Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Smuggler Superfund- Interpretive Report & Health Risk Assessmt 3.9.84
Thomas S. Dunlop, 11 Aspen/Pitkin Enviromment0: Health Department 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 INTERPRETIVE REPORT AND HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT OF THE SMUGGLER RUNE ASPEN, COLORADO TDD RB -8401-15 it "MfttKWKr ROTra r OF '010N Vitt LftR!' ov" A , SUBMITTED ON: MARCH 9, 1984 SUBMITTED BY: KARL FORD JEFFREY FOSTER THOMAS HENDERSON GEOFFREY UPSON, PROJECT OFFICER INTERPRETIVE REPORT AND HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT OF THE SMUGGLER MINE ASPEN, COLORADO TDD R8-8401-15 SUBMITTED ON: MARCH 9, 1984 SUBMITTED BY: KARL FORD JEFFREY FOSTER THOMAS HENDERSON GEOFFREY UPSON, PROJECT OFFICER TABLE OF CONTENTS Paae LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LIST OF TABLES IN APPENDICES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 II. SITE CHARACTERIZATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . l A. Location . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 B. History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 C. Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 D. Geology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1. Bedrock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Ore Body Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3. Surficial Geology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 E. Hydrology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1. Surface Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2. Groundwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 F. Soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . 11 III. SAMPLING PROTOCOLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 A. Sampling Site Locations and Descriptions . . . . . . . . 13 1. Surface Water Samples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 2. Sediment Samples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 3. Groundwater Samples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 4. Soil Samples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 5. Tailings Samples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 B. Sample Collection Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 C. Quality Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Geochemistry / Water Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 1. Surface Water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) Paoe 2. Stream Sediments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 3. Groundwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 4. Soils. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 5. Tailings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 V. HEALTH HAZARD ASSESSMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 A. Methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 B. Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 1. Air . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 2. Soil, Sediment, and Tailings . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 3. Surface Water and Groundwater. . . . . . . . . . . . 24 VI. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 A. Air . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 B. Surface Water and Sediment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 C. Groundwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 D. Tailings and Soils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 APPENDIX A GEOCHEMISTRY / WATER QUALITY DATA TABLES APPENDIX B HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT DATA TABLES t LIST OF FIGURES i Paae FIGURE 1 GENERAL SITE MAP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1A FIGURE 2 STUDY AREA LOCATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2A FIGURE 3 GEOLOGY NEAR ASPEN, COLORADO. . . . . . . . . . . 4A, 4B FIGURE 4 GROUNDWATER SAMPLE STATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . 116 FIGURE 5 SURFACE WATER SAMPLE STATIONS . . . . . . . . . . 14A FIGURE 6 SEDIMENT SAMPLE STATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14B FIGURE 1 SOIL SAMPLE STATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15B FIGURE 8 BACKGROUND SOIL SAMPLE STATION. . . . . . . . . . 15C FIGURE 9 TAILINGS SAMPLE STATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15D i LIST OF TABLES Page TABLE 1 ESTIMATED WATER QUALITY IN ROARING FORK RIVER BELOW MOLLIE GIBSON MINE DRAINAGE FOR LOW -FLOW PERIODS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9A TABLE 2 DEPTH TO WATER IN PERSONAL WELLS SAMPLED BYFIT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11A TABLE 3 SAMPLE PARAMETERS ANALYZED . . . . . . . . . . . . .13A TABLE 4 PRIVATE WELL OWNERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15A TABLE 5 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS FOR THIRTEEN COMPOSITE SOIL SAMPLES AND ONE BACKGROUND COMPOSITE SOIL SAMPLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20A TABLE 6 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS FOR SIX COMPOSITE TAILINGS SAMPLES AND AVERAGE LIMESTONE COMPOSITION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20B ii M a w -M LIST OF TABLES IN APPENDICES PAGE APPENDIX A: Geochemistry/Water Quality Hata Tables Table A-1 Inorganic Analyses - Surface Water Samples A-1 Table A-2 Inorganic Analyses - Sediment Samples A-4 Table A-3 Inorganic Analyses - Groundwater Samples A-5 Table A-4 Inorganic Analyses - Soil Samples A -B Table A-5 Inorganic Analyses - Tailings Samples A-13 Table A-6 Inorganic Analyses - Field Blank Samples A-15 APPENDIX B: Health Risk Assessment Data Tables Table B-1 Health Risk Assessment - Soils Route B-1 Table B-2 Health Risk Assessment - Tailings Route B-3 Table B-3 Health Risk Assessment - Groundwater Route B-4 Table B-4 Health Risk Assessment - Surface Water Route B-5 I. INTRODUCTION This report has been prepared to satisfy the requirements of Technical Directive Document (TDD) R8-8441-15. The TDD tasked the Ecology and Environment, Inc. Field Investigation Team (FIT) to prepare an inter- pretive report on the results of sampling investigations conducted at the Smuggler Mine Tailings Site, Aspen, Colorado. The objectives of this re- port are to analyze data collected during the FIT investigations and to make an assessment of the potential hazards associated with this site. The sampling investigations were the result of a request by the City of Aspen to characterize any human or environmental threat posed by aban- doned mine tailings in the northeast quadrant of Aspen, Colorado. The city of Aspen intends to build low income housing on twenty-six acres of land in this particular area. The city became concerned following the analyses of soil and plant samples from the Aspen area which indicated elevated levels of trace metals, specifically lead and "cadmium (Boon, 1982). The potential - exists for surface runoff and wind blown dusts from these abandoned mine tailings to pass directly through existing and proposed areas of dF.•:lop- meat. The resulting concern is human exposure to trace metals from inhalation and ingestion. II. SITE CHARACTERIZATION A. Location The city of Aspen is located in Pitkin County approximately las air miles west-southwest of Denver, Colorado (Figure 1). The city is situated within the upper Roaring Fork River Drainage Basin and is bounded on the northeast and east by the Sawatch Mountain Range and on the south and southwest by the Elk Mountains. The study area, at a latitude of 39`11'30" north and longitude of 106048'36" west, is approximately one mile northeast of the Aspen City Hall and lies within the northeast boundary of the Aspen City limits. The Smuggler Mine property lies in an unsurveyed area of the White aY I_ �� • lI� � ri:+E �,uJphuf.• -. •. NAI 1:n A-wj _ • y ! 'Y -.^ SPfiflgsi r 1 Nl ,r.tIoNAE �• v+tom fwa. t R *...7 , aN /r• • r• \ ` .� iDOW • rMc _ - �•. ✓ -�'7'I ` ` 1 - L `' ►`►� ; • ♦ r�IV FDRFST.•. B���Ue% t1 •i r I • , � • 'r' � ' +•, 42 Itz �L � r �y,•, ♦�i• !i � n IrMr .t • 1 H 1 i ' y _ kC.. `e a ti s �' ,/...• 1'r .wr[I.ae Vii} tPorru i `` R-"� • Mrl •� -, � �-r• -~. C • 1 '•. wFANO • ''. r ,rn. tl �.f Inf••�I e''+ "."'�� , 7 ^ rw I ATtUI'T it • - •� ,• 4Mr � • ~': �� -� ��,. ' - •r • ♦.:w ►••\� 1. �• I � � 9I e5 • wm ► iGILp e 1 IQ �� a: -•ri }!'w. .x`. . r = �i `��: 7rp11 NAta •„_y,, _r I i r "Cl •1 ti H -C• III ARAPAIIQ FOREST !'rs�:-'4.•F e e.w•` 0-. Maiden JAI NATIO • .� 7Y '+" - y 1Li +' .7SI I to . ''� = : / WWIrI RIVES • t M • EAGLE +"•`enr h1�17101 �tARESI:.\ rte. � EiS gEENia Geoigel r ' R ��► S.ajp0� 4 r�. i,: y,r }�I l.�y• r i r t-XSUMN117 'SIA tAONgIAL .1IA3' .�,03�i Irlyjy + •. e o •e - r rr-..' 7! rvwtr •+M. o• `J► s j ® Sr�MllrFrnT ..�iw�♦.�' • r.4Jat I.dr (i .,.re.. , .•,1 i[s • F q. •• CLEAR" t:.rn.�r�" 4s Q :'1 • } t ® ,I ' e .♦ ©CRC���"[' I wap Little n '�••'•—J•+�ar�.J * s• E: y: �a 1� �- i.. �O•r•r la•�rnrr•: T WWII LYE `� - a;r a • s ,e`_ 14 .` •r /rA. 'L ♦. 0 4 c..r.. •ter ff . r !� r �• ! / R* �'•"' # .' .:•�1* �-. 16 O • a'ti •• d., .. I;,. E• eS w NATIo►jill / , �-` /w m 'arcckenrido- JEFFERSDN y /♦ ) ilf •.• ' ♦ .