyanite. Larger deposits at Hammond River and
Nolan Creek

References' Maddren. 1913' I.M.Reed, written cornrnun..  193P' Brosgt- and Reiser. I3f-:(l; Cobb   197:1. Dillon, 198?
Bundtzen and othec-  1996.


No 63-- Ruby District

-------
Summary Description;
District displays a complex geomorphic history, Vetn quartz, chert and other resistant rocks are common in
placers. Several cycles of erosion and deposition are interpreted. Placer deposits are generally buried and are
mined with shafts and drifts. Region not glaciated. Heavy minerals are gold, cassiferite, platinum, scheelite,
allanite. and native bismuth. Largest deposit on Long Creek produced nearly half o1 the district gold through 1993.
Bedrock consists of quartz veins in schisi in or near granite. District also contains minor ptacer Sn deposits, Gold
in district probably derived from polymetallic vein and skarn deposits associated with Cretaceous hypabyssal
granitic plutons. Local bedrock consists of limestone, schisi. volcanic rocks, and granitic plutons.

References: Eakin, 1918; Mertie and Harrington,  1924: Cass. 1959; Chapman and others. 1963: Cobb, 1973; Bundtzen
and
others, 1996.

-------