�••' 1. i ®' 'fir / ► -. sr rr .i,•..d. \� lawwr '.' i' 1;�.r:a�Z Ir•wr! ►... a •�f� 11 ��'.I•rrr i ir/ • f _ FOREST kcl.i+% re ' l f+ `' i• -V - , LR•((r mss 1�+t' •. a�il�l e1��el'r•yy.1 a.re.C.• �;+'w�M`\•j `� u,Ry + /�Mr+•` +1•, �� T � 7a 11;d•r. •�..,� : j:' �' 1•�I a i.wl y�� � !i �._ � 1 i _7��'✓ -. .:. � - ,�' 'i - * ��. S • n.r, .-./ o '-} a" :f.n•ti t.ei• f7 � •; 1. •+ ♦ � �rr,a•n •+ `�A s. '• ji+�� ..,a �." `1;;;r try-•�� �� rr +-.:;.er-•� . ?�- '' ' � .r 1 . K � �� mow' . d . j . { - •� - ; '��-ssr � Y 1..:r1►a .a' Il.r��..sr t�.�...,+ .s � C'�1F:`• _ r♦ 'L-�� ('� ' '. ,f ♦ ) 1 '.•��a�'' .'1• I _ r'Y4� +;'='�V ".-r'` .y�S !'.�`'• ; �!�:'�'r-'7 �- Aw7�• a- -� • _ ° {j�• .r� �1s+aFI•. ' Apli•lw. I z+J-. tFC�M�•r.•+• . L0 � . � .' �*�::`s�J. I�'A','lF• AY+�OR• �r�1.A���E' •��1, .-��d .. �.j!It13� a ♦♦ ♦ d_iCtG, LAS 1• AT' eadvlll wau r�' 30D uu•_r •r l +.� ti r � ,� .if�«nr:. x/! - r R �•�_ I rl y:,r i. ��'E� ,C/'s • £` ]� r +'•�a r• ..'•r,...;! ?e 1! PARK - ; .... ..r......lr. i tDs ./ �•r �� I I f baro. _e.. "..Vm '► AL_ — . .. �! �• - .0 - i- r Gr•►sd ' -r 1. l� . 4 —�� + •� Fa. nw lr•1 .7 ., ' �j•��+*. r"• a......,.• crlrM•� Pin. A%..4 + .. `ue FOSI -`P u1W ✓��•• L *': .� fr.yr \ 1 f..+N LTIONAI"' W.. •.. P - •`il t L 1 • ACA - v� ' �. . •.—fes3'S' �... l..1 ♦ •rlw� _ �-•.�•"� r—^- LLEE - 1 ` '4-1f !� 1a •3� ;?.. r r, ��� T FOREST 1 1s t c Wowlarw w . • �k .� + � _ ow.! it ,l) :+� ru..l ' Park— a" �. l L s .♦ aae• _1•„a• � jjam• rr 7l j 1 1♦'♦.• P...s. try*irlr•y Gr.•.•v• -'ti.i. .r ;%/r. MY.}. ' 1•-iJ'`v ir.�w y+-� M•r• ltl ` ' �tAuk Fre• �jfi'♦i:;1' j -� i::- .waq. 7a �•�+:w n"' { ri' dr 24 I♦F'� . . r �'.4♦ ; .�='♦ rr.+'rr,t� •iiaM .,Buen•• •1 i i s f S FLO I+SANT rti F.r ! a.r •.ti- - 4 vef y tia •u• j �' , --. ,r c* ra �I�' FgSStI BEL15 t • Mars. ` • , rC �- ss.0 '�♦,%� r` s pd ►st 1 r' • - .NATIONAL ri in•5p,u a •+e T-• _♦/ * F Y M1FINUMENT ° -.'] i•,T ! r, ♦ •a iN ISAfFL♦ n •C AFFEE• ' n r ,_. ■' - ' © e7 ' • ` a ♦ 1_jl kAT7ONAt .n ►fir... w . J , � ; 4rMt' • )S :-• a ., •� S. per �� - !1 Cripple ♦. I FOREST ' Creek ►rwu - `i . �7Ar � • � _SR .as, CMN SITARS - `~ _ t t . �•1 t, r'n- v MRM .� +, • + Kim / � •C� . A - � ! y , y •.� y_,! fall � .F t 1 � 1�F .F - + - - ' GL' 1I ism-'_[b,'rt»IdI * .91 i - J I +• r� - •' - . r .�, ►, :�' " �"i :E' 5alidz FREMONT =' w ri• . 4 ♦. i .°rte. O Bit Fa.w Nel S•rR1 U = � � �.� ' SMnss d .,r` - �� � 1 . ^ larlltgtir ,? 1e - 1 I �; — rbc —_— :_.-+F�.•.r.. ,���' ► 7 y1 '-Canon `i�! .: f t5 • s —. �Y _ .� --- :><MM1s '�.an � ` � •yl t'.at .T_� ,•.•.•A•M.rra - ' I .,..M f. •3 = s vxw ow .rte y' 4.... q.• GUNNISON "� •I TaY NATIONAL SAGUACHt - _ 210 C NATIONAL ''. ♦ N � 12a,rti Bala•+l er•.w Flore ice • rp■I leas G•M �JNAT ' MA S1ri 11 Rf.E " T� 1 5 "MILE ecology and environment, ine. 4105 EAST FLORIDA AVENUE, SUITE 350, DENVER, COLORADO 80222 he a FIGURE 1 w••,7 GENERAL SITE MAP ASPEN, COLORADO 4 River National Forest adjacent to the Aspen City Limits (Figure 2). B. History The following site history was taken from a 1950 U.S. Bureau of Mines Report of Investigation #4696 by Volin and Hild. The mining of - _ the rich silver -lead ores in the Aspen area began in 1879. In that year, mineral discoveries were made on Aspen and Smuggler Mountains by prospectors following limestone outcrops from Leadville. For the first decade, rich silver ores were packed over the mountains by burros to the Leadville smelters at a cost of $50 to $100 per ton. Because of the high transportation costs, production levels remained at somewhat depressed levels until the arrival of the Denver -Rio Grande and the Colorado Midland Railroads in 1887 and 1888, re- spectively. During the first year, after the arrival of the rail- roads, production levels for silver reached 1,000,000 ounces. Because smelting and milling costs remained high due to the unique nature of the ore bodies, owner profits .were constantly - depressed. Several smelters and mills operated prior to the arrival of the railroads, but they were unsucFessful in separating the lead and zinc. Additionally, penalties were paid to out-of-state smelters — because of the high zinc content of the ores. Regardless of these in- herent problems, the silver and lead ores produced by the Aspen dis- trict mines between the years of 1880 and 1918 were worth approxi- mately 102 million dollars. The Aspen district mines form a corridor that extends three miles south and approximately one and a half miles north-northwest of Aspen. The Smuggler Mine lies on the north-northeast side of this corridor. The mine workings in the Aspen City area were continuous and inter- connected. During the boom years, these workings extended from Aspen Mountain, under the Roaring Fork River, and northeastward to Smuggler Mountain. The mines extended from.1,200 feet below to 800 feet above the valley floor. •. 01 CIP �c`• • �+ �`\ � 't �..r. ..�:-..rpt--l-..- V `nNK oil 4L.W. t • \y � 1� 4111 �� �,•1.� ••�'----��' ' � ' �� 1 r! � +� JOIN • Jill + � •�1 1$LjS wa e !1 : • it � .. J �•.�Aspen .• '\ SBM 7907) br '441 , Its , Vp x 'ir •11♦•i;r1��•� ,�� i� - • �' �� ♦ JOIN 44 ir -hiss J1 411 IN IF 40 IN 6 • i�1Jl • ��l �1 • • f `�,� APA N vel/ R �j • ` YVf} � �Zf e • • • PitTali ,/ • n ecology and environment, inc. 1 R 4105 EAST FLORIDA AVENUE. SUITE 350, DENVER, COLORADO B= FIGURE 2 STUDY AREA LOCATION ASPEN, COLORADO As the pursuit of the main ore bodies extended the manes far be- low the valley floor, dewatering of the mines became a major expense and activity. In 1918, discharge from dewatering operations of the Smuggler #1 and #2 tunnels and the Mollie Gibson shaft reached 3,200 gallons per minute. By this time, the majority of the mines were con- solidated into two properties owned by the Smuggler -Durant Mining Cor- poration and the Delta S. Consolidated Mines Company. The Smuggler - Durrant Mining Corporation held titles to the Smuggler and Mollie ' Gibson Mines plus several adjoining properties. In 1918, the two mining companies became involved in a dispute over mining rights and, - as a consequence, mining and dewatering operations ceased. The w Smuggler, Mollie Gibson, and Cowenhoven Mines flooded in a short amount of time to the level of the valley floor. Currently, the first 800 feet of the Cowenhoven Tunnel is caved in. and ponded water in back of this obstruction extends to within 20 feet of the Smuggler #1 Tunnel. Since cessation of full mining operations in the Smuggler Mine in 1918, lessees have intermittently produced small quantities of ore for shipment. During World War II, the Herron Brothers operated a small gravity concentration mill with ores selected from the Smuggler and Mollie Gibson tailings. Exploratory work has continued sporadically in the Smuggler #2 Tunnel by a number of different lessees. C. Description ' The study area encompasses approximately 75 acres of developed and undeveloped properties. It is composed primarily of tailings from the Smuggler, Mollie Gibson, and Cowenhoven Mines, and former smelting - milling operations. Tailings and mine water drainages from the Mollie Gibson and Cowenhoven Mines still impact the study area in the southeast and northwest portions, respectively. Other mine and mill tailings that existed in the study area years ago have been used as fill under the Hunter-Longhouse Condominiums, the Silver King Condominiums, the Smuggler Mountain Trailer Court and other private property developments. In most places, tailings have been covered by topsoil. However, some tailings used as fill remain bare. One particular area is located in the Smuggler Mountain Trailer Court where trailers have been placed directly on mine tailings (Ecology and Environment, Inc. 1983a and 1983b). ' D. Geology Aspen is located in the valley of the Roaring Fork River sur- rounded by Smuggler Mountain to the East, Aspen Mountain to the South, and Red Mountain to the North. The extensively folded and faulted bedrock in the area is partially overlain by unconsolidated sediments of primarily glacial and alluvial origin. 1. Bedrock Aspen is located in the Colorado Mineral Beat near the southern end of a minor northward plunging syncline extending from Aspen Mountain into Red Mountain (Figure 3). East of Aspen, running roughly north -south is the Castle Creek Fault Zone, marking the boundary between the Sawatch Range and the Elk a Mountains. The maximum width of the fault zone is approximately one mile. The eastern fault blocks are downthrown with respect - to the older rocks to the west of the fault. Additional faults extend northeast from Aspen between Red Mountain and the Sawatch Range (Tweto et al., 1978). Some faulting has occurred parallel to bedding planes on the eastern side of the syncline. Mineral replacement in the steeply dipping rocks near the fault has been g very important to mining in the region. Precambrian quartz monzonite forms the back bone of the Sawatch Range. Dnconformably adjacent to this formation along m the western slope of the Sawatch Range near Aspen. are quartzites, dolomitic sandstones, and dolomite of Cambrian'and Ordovician age. The Devonian age Chaffee Formation made up of shale, quartzite, siltstone, limestone, and dolomite inconformably over- lie these rocks. Mississippian age Leadville Limestone made up 4 I 0.4 FIGURE 3 "—INS OGY NEAR ASPEN, COLORADO FROM BRYANT, 1971 dq.4000 SCALE 1: ,OGIC KEY NEXT PAGE RB -8401-15 EXPLANATION - GEOLOGIC MAP (FIGURE 3) — U -..• — •••• fault, dashed for approximate location, dotted where D concealed. U indicates upthrown side D indicates downthrown side -•-- — ---� syncline, plunging in direction of arrow 401 strike, dip, dip direction of planar feature PEg Quartz Monzonite - Precambrian £s Sawatch Quartzite - Cambrian -Ep Peerless Formation - Cambrian dolomite, sandstone Om Manitou Dolomite - Ordotician Ml Leadville Limestone - Mississippian Pb Belden Formation - Pennsylvanian limestone, dolomite & shale Pg Gothic Formation - Pennsylyanian sandstone, siltstone, shale & limestone Ppm Maroon Formation - Pennsylvanian & Permian sandstone, siltstone, mudstone, conglomerate & limestone Qma, Qmb, Qmc, Qmd, Qme Quaternary - Various episodes of Glacial moraine Qga, Ogb, Qgc, Qgd Quaternary - Various episodes of Glacial outwash Qt Quaternary - talus QC Quaternary - colluvium Qal Quaternary - alluvium Qf Quaternary - alluvial fan deposits IN of limestone and dolomite with some sandstone unconformably - overlies the Chaffee Formation. In some places, a thrust fault follows the contact of the Leadville Limestone and the unconform- ably overlying Belden Formation, composed of limestone, dolomite, shale and evaporites. Extensive secondary enrichment in these formations resulted in economically important silver deposits. ' Much of the silver was mined along fault zones in these for- mations. Overlying the Belden Formation are the Eagle Valley, Gothic, and Maroon Formations which make up Red Mountain. These strata are predominantly sandstones, siltstones, and shales with some limestone. This stratigraphy has been greatly disturbed by faulting and igneous -intrusions south of Aspen. 2. Ore Body Description A highly brecciated fault zone within the Leadville Lime- stone and at the contact of the,Leadville Limestone .and the Belden Formation has been the site of replacement by various minerals in economically important quantities. Ores of silver, lead, zinc and cadmium have been mined and refined. Some low grade ores were found in limestone beds adjacent to the fault zones. No gold was found in the major ore body. Silver was mined both as native silver and in sulfide com- pounds such as argentite (A92S). Other sulfide ores associated with this mineral deposit include galena (PbS), sphalerite ((Zn,Fe)S), pyrite (FeS2) and wurtzite (ZnS). Non -sulfide mineral deposits include smithsonite (ZnCO3), cerussite - (PbCO3), siderite (FeCO3), and barite (BaSO4). Some quartz replacement also occurs in the deposit (Volin and Hild, 1950). Major minerals in the wall rock include iron -rich dolomite (CaMg (CO3)2) and calcite (CaCO3). 3. Surficial Geology Surficial geology in the study area was determined by the actions of glaciers and streams passing through the region. Most unconsolidated deposits are found in stream valleys along the t water courses. Glacial moraine and outwash deposits fill most of - the stream valleys. These are unsorted to poorly sorted sedi- ments containing silt to boulder sized materials. Aspen is built on several layers of glacial outwash in the valley bottom with - moraine deposits along the valley slopes. Several gravel pits have been located in the moraine deposits. Alluvial sand, silt, and gravel overlie glacial moraine in the Roaring Fork River Valley south of Aspen. This material may be poorly to moderately sorted. In some locations, alluvial fans are found where inter- mittent streams enter the main stream. Several talus and col- t luvial deposits are found south -of Aspen on Aspen Mountain. Bed- rock outcrops are common in the unconsolidated sediments. The mine shafts of interest are located on Smuggler Mountain in glacial moraine on the lower slopes. The mine tailings deposits were on glacial moraine and alluvial fan material. E. Hydrology A discussion of hydrology in the area must consider both surface water, groundwaters, and their interaction. This interaction has been promoted by mining in the region, opening routes for water exchange which were not formerly available. The water quality changes associ- ated with mixing of surface water and groundwater are also examined. 1. Surface Water rt The Roaring Fork River flows northwest through Aspen. In Aspen, Hunter Creek joins the river from the Northeast. A short distance northwest of Aspen, Castle Creek joins the Roaring Fork River from the South. All of these streams have numerous small, intermittent tributaries rising in the surrounding mountains. Puny of these small tributaries follow fault traces down the 6 M mountain slopes (Figure 3). These small mountain streams characteristically exhibit quick hydrograph rise and fall during runoff events. A U.S.G.S. gaging station is located on the Roaring Fork River one mile southeast of Aspen. Statistical analysis of the data gathered at this station shows that the Roaring Fork River has a mean annual discharge of 84.1 cubic feet per second (cfs), and a standard deviation of 19.5 cfs for the period 1965 to 1975 (U.S.G.S., 1979). High positive skewness of 1.53 indicates that there is a high frequency of occurrance of discharges signifi- cantly greater than the mean flow. Maximum average monthly dis- charge occurs in June at 349 cfs with minimum average monthly discharge in February at 23.5 cfs for the period of record. The gaging station is upstream of the Salvation Canal headgate; thus, the removal of irrigation water is not reflected in the discharge data. No discharge measurements are available for the outflows from the Mollie Gibson Mine or the Cowenhoven Tunnel. An esti- mate of discharge from the Mollie Gibson Mine can be calculated using the following sampling information: o Total dissolved solids (TDS) concentrations in the Roaring Fork River above and below the Mollie Gibson Mine discharge were 52 and 50 mg/l, respectively. o TDS concentration in the Mollie Gibson Mine water prior to its discharge into the Roaring Fork River was 583 mg/i. o Daily mean discharge in the Roaring Fork River at the upstream gaging station on September 17, 1983 was 54 cfs (Kretschman, 1984). It is assumed that little irrigation water was being removed or the sampling date. 7 Under the assumption of total mixing throughout the stream, the Mollie Gibson discharge is estimated at less than one cfs. The FIT indicated that this discharge fluctuated somewhat, per- haps indicating additional surface water sources as well as the expected groundwater source. Rough visual estimates made by the FIT indicate that discharge from the Cowenhoven Tunnel is quite steady and less than that from the Mollie Gibson Mine. The Mollie Gibson Mine drainage enters the Roaring Fork River in Aspen. The Cowenhoven tunnel discharge enters Hunter - Creek. In general, the mine discharge volumes are quite small in comparison to the stream discharge; however, during low -flow periods, their impact on water quality may be more noticable. Flow analysis of the Roaring Fork River above Aspen indicates that the lowest flows generally occur in the winter months, - December through March, when little water is being removed for irrigation. Low -flow analysis of the stream (U.S.G.S., 1979) for the period 1965 to 1975 shows a one -day minimum discharge of 15 cfs and a 30 day minimum of 18 cfs discharge. During these admittedly rare events, one cfs discharge from the Mollie Gibson Mine may be significant. Under the following assumptions, several water quality para- 14 meters were calculated for a "worst case" low -flow discharge: o Water quality in the Roaring Fork River is the same during low -flow periods as it was during FIT sampling. - ❑ Discharge in the Roaring Fork River is the same through . Aspen as at the gaging station. This assumption may be } invalid during periods of irrigation diversion. o During low -flow periods, discharge and water -quality from the Mollie Gibson Mine are the same as during FIT sampling. o Mixing of the waters takes place without precipitation of minerals or additional uptake from sediments. Using the results•of the September sampling, hypothetical water quality for a sustained river discharge of 16 cfs was calculated (Table 1). Even for this case, water quality standards for the stream are met. Water quality effects of the Cowenhoven Tunnel discharge are more difficult to quantify. Water in Hunter Creek was not sampled near the outflow from the tunnel discharge. No estimate of dis- charge from the tunnel can be made. in -stream water quality ef- fects due to this input are expected to be smaller than those attributed to the Mollie Gibson -Mine. 2. Groundwater , Groundwater in the area of interest can be found both in bedrock and in the unconsolidated valley -fill sediments. Both of these water systems are important to the study. Water contained in the bedrock in the region can migrate in two ways: 1) through the intergranular spaces in the rock matrix (primary permeability), and 2) through joints, fractures and faults within the rock (secondary permeability). Both routes of water movement are expected to be important in this region due to the abundance of sedimentary rocks and the extensive faulting which has taken place in the region. Hydraulic conductivity is most likely higher in the direction parallel to major faulting, increasing ease of water movement preferentially in the northeast -southwest direction. A vertical section through the Smuggler Mine (Volin and Hild, 1950) suggests that the mine extends into the mountain much farther laterally than vertically. Several fault zones are TABLE 1 ESTIMATED WATER QUALITY IN ROARING FORK RIVER BELOW MOLLIE GIBSON MINE DRAINAGE FOR LOW -FLOW PERIODS PARAMETER ROARING FORK MOLLIE GIBSON ABOVE DRAINAGE MINE DRAINAGE TDS mg/l 52 Sulfate mg/l 4.3 Total iron ug/l 146 Total Manganese ug/1 8 Total Zinc mg/1 9 Sustained low -flow in roaring fork 16 cfs Mollie Gibson drainage 1 cfs 583 217 730 389 685 ROARING FORK BELOW DRAINAGE 83.2 16.8 179.9 30.4 48.8 r intercepted byothe various tunnels. If it is assumed that hydro- static head in the bedrock follows topographic change to some extent, it is expected that head will increase with depth below ground surface beneath the mountain. The many horizontal tunnels in the mine would then act as pipes allowing water from regions of higher head beneath the mountain to flow at the surface on the lower slopes Groundwater head change with surface elevation can be seen to some extent in the limited data available. Depth to water at well SM -PW -1 was 130 ft. at installation (Table 2). The topo- graphic map of the sample locations (Figure 4) shows the well to be at approximately 8,460 feet above mean sea level (msl). The groundwater elevation is about 8,330 feet above msl at SM -PW -1. Wells SM -PW -4, 6, and 7 in the river valley all have groundwater elevations about 7,850 feet above msl. This indicates a great groundwater head difference between water beneath the mountain and water in the valleys. Since the mine shafts penetrate deeply into the mountain, they can be expected to encounter areas of higher head, resulting in flow from the shafts. The upslope portions of the mountains, especially at the surface locations of fault zones, are probably recharge areas for the bedrock system, with the valleys being discharge areas. Ground- water from the bedrock system probably recharges the near - surface valley -fill system. Near surface groundwater in the glacial and alluvial valley - fill al1ey-fill sediments probably moves in directions suggested by the topography. Water can be expected to move downslope toward the stream channels. Some disruption of flow streamlines can be ex- pected due to stratigraphic changes in the sediments. Well sorted silt and clay lenses in the coarse sands and -gravels act as flow barriers and can slow groundwater movement. Interaction between near -surface groundwater and surface water probably changes with the highly variable nature of the valley -fill sediments. Interaction is probably quite free in w alluvial fan deposits. Lower flow rates and higher gradients can be expected in glacial deposits with increasing silt and clay content. Slow groundwater movement can be expected in the tailings due to their relatively poor sorting and characteristically high silt -clay fraction. Slow movement of water through the tailings provides ample time for chemical reactions to take place resulting in the degradation of water quality as seen in samples SM -PW -5 and SM -PW -7 downslope from the tailings. The relatively good water qualtity of sample SM -PW -6 can be attributed to the complex glacial geology in the area. The existence of a barrier to groundwater flow can be postulated upgradient of sample SM -PW -6. Groundwater quality will be discussed in more detail in Section IV. - F. Soils The following soils discussion is taken from an unpublished soil survey report titled Aspen -Gypsum Area Soil Survey by Spears. Within the Smuggler Mine study area boundaries, one soil mapping unit and one land area are delineated. The soil mapping unit is the Uracca-Mergel soil complex, 6-12% slope. The land area delineated is mine tailings. This soil complex is found primarily.on alluvial fans, benches, and valley sides. The complex is 50 percent Uracca soil, 40 percent + Mergel soil, and 10 percent of similiar soils with thicker surfaces and less coarse fragments. The Uracca soil is deep and well drained. It formed in alluvium derived predominantly from mixed igneous and metamorphic parent material. This soil is cobbly to extremely cobbly as depth increases. Coarse fragment content ranges from 35 to 85 percent by volume. Depth w Ad W SAMPLE NUMBER TABLE 2 DEPTH TO MATER IN PERSONAL WELLS SAMPLED BY FIT DEPTH TO WATERT TOTAL WELL DEPTHI DATE FT. FT. SM -PW -1 130 266 5/63 SM -PW -4 60 85 11/76 SM -PW -6 40 79 2/67 SM -PW -7 70 96 12/80 1 Information from well installation records " � �'.�' � •,• •L_:C - � •,�'' •,,.��ir�;\."''��.'-� - :'.vim ,_ �.�.: - .rn[I ry � `�l ati • • ' '• '� -'1 ` � , i If 'f'� lelr� / L's.r`L1 \ of 4 WIN ' ! r n'« ..-»�[y='t ,� `-a i r \��]�! l\\ a•<�' 9Vs- osc*egw I • i (. 1. :.• i .' ti♦1 ,1 a li !'� �•, bae�. e I •r, ,f 1 ov. > 40' , t a k 34e en 1 II `•• Asps lt� �, • :\ r �n.0 �� �. /��•�1-ra !r' •L.Ir •..�:'.F'-- f'Yy"'� f41M i9U r: `n� • , cc -t. -t.'\ 1�1 '`�,' •t•`11 \�•• . p/'�`\�. l i/ ] I •�*r .. ;I'' •�:. '�• ` �'. ,+hsi r ' ccvffl d , i,• �0F I., •, I �'» .'� ��'•'•�»'• f'..- .a.^` / P� P W •C T„nne $rn gK'r .� �'.. ���'•-t,..!_.; ^� r'•r-..: �'' a O f� 1 i i new: \` �' � • .3n fro bow 1) � r .~1 �b �\.'.ti, v ar. ` L •r �. � � 111 's„ - �!• `11..1`\ 1 1` :.i•••L _ l.,: CV;L� ` 1 I i tL eL an►: iC�. �ttl,;�ie 1�, 'i• '.\:. «•, r- •!i•���s`�l+l��• � '`�:++- ,. • �•r '• 1`� \ `•\. � 1 \, �• ��_ �- � i.b,lfr it ` `,� !� �y� ' E '� •.�� '� \ ' . a !� rere4 . �', �. �'" E � \` \ \\ '�r r Wa1w -N` •'Z P+/`�/r` + C_ r..{ S V \�\�'�`� `moi•-?�`�'\�,\ '• ..� r[ f�li r1, 1 � �\r(�� �.�1 r4� � E►. �'•� ��_ iUl�i •� � mac. Irl � } , 'i rrl� � '�i •r� �r /' � '��111W\� .4 __ aDD� . ���1�� � YJ ''�.. \ �� ��i, i`\,\•_ "{l�`'1f/ ll�\.�K, i\\.J -�1 � 'Op0;�1,'„`���`.� "\`�t`:,, \\ s]3flra.11P1U �\ � ]U O..0 A L E 7 : Z 4 0 0\ '' IiI;"� �- � tjr .�`!� �1 1�'Lol�.%•,=�� �o �; 1`\ - .. _. ecology and environment, inc. 4105 EAST FLORIDA AVENUE, SUITE 350. IN `t`I = y \ `•` % ; `�' ''l �\ DENVER, COLORADO 80222 o FIGURE 4 GROUNDWATER SAMPLE STATIONS `��. l':� y`•�a' �` ,�Q,'HFI1;\ ASPEN. COLORADO 11B Al L' 4A to uniformly calcareous material ranges from 6 to 40 inches. Permeability of the Uracca soil is moderately rapid (2.0-6.0 in/hr). Available water capacity is medium (0.16-0.18 in/in of soil). Effective rooting depth is 20 to 40 inches. Runoff is slow and the hazard of water erosion is slight. The Mergel soil is deep and well drained. It formed in glacial a outwash. This soil is cobbly to extremely stony as depth increases. Coarse fragment content ranges from 30 to 80 percent by volume. Depth to uniformly calcareous material ranges from 0 to 12 inches. Per- meabi,lity of the Mergel soil is rapid (6.0-20.0 in/hr). Available water capacity is low (0.11-0.14 in/in of soil). Effective rooting depth is 20 to 40 inches. Runoff is slow and the hazard of water erosion is slight. The undisturbed mine tailings make up approximately 25 percent of the study area. Another 25 percent .appears to be disturbed native soil (Uracca Mergel Complex), and the other 50 percent of the study area is primarily a complex mixture of mine and mill tailings, Uracca- Mergel soil complex, fill dirt, and topsoil. Except where sampled, the physical and chemical characteristics of this mixture are largely undetermined. However, knowing some of the physical and chemical pro- perties of the Uracca-Mergel complex and of the mine tailings, the range of soil characteristics described are expected within the study area boundaries. III. SAMPLING PROTOCOLS w The sampling procedures used during this investigation were in accord- ance with the June 1982 Standard Operating Procedures for Field Samplers published by the Environmental Services Division (ESD) and the ESD approved s Sampling Plan. The following descriptions of sampling stations are con- tained in both the September 1983 Sampling Plan and follow-up Report of Sampling activities (TDD R8-8308-01) and the November 1983 Sampling Plan and follow-up Report of Sampling Activities (TDD R8-8310-06, Ecology and Environment, Inc.,�1983a, b, c). The samples collected were delivered under proper chain -of -custody procedures to the EPA Region VIII laboratory for analyses. Additionally, one set of tailing samples collected were - delivered under proper chain -of -custody procedures to Core Laboratories, Denver, Colorado for mineral carbonate analysis. " During the September 1983 sampling trip (TDD R8-8308-01) seven surface water sites, five sediment sites, fourteen soil sites, six tailing sites, and six groundwater sites were sampled. During the November 1983 sampling - trip (TDD R8-8310-06) five surface water sites and one groundwater site were re -sampled. In addition, one new groundwater site was sampled that - had not been possible to collect in September. The analyzed parameters for each type of sample are listed in Table 3. A. Sampling Site Locations and Descriptions 1. Surface water samples - The surface water sampling sites, as shown in Figure 5, include: The Roaring Fork River above (SM -ST -1) and below (SM -ST -2) the confluence with the Mollie Gibson Mine discharge (SM -ST -4 and SM -ST -5). Surface water sample station SM -ST -1 is considered to be the background sample because it is upgradient of the study -� areas. The sampling site (SM -ST -3) below the confluence with the IV Cowenhoven Mine drainage was not sampled because it was determined that drainage from the Cownehoven Mine did not flow directly into the Roaring Fork River. The Mollie Gibson Mine drainage just after emergence (SM -ST -4) from the underground pipe section and just above (SM -ST -5) its confluence with the Roaring Fork River. The Cownehoven Mine drainage about 100 yards after emergence (SM -ST -6) from the Cowenhoven Mine exit. Approximately two blocks from its origin, the Cowenhoven Mine drainage disappears into a storm sewer system. The drainage apparently enters Hunter If t9 TABLE 3 SAMPLE PARAMETERS ANALYZED SAMPLE ID: PARAMETER SURFACE WATER GROUNDWATER SOILS TAILINGS SEDIMENTS FIELD - BLANKS (SM -ST (SM -PW (SM -SO (SM -TA (SM -SE (SM -BL SERIES) SERIES) SERIES SERIES) SERIES) SERIES) Field Conductivity X X X pH X X X X X Temperature X X X Lab Ac d it yl X X1 Alkalinity Anions X X1 X2 X3 X Carbonate, X ' Mineral (CO3) Cyanide ' X4 Dissolved Metals X X X + Total Dissolved X X1 X5 Solids (TDS) Total Metals X X X X (Acid Digest) Total Metals X X X (Weak Acid Extraction) 1 Not analyzed for samples SM -PW -5A or SM -PW -7 2 Not analyzed for sample SM -SO -19. 3 Not analyzed for sample SM -TA -3. 4 Analyzed for sample SM -BL -20 only. 5 Analyzed for sample SM -BL -1 only. 13A Creek at some point rather than the Roaring Fork River. For these reasons, SM -ST -7 was not collected. The Salvation Canal upstream (SM -ST -8) and downstream I (SM -ST -9) of the Smuggler Mine Tailings area. These sampling sites were located just prior to entering (SM -ST -8) and just after emerging (SM -ST -9) from the underground pipe section of the irrigation canal. SM -ST -8 can be considered to be a background sample site bacause of its position upgradient of the study area. 2. Sediment Samples - The sediment sampling sites correspond to the surface water sampling sites and are shown in Figure 5. Roaring Fork River sediments were sampled above (SM -SE -1) ' and below (SM -SE -2) the confluence with the Mollie Gibson Mine discharge. The sediment sampling site (SM -SE -3) was not sampled for reasons similar to those mentioned for not collecting SM -ST -3 - Sediments from the Mollie Gibson Mine drainage were sampled just after emergence (SM -SE -4) from -the underground pipe section - and just above (SM -SE -5) its confluence with the Roaring Fork ° River. Sediment samples were taken from the Cowenhoven Mine drain- age about 100 yards after emergence (SM -SE -6) from the Cowenhoven Mine Adit. Sediment sampling site SM -SE -7 was not collected for the same reasons mentioned for not collecting surface water sampling site SM -ST -7. J Because the water chemistry was determined to be of primary importance, no sediment sampling sites were designated for Salvation Canal. 14 4w • \ ��' .�\ •,`.• 1, - •' .' 9� -�/V y ,'M..S.r...+�• •; ��-i'!„r�'`� ',����,• - � ;'' ••fr fir_ R� •_' i�r,�_� i•: `a: Cir• .�.s �`\ •' Lt S�£•`r'. .:R._�.' fi if +URSE Ir met ar �•-�•.4�"•! •'`�1��' -• �7i1 (r1r�r !`!.� �1,��—tom /; -a� •�• + n•-•;� .r .�„'n•'F •r � � r 1S (`�.�` BK ad ![p i ,� l�� • •�'- � � i psi � . �, •� •, r �n.ttJON I"• ¢ .k'•- Y (B 790 i { `A \ io •` .�1 ... t �•�• .7r"'� ■.. ` •� _.. 4 D aosa:?' e! �• ,; � y , �• �•:" � �� r.'j'•,�:• � �� • � j o unne -OV �• �. r•, �� � �: h�`�r pL. .. •`! • L ��� i • rh f� �. k •` ` I, \ 1• �114,1�, • 1;,:1. �, 1r- 1,1 (r:,� �:I ,•�;; ~, �+�` ~•••-��r••.r j •"• ��l �/■'T•.+� -” 1• .` •1.' i� � \`� •\�'1•' � I il.�j ` -li 1`- t rrf .%7-!n\,,',',\\j� �,, .. •1 jl 5� j���:I••■i:aF►�•�'�¢rpJ Miier s• .,'+ .4 i(i -+ \�. 1L'� Mw_4ii 7'v k Tari i l•,r '' ilSr � .:p dy /t.' .�11 .\.. �.- /., a i •!� � ` \ 1�� '" .��. — �+ _Qy; i:l{ t�y'.�k( ;� l oii�ll�� .t' 1 �� • J: r.:. ��, �. ,� ���,\\� \�, `rr /I' 0.ilop'- ,,.'+..,'.',y+ll+4'} +`��• .( `� �a •• ii fa vel • ! I G• E 'i ^r,'tf'✓, .{. '' I1`L'', LwatM •_�' \ �. Pit • '; !JI ' ,r e'rr r+,r'.'jf � l`w� \ t 'n;li Taeik�-r� 11 �, /�� I • +_< 4 �` ��,` •��F - ;� �� • r. :�,.�, :��� .;�f:� ` � •�+- x`11 ,'Ut " :� 1� (' �' ,r � � (� •'!• mil ' h�1\ r: •. �,,r �e - ` y�:�=� q� .Q ' � _ . � 1 � i ..k r`,' j r^ _ �� , e•�� �':y; .ppm :_j��=-:,~`` 1. , .,i l' .�#{ �f� �,'n�' \ _,�\� r ����i3'!� r` �• � s°'Zs ` 'o ICL ./, S.�f ! �4 - '.I,. �� �_�� �'i• .' i r �1 .� �\s ;;� ter♦ �. `� ,� ��,� � i�i.:. 1a� ;'��'��� :` � � � ill •.I.:J`!r/j \\ �`\�\ i5� i ~ 1 hn} :f 'PEFTiIrq TC ��\ �' �'' r i 1`'`lb �� sal r it ` (I r'; I i ( l t1 0 +►. O ' r ; % _ _ moo• � i'r :',� � ; °1.t \� ��: ���I ��'l ' r 1 ,r/1� • M rata to 14A e Graver Pr[s � �\ 92 � 1 '\ .�,�, p,,Q, 1M �Ir ,, `�► ;I; 24000 ecology and em•ironment, inc. 4105 EAST FLORIDA AVENUE, SUITE 350, DENVER, COLORADO 80P22 FIGURE 6 SURFACE WATER SAMPLE STATIONS ASPEN,COLORADO 41 ,' ` •.:`' ,' �_•. e!.yL,..►• .+ -t `IWC '\,�_:11,''x,:1 :r' _ _ _ _ `-��/-� . N, `� .- - • 's1, 'ti •,� •i;� : tit` ;: _ ' _ _ �_ � �•� r _ ` C•• r') �' .r. � u,'j -�,� i' � _ -� �., 'moi t ,I •,,�.'� rrL •i ' , � �ylN f �'' �" � _ �/ '' �'��j_t fir•. r~_ • R tl B lie 1 a• ....0 S,`, �r»,. _ )'�1 �.,' , r s COURSE met rY ?`• v Nti� If I y` 111 jr((� i.'•,acker [` � !7 •ar �\�� w� ,r � •,` 5 � , .a„ �� \`t• �• as i.a lw a �' V5 A tNj to A\r 8 1 sn o •�• `1 ���''' ,` A� �� p-r.s��� • /, r:. �;; �R-r �]•�Fa�tBi+l 79D+r - SIM` `\.\` ' .. • 1J •,�'. r,F' ,� , i •-1'+1` �P• aa, �• �,,, -niR! ,CD.rt +bl.ln�`� '•�. �C SO N --f k,` •..J '•�'•a•'\�': y .; vnne SITI a J��-�I•' ! .�••jrf:' .��'\y. i� �Ca` _ ' 'Sfi�''�'�i�•'� ,(,.� '��lCy/ Ali -'o\ =•'i `w •.' ,r• \�•Ca.'�• �h'• •`�r'•'+''!'\'���\, r :� • r0 1r /. ��,.,1 •�` \l1'`. X11,` i _ ' _ �\ � Far .�*. �� err v � ••_9h 1�'��,.i d' 1�� . jl � ,. ti~ If. •,'/�f' ,,:\- `v.li .•. 1' �� 4�-f••. �'_' i��SE _ • - �. �•'� ,� i __ Yvnti "'1111: ;,i; �.y` \2 • .�•-�i�`•+.a.,� ''�-��: `- � ' �. �' �•`•.;���' _ _ -, r' J/!J ' "�r.'O' '�i{`. `.I ',1 j• I'r il, `\••� • ♦`.� .s i Fir` / - •�' :` S -r I `���, \�* " __ •V Wmirr 'A Prl.� Jl ' �• I a. t �� �7 \,]^ \ �.) r 1 i r. �� I' rJ�1511 s.�\ 4 _\y_ �pp� �}�\ `� "' •�..._ \;\1. 'w � -ii',' '• rf� \fit` w �.��\�'�, - �\1 }� �f I, i\\ 'DE IY ,' 14- ted .+; � -�= :' � •i , � If r .� �1`1�►�1d —� . r / /�' IIA q !• !r mss ��-_ Itl� IiN� 1 X1;1 a%•I ����` rl �l! ., \, '\� � , .;r. '+elf `6 �•'+l } r.y ./A . �� 14B IN 10 , ti aGl�r11 PIIS �� k Ma 1AA��P S\AL1;�1: 24000 55, •. ,1 r ,] , ecology and environment, inc. 4105 EAST FLORIDA AVENUE, SUITE 350, DENVER, COLORADO 80222 FIGURE 6 SEDIMENT SAMPLE STATIONS ASPEN, COLORADO V r, 14 3. Groundwater Samples - The groundwater sampling sites are shown in Figure 4. These sampling sites are private wells, developed for domestic water use. The owners and their addresses A are listed in Table 4. One sampling site (SM -PW -2) is a diversion from the Salvation Canal and/or Hunter Creek to an underground cistern. _ 4. Soil Samples - The study area was divided into eighteen, five hundred square foot grids as shown in Figure 7. Sampling grids 3, 15, 16, 17, 18 and the upper halves of grids 6 and 9 were eliminated because it was determined that these grids were out- side the study area. SM -SO -19 (Figure 8) is considered the back- ground soil sample site because of its position upgradient of the b study area. 5. Tailing Samples - The tailings sampling sites are shown in Figure 9. The tailings dumps in the study area were divided into three particular are -as for sampling. Sampling sites SM -TA -1 (0"-6") and SM -TA -2 (42"-48") were designated for the tailings piles that exist between the Smuggler Mountain Trailer Court and the Aspen Tennis Club. Sampling sites SM -TA -3 (0"-6") and SM -TA -4 (42"-48") were designated for the top of the tailings piles that exist between the Smuggler Mine and the Aspen Tennis Club. Sampling sites SM -TA -5 (0"-6") and SM -TA -6 (42"-48") were designated for the base of the tailings piles that exist between the Smuggler Mine and the Aspen Tennis Club. B. Sample Collection Methods The methods used for the collection of all surface water, sedi- ment, groundwater, soils, and tailings samples are described in the September 1983 Report of Sampling Activities (TDD RS -8308-01) and the November 1983 Report of Sampling Activities (TDD R8-8310-06) (Ecology and Environment, Inc., 1983a, b, c). TABLE 4 PRIVATE WELL OWNERS SMUGGLER MINE STUDY ASPEN, COLORADO WELL ID# OWNER ADDRESS SM -PW -1 Ed Sweeney 1200 Red Mountain Road P.O. Box 792 Aspen, Colorado 81611 SM -PW -2 Herb Balderson 708 Spruce Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 SM -PW -3 Cecil Lewitz 711 Spruce Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 SM -PW -4 Joe Candreia 930 King Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 SM -PW -S Stanley Lauriski 805 Smuggler Mountain Road P.O. Box 803 Aspen, Colorado 81611 SM -PW -6 Michael Garrish 855 Gibson Avenue Aspen, Colorado 81611 SM -PW -7 Heather Campbell 515 Spruce Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 15A I r 3 ATIO 1 Ilk ILI SM-SO!c'f'�• SM;SO-1 ,�.. _� .�J .! '` Vii• J:.: � r` 'E"'• � .. s. = �• 1- -�~ - � .� i+.` �. ;��`•�•`}. '' ;,. ;�; S , -SAO-'li,. ,�/ �.��. � .?-; -, 16 jvp f su-SO-1.1. C "• - SM-SO•/3, - tib!:r•1 1;', l"' .1- �l Ilk -', }` � .. -' � 1'�/,-.l /'� ��,5, .n` 1 \'t ,` � ,`'rte � �l�,M�I[j�F��, ?�•'�. `- M -SO -/Q. ,•- '� SM SO l.i - J- i 11 40 `'^ br„ 1�f• I. � '' , }�.,�• �. r •). 1 `�+ v A\. , , ,�- j�. } s' ! GO ���} , . _ _ ; �. • G=SM -SO -S•• _ �l �'�1 i L{���'�,•' �. • V � ray/i ��.., .iL�iJl� ` • •`%'� � 1 �.1 I�'_ N�', � . SM�SV=4, SNS-�Q�'1• _Nirr'% 1 t»0><tYATN�AI DG'AL� fT-i1d• � •.Yrs �'�_. lw :���• ��\�' '�:•,�' �� � r \w ' teoingy and envinonmem, Inc. Nog E4ZT f10IIIDA AVENUE. SUITE 30.�j DENVER. CDLONADD EO?a FIGURE T i, rT %moi �J'.��`�`•,� `, r ` T { ` :� f. ' N SOIL. SAMPLE STATION' .ASPEN. COLORADO ���� -� •�`j�.,�'t' r ,: I 1 Ise , �; Com' •�� � `�/? .� ``._� � _ � �`,� ` •i , � ,� ; �• 1 w9c_ r Lod Ile- 14 { mal .y, z �' , '' '•+ — : h rll f (�.!!=+�� �� y� � y� �• .�1��.~ i7rli'i ;�. -�1. �� lows gip/// . r •'��. r h. rr O�• •• .:W.• ''••! •� � ! n` i \, 5s 1\�!'���Tl r'+'•�`KI� 1 ��" D��' Berl s A Rt rn }-� , 'Asp d i. sh.°- OV . . "�. - \ . .�'C ,611 ! IM n - — v , f :�`jti'-••jkr:k' �w.: • t ao i1 SA1RP "`, Iry ! . �* (jJ •` � • ` \ 1'~I�" ' • +•.'.1: •. �• •ra. '\;,; •• �„ YRA .4i3 t �• -t .Sf.! �Jr T . ": ' J�i•�`-•., !' `'r:��`'r,•�. ♦r�.y� -� s .0401 ir \ r' '• \1i� tl` til( «. . _ _ ' \ � ' • ...r::: Ps ��.+j' � . ��`�. •fir, /' � � .T 1 71 `\• ^...ir ,\ ;\� *• I'••... .7 _ �•. . ; = IY•t,�i i II`} 1',+\� �-� •`:\ N `�••1 1ili� 11 . •` '';I�, ,'1 .\~, .� LSO �\•�;1'.Y � �f L �;! •����:•-� ' •'\ .`y ,.\,` ',S �I;� I` ,._` � �; . , ; .. �;,, `,., � �•- �' r ice.. 4 ,.••...;•• i ••. �; �v5i+'e,' �- _� • 1 ;) : �Ir I - rl • � 1 •'= i{ ..•\� � `. '�; \t.'':;:. •'� ,'+.. ;.fir. r p �•.,,•� =u �., -, �.\ '•\ `1 _ __- r �;j i i 'll �` •�'. .,['• �ti�'"lf., ,, •� ` 1, til .�— �' , 5 \ :'� `. • s t G�rel / • i � �" — . � \,\` \Ir , • '�\� 'fir . \ \ XE W i� , Y IIK r L•' �. Plt./ ill' � • ��• ^` • . ti- `+\ ` , �' �� J'.1�1 ''�;� tf41.� ����;!\ �lw- ��._�� "�r�'f•I,�r\�\: `�\ •. K sods .� ;\� �" ., �l. I � 5r,` ,1�."Q+F �+\_� ,1 •! � •\ \- ' � '� c� '\ r aG�r.el P,4. \\ � _ - //� �� .y 4114,x'\�l�\`���• ��s"� i : ill `I s� .li, f r�11 \�` ,.�. ��'��,-��• -�`,` _ rte, Off. \\\\, � -.ih' tily�'��` \1\5111\.-�i�`'�J��r:l•.I}�_K:� •_ `1� . -- � •.;;i� -.\ '� r,\�2 F.:&4ALE 1:1 2400 f 'l�'� �14� 4 �� 151 ` ���� �. •_"�� ;,� Im a., , `l� 'I� 1`\n �' �` i ecology and environment, inc. It ` 4105 EAST FLORIDA AVENUE, SUITE 350, DENVER, COLORADO 8= FIGURE 0 \\\�•; t. �• ., t1, 1'+� +. �ti !� \ 'yACKGROUND SOIL SAMPLE STATION ��',�'�„ _ ii •ne nta ASPEN,, COLORADO �- _ :.�•. ��� ..\ •i5 I iii \\\�'�.I ,•. 411`.1.1•\.\�\ -• ,\ \r 4 G A 2 y -TA 3 � 1 J_�-TA 3 1 S Ql _. _ -- r•, � ♦ �- l Rte:. Iw _�{. CICS- c-�'j �i ��Y_ ,� 6` ,�.' • - - * �7 M \ �A % 4 SM « roa, 'zC'C's .` � �� ` ;� -�0 S J. M` A'6 TA 1 & ( f SM -TA r� ., : 1 !,, ► ,` 11111 1 ! Y. f �. APPRO ? $C L 1: 1 0 ecology and environment, Inc. 6105 EAST FLORIDA AVENUE, SUITE 350, DENVER, COLORADO 80222 FIGURE 9 As TAILINGS SAMPLE STATIONS ASPEN, COLORADO U C. Quality Control The quality control procedures followed throughout the Smuggler Mine Study are detailed in the September 1983 Report of Sam lin Activities (TDd R8-8308-01) and the November 1983 Report of Sampling Activities (TDD R8-8310-06) (Ecology and Environment, Inc., 1983a, b, c). IV. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS Geochemistry/Water Quality 1. Surface Water id Surface water samples for both total and dissolved determinations were collected on two separate occasions. Samples were originally collected during September 1983, but several surface water stations were resampled during November 1983. Those samples collected during " November are denoted by an 'A' designation, and represent conditions of lower flow. Sampling locations are presented in Figure 5. Dis- solved (filtered through 0.45 um membrane filter, HNO3 acidified) and total (raw, HNO3 acidified) determinations for surface water ., samples are presented in Table A-1. Comparison of dissolved and total values reveals several incon- sistancies in the data. Dissolved barium is consistently greater than total barium. Analyses of field blanks (Table A-6) exhibit measurable concentrations of dissolved barium in three out of three determi- nations, indicating contamination during sampling or analysis. Similarly, dissolved zinc values are sometimes greater than total zinc. Dissolved zinc blanks indicate detectable concentrations of zinc in two of three determinations. The discrepancies between total and dissolved zinc are not as great as in the case of barium, however. ro The remaining blank determinations do not indicate any problems with other parameters. Most metals were undetected in the surface waters sampled, as shown in Table A-1. Similiar total and dissolved values for manganese E and zinc demonstrate that these metals travel primarily in the dis- solved state. Total iron values are much greater than dissolved, sug- gesting that iron occurs largely as suspended particulates. The pre- sence of suspended iron is especially evident in streams draining the Cowenhoven (SM -ST -6, SM -ST -6A) and Mollie Gibson (SM -ST -4 and SM -ST -4A) mine shafts. These mine drainage samples exhibit higher alkalinities and higher concentrations of sulfate, iron, manganese and zinc than water from the Roaring Fork River (SM -ST -1, SM -ST -2). The mine drainage samples may also have slightly lower pH values. Sulfate in these mine drainage samples is derived from the oxidation of metallic sulfides either in the mines or in the adjacent mine tailings. Association of the sulfide ores with a limestone host rock allows for neutralization of the acidity produced during sulfide oxi- dation and results in only slightly lower pH values in the mine drainages. Samples SM -ST -5 and SM -ST -5A were -collected downstream of the T Mollie Gibson Mine near its confluence with the Roaring Fork River. These samples exhibit characteristics similar to those observed up- stream at the Mollie Gibson Mine (SM -ST -4, SM -ST -4A). Samples col- lected from the Roaring Fork River upstream (SM -ST -1, SM -ST -1A) and downstream (SM -ST -2, SM -ST -2A) of this tributary indicate that concen- trations of iron, manganese and zinc increase slightly in the Roaring Fork due to the input of Mollie Gibson Mine drainage. Samples were also collected from the Salvation Canal at points upstream (SM -ST -8) and downstream (SM -ST -9) of the tailings dumps. The canal is covered between these two sampling points. There is no evidence of degradation of water quality in Salvation Canal in the vicinity of the mine tailings dumps. 2. Stream Sediments r_ - Samples of stream sediments were collected concurrently with the surface water samples discussed above. The bulk sediment samples were - analyzed using a weak acetic acid extraction in order to determine the _7 availability of trace elements. The results of these determinations are presented in Table A-2. Detectable concentrations of sulfate, aluminum, iron and manganese were extracted from nearly all samples. Extractable sulfate concentrations were much higher in the sediments associated with the Mollie Gibson (SM -SE -4, SM -SE -5) and Cowenhaven (SM -SE -6) drainages than in the Roaring Fork River (SM -SE -1, SM -SE -2). Barium, manganese and zinc also appeared to be slightly higher in samples collected from streams draining the mines and tailings, although for zinc the significance of this trend is questionable. The presence of these constituents in the weak acid extractable fraction is indicative of the ease with which barium, manganese and zinc may be subsequently released from the sediments to the aqueous environment. - 3. Groundwater - - Analyses of groundwater samples collected during September 1983 from well locations plotted in Figure 4 are presented in Table A-3. Available well construction information (Table 2) indicates that wells SM -PW -6, SM -PW -7, and probably SM -PW -4 are less than 100' in total depth and are screened in unconfined glacial morraines. Well SM -PW -1 extends to a depth of 266' and may penetrate the limestone which sub - crops beneath the moraine. Construction details are unavailable for the remaining wells. Determinations indicate that most groundwater samples have specific conductances of less than 750 umhos/cm and pH values ranging from 7.5 to 8.0, with bicarbonate as the principle anion. Two wells - located immediately below the base of the tailings piles (SM -PW -5 and SM -PW -1) exhibit slightly different chemistries, however. Samples from these two wells have pH values less than 7.1 and specific con- ductances greater than 800 umhos/cm. Where data are available, the analyses indicate that sulfate is the predominate anion. Samples SM -PW -5 and SM -PW -7 also show elevated concentrations of cadmium, copper and zinc - elements shown to be present in the tailings. These observations suggest that wells SM -PW -5 and SM -PW -7 are contaminated with waters derived from tailings and/or mine drainage. 4. Soils - A Soil samples were collected downslope from the tailings piles during September 1983 from an area which is underlain by graded tailings and has been mostly covered with transported top soil. The area was divided into thirteen 500 foot square sampling grids, as (j shown in Figure 7. Three to five grab samples were collected from the upper six inches of soil, sieved to less than 2 mm and composited within each grid. In addition, a native glacial moraine soil sample was collected upslope of the tailings dumps in order to evaluate back- ground conditions (Figure 8). As with the tailings samples, soil samples were analyzed for both weak acetic acid extractable and total acid digestion fractions. The weak acid digestion provides infor- mation about easily released metals while the strong acid digestion is used to determine bulk concentrations of elements. These determi- nations are presented in Table A-4. Plots of soil concentrations as a function of sample location reveal no discernable areal patterns. Descriptive statistics for the total digestion soil grid samples can be compared to background sample SM -SO -19 in Table 5. On the average, the soil grid samples collected downslope of the tailings are enriched in arsenic, barium, cadmium, copper, iron, lead, manganese, silver and zinc as compared to the manganese, silver and zinc as compared to the background sample. Com- posite soil sample concentrations range from less than native soil background levels (SM -SO -19) to values within the range of tailings concentrations (Table A-5). The wide range of concentrations and lack 2 of any discernable areal patterns suggests that the imported soils may have been mixed in varying proportions with tailings during grading and compaction, leading to apparently random variablility in soil con- centrations over the area. 19 - Weak acid extractable data indicates the presence of readily available barium, iron, manganese and zinc. Other metals found in high total concentrations in the soils may be tightly bound to organic matter or present in phases which are not readily attacked by weak acid extraction. 5. Tailings Six tailings samples were collected from the area in September " 1983 at the locations plotted in Figure 9. At each site, one sample was composited from material collected at the 0"-6" interval and another sample was composited from material collected at the 42"-48" interval. In Table A-5, both total digestion and acetic acid extract- able determinations are reported for each tailings sample. Descriptive statistics for the total digestion determinations of the six tailings samples have been calculated and are presented in Table 6. Because the ores of the district occur within a limestone host rock, an average limestone composition calculated by Bowen (1979) has also been tabulated for comparison. The tailings contain elevated concentrations of sulfate, arsenic, barium, cadmium, copper, lead, manganese, mercury, silver and zinc as: compared to the average limestone. These elements are undoubtedly, derived from the lead -zinc sulfide ores and associated barite mined within the district. Weak acid extractable determinations (Table A-5) indicate that sulfate, barium, cadmium, lead, manganese and zinc are readily leached from the tailings and available for dissolution and biological uptake. The near neutral pH values measured in the tailings samples demonstrate the beneficial effects of limestone in moderating acid drainage. Acidity produced by the oxidation of metallic sulfides is neutralized by the dissolution of calcite present in the limestone. Hear neutral pH values result in low solubilities for many metals, thereby decreasing the mobility of most metals present in the tailings. 1 TABLE 5 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS FOR THIRTEEN COMPOSITE SOIL SAMPLES AND ONE BACKGROUND COMPOSITE SOIL SAMPLE. CONCENTRATION IN ug/9 UNLESS OTHERWISE DESIGNATED SOIL SAMPLES BACKGROUND SOIL SAMPLE PARAMETER MEAN STANDARD MINIMUM HUI SM -0 -FT DEVIATION - - DEVIATION FIELD MEASUREMENTS PH S.U. 7.22 0.29 6.62 7.64 6.85 ANIONS Chloride 5.3 7.0 1 28 NA2 Fluoride 9.1 12 2 46 NA Sulfate 1540 1980 2 7300 NA TOTAL METALS Aluminum 4970 1090 3110 6800 4720 Antimony NA NA NA NA NA Arsenic 82 75 25 303 20 Barium 2240 1780 14 5620 411 Beryllium NA NA NA NA NA Cadmium 26 13 4.4 53 3.5 Calcium NA NA NA NA NA Chromium 8.3 1.9 5.9 12 4.3 Cobalt NA NA NA NA NA Copper 130 177 14 684 16 Iron 15800 3770 9850 22300 9490 Lead 4060 2570 59 8530 191 Magnesium NA NA NA NA NA Mangane a 844 828 320 3460 431 Mercury 0.30 0.30 0.02 1.0 0.03 Molybdenum NA NA NA NA NA Nickel NA NA NA NA NA Selenium NA NA NA NA NA Silverl 32 25 0.3 68 2.6 Sodium NA NA NA NA NA Thallium NA NA NA NA NA Tin NA NA NA NA NA Vanadium 11 2.5 8.3 17 8.2 Zinc 2330 1730 136 6990 134 1 Determinations less than detection converted to 60% of the detection limit. 2 Not analyzed. 4170 TABLE 6 DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS FOR SIX COMPOSITE TAILINGS SAMPLES AND AVERAGE LIMESTONE COMPOSITION. CONCENTRATIONS IN ug/g UNLESS OTHERWISE DESIGNATED. AVERAGE LIMESTONE MEAN NA 76 220 3300 580000 9000 0.3 1 90 <1 0.03 340000 - 11 0.1 5.5 17000 5.7 5800 620 0.16 0.16 7 0.03 0.12 1300 1.7 0.5 45 20 1 Bowen (1979); Average elemental composition of limestone. 2 Not analyzed. a TAILNGS SAMPLES PARAMETER MEAN STANDARD MINIMUM MAXIMUM DEVIATION pH (units) 6.38 0.43 5.86 7.08 Chloride 2.6 0.9 2 4 Fluoride 31 19 10 56 Sulfate 26100 1680D 910 46100 Carbonate 159DOO 78500 64000 276000 Aluminum 2530 2120 1190 6540 Antimony NA NA NA NA Arsenic 48 19 25 80 Barium 218 186 16 425 Beryllium NA NA NA NA Cadmium 56 23 20 87 Calcium NA NA NA NA Chromium 7.0 2.4 3.7 11 Cobalt NA NA NA NA Copper 98 74 29 232 Iron 20600 3370 18200 27200 Lead 8120 3380 4520 13900 Magnesium NA NA NA NA Manganese 1230 427 552 1670 Mercury 1.03 0.67 0.10 2.10 Molybdenum NA NA NA _NA Nickel NA NA NA NA Selenium NA NA NA NA Silver 33 13 20 51 Sodium NA NA NA NA Thallium NA NA NA NA Tin NA NA NA NA Vanadium 6.7 2.4 3.8 10 Zinc 6810 3070 3100 11100 AVERAGE LIMESTONE MEAN NA 76 220 3300 580000 9000 0.3 1 90 <1 0.03 340000 - 11 0.1 5.5 17000 5.7 5800 620 0.16 0.16 7 0.03 0.12 1300 1.7 0.5 45 20 1 Bowen (1979); Average elemental composition of limestone. 2 Not analyzed. a V. HEALTH HAZARD ASSESSMENT A. Methods Data for inorganics in air, soils, sediments, tailings,ground- water and surface water were analyzed using health criteria and stand- ards. Air data were provided from a 1982 sampling by the Aspen/Pitkin County Health Department (1982). All other samples were collected , during September and November 1983 by FIT. Criteria and standards applied to the air data include the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for lead and threshold limit values (TLVs) of the American Conference of Industrial Hygienists (1984) for iron and manganese. Criteria and standards applied to groundwater and surface water included maximum contaminant levels (MCLS), secondary drinking water standards published by EPA (1979), and suggested no adverse response limits (SNARLS) published by the National Academy of Sciences (1980). These guidelines for groundwater and surface water were modified T for interpretation of soils, sediments and tailings as follows: o Find water -acceptable daily intake (WADI): WADI (mg/Kg/day) = MCL (mg/1) x 2 1/day x 1/70 kg body wt. o Assume soils ingestion by 10 Kg child of 0.1 9/day. o Find safe soil concentration (SSC): o SSC (ug/g) = WADI mg/Kg/day x 10 Kg boder wt. x 1000 ug/mg 0.1 9/day soil ingestion The analysis consisted of a comparison between the observed con- centration and the respective health criteria or standard, (i.e. "Safe Concentration"). This comparison is expressed as a ratio of observed 21 r_ concentration divided by the criteria concentration; this ratio is referred to as "risk". It should be noted that the secondary drinking water criteria for iron, manganese, copper and zinc are not based on toxicity but on problems largely associated with taste and staining. The comparison of constituents with the criteria is displayed in q Tables 1-4 in Appendix S. Only those constituents and samples which exceed the "safe concentration" (or whose "risk" exceeds 1 00) are displayed. B. Findings 1. Air The health Department data were collected on a hi -vol sampler located on the northeast edge of the Smuggler Mine site. The sampling consisted of composites of two to six runs per month for five months during the summer of 1982. Although the metals of interest were limited to lead, manganese and iron, the levels found were one to two orders of magnitude lower than the health criteria. The low levels observed may be, in part, due to the wetter than average summer ex- perienced that year. 2. Soil, Sediment and Tailings Data were collected at thirteen soil locations plus one back- ground location by the Field Investigation Team. Where more than one A value for the observed concentration in soil or tailings were re- ported, the larger value (normally the acid digest) was used in calculating the risk ratios (Table 8-1). Risks greater than 1.0 were reported for arsenic, barium, cadmium, iron, lead and manganese. Risk levels associated with iron and manganese are not important for two reasons: 1) the health criteria were derived from taste or staining problems associated with drinking water, and 2) the risk levels for the thirteen study sites were approximately the same as that found for the background site. Iron at the background site was found with a "risk ratio" of 11.12 and manganese with 3.37. only one sample exceeded the risk ratio of 1.00 for arsenic, and while barium exceeded 1.00 three times, its risk ratio averaged only 1.10. Cadmium was similar to barium with four samples having concen- trations in excess of health criteria with an average risk ratio of 1.39. Twelve of the thirteen samples exceeded the health criteria for lead with a range of 3.9 to 60.9 and an average of thirty times the health criteria. These levels represent a serious degree of contami- nation. Studies are now reporting the importance of hand -oral contact with contaminated soils near smelters and other locations (Roels, 1980; Sayre, 1981; Wesolowski, 1979). These calculations assume a conservatively small amount of soil - (0.1 g/day) ingested by children in hand licking and other incidental oral contact with soil. Children ingesting only one gram of soil at site SM -SO -1 would receive a dose of 609 times the water acceptable sw daily intake. Expressed another way, in a one gram ingestion event, a child would receive an equivalent of a "safe" intake of 609 days. 9,1There are several reasons why this is a serious finding. The National Academy of Sciences ( 1977) has indicated that the present limit of 0.05 mg/1 of lead in water may not provide a sufficient - margin of safety, particularly for fetuses and growing children. Al- so, this group absorbs lead from the gastrointestinal tract more readily than do adults. The nature of the harm done to children may be in the form of irreversible adverse effects on behavior and intelligence caused by chronic low -lead exposure. It is unknown if the entire amount of total lead as determined in the laboratory by acid digestion is biologically available to man. a Tailings concentrations appear to be of greater hazard than the soils (Table B-2). Cadmium was present in five of six samples at concentrations averaging 2.19 times the health criteria. Similarly, lead was present in all six samples at concentrations averaging fifty- eight times the health criteria. A 10 Kg child ingesting 1 gram of tailings from SM -TA -4 would receive a dose 993 times the water - acceptable daily intake. Sediment data were only subject to a weak acid analysis, ex- tracting generally less than 1 ug/g. These data were not subjected to a comparison with health criteria since the concentrations reported are, without exception, orders of magnitude less than health criteria. 3. Surface Water and Groundwater Groundwaters did not reveal any metal concentrations exceeding health criteria (Table B-3). In fact, with the exception of cadmium in SM -PW -5A and in SM -PW -7 where concentrations reach 80% and 70% of the health criteria respectively, the water is of good quality. Sur- face water was of generally good quality (Table B-4), surpassing - Colorado Water Quality Control Commission stream water quality stand- ards for aquatic life protection and other uses. Iron and manganese regularly exceeded health criteria, although these criteria are based on taste and aesthetic problems rather than toxicity. VI. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Air Air quality at the Smuggler Mine site is a potential route of ex- posure. Considerable lead may be entrained -into the air during dry periods and from fugitive dust of earth -moving operations. It is essential that, at a minimum, dust controls be applied during these operations. It is re- commended that air monitoring be continued during any planned around disturbance. r� B . Surface Water and Sediment As compared to the Roaring Fork River, the Mollie Gibson and Cowen- hoven Mine drainages and their associated sediments contain elevated con- centrations of barium, manganese, sulfur, and zinc. However, low -flow analysis of the Roaring Fork River indicates that even during natural low - discharge periods, water quality should not be seriously degraded by these mine drainage inflows. Additionally, it appears that most of the metals are in insoluble forms and are bound to the soils. As a consequence, surf ace water and sediments do not appear to be significant sources of exposure to man or animals near the site. Also, no degradation of water quality is observed along the section of - Salvation Canal which passes underneath the Mollie Gibson and Smuggler tailings dumps. C. Groundwater The groundwater route, like the surface water route, does not appear to be a significant source of exposure to the local population. viowever, two groundwater samples collected from the SM -PW -5A and SM -PW -7 wells exhibit elevated concentrations of cadmium, copper, and zinc. These wells, which are located downslope from the tailings dumps, indicate possible con- tamination of the unconfined aquifer by tailings leachate and/or mine drainages. Due to the lack of additional hydrogeological data, a positive determination of the source of contamination cannot be made. 0. Tailings and Soils Tailings from the Smuggler and Mollie Gibson Mines contained high con- centrations of arsenic, barium, cadmium, copper, lead, manganese, mercury, silver, sulfate, and zinc as compared to the global average. of these constituents in limestone. Weak acid extractions indicate that barium, cadmium, lead, manganese, sulfate, and zinc are readily leached from the tailings. A Soils that existed within the study area before mining and soils brought in to serve as cover for the graded tailings appear to have mixed - extensively with the tailings. The soils generally contain far above background concentrations of arsenic, barium, cadmium, copper, iron, lead, manganese, silver, and zinc.. Weak acid extraction of the soils indicates that barium, iron, manganese, and zinc are readily leached from the soils samples. Little data on plant uptake is available from this study, but it is possible that certain varieties of vegetables grown in these contaminated soils may represent an important route of exposure (Boon, 1982). By far, the greatest hazard posed by this site is that of direct con- tact followed by ingestion of contaminated soils. Small children (ages 1-10) are at greatest risk during play in the areas contaminated by metals, _particulary with respect to lead. The problem is sufficiently serious to warrant additional study and perhaps remedial action. It is recommended that a biological lead surveillance program be instituted to determine if the children are actually evidencing hazardous exposures. Biomonitoring, using blood samples from young children, is among the best established and - most reliable of all biomonitoring programs in use today. If high levels are found, then remedial actions such as removal may be indicated. 12r REFERENCES American Conference of Governmental and Industrial Hygienists, 1984. Threshold Limit Values for Chemical Substances and Physical Agents in the Mork Environment with Intended Changes for 1983-84. Cincin- nati, Ohio. Aspen - Pitken County Health Department, 1982. AQDHS-II Standards Report from January 1982 to December 1982; Smuggler, Special Studies. Boon, D.Y., 1982. Lead Contamination in Aspen - A Preliminary Presen- tation - Colorado State University, Department of Agronomy, Fort Collins, Colorado. Bowen, H.M.J., 1979. Environmental Chemistry of The Elements; Academic Press, New York, New York, pp 42-43.. Bryant, B., 1971. Geologic Map of the Aspen Quadrangle, Pitkin County, Colorado. Ecology and Environment, Inc., 1983a. Sampling Plan for Cowenhoven/ =� Smuggler Mine Tailings, Aspen, Colorado, TDD R8-8308-01. 91 • Ecology and Environment, Inc., 1983b. Report of Sampling Activities at Smuggler Mine, Aspen, Colorado, TDD R8-8308-01. Ecology and Environment, Inc., 1983c. Report of Sampling Activities at Smuggler Mine Tailings Area, Aspen, Colorado and California Gulch, Leadville, Colorado, TDD R8-8310-06. F Environmental Protection Agency, 1977. Multimedia Environmental Goals. Washington, D.C. �' Environmental Protection Agency, 1976. National Interim Primary Drinking y Water Regulations, Washington, D.C. 27 Im r] Environmental Protection Agency, 1978. National Primary Ambient Air Quality Standards for Lead, Washington, D.C. Environmental Protection Agency, 1979. National Secondary Drinking Water Standards, Washington, D.C. Kretschman, R., 1984. United States Geological Survey, Personal Communication. National Academy of Sciences, 1977. Drinking Water and Health, Washington, D.C. Roels, H.A., Buchet, I.P., Lauwerys, R.R., Bruanx, P., Claeys - Thoreau, F., LaFontaine, A. and Verduyn, G., 1980. Exposure to lead by the Oral and Pulmonary Routes of Children Living in the Vicinity of a Primary Lead Smelter. Environmental Research 22: 81-92. Spears, C., 1981. Aspen - Gypsum Area Soil Survey - Unpublished. United States Department of Agriculture - Soil Conservation Service. W Sayre, I., 1981. Dust Lead Contributions to Lead in Children, in Environ- mental Lead, D.R. Lyman, L.G. Piantanida and J.F. Cole eds. Academic Press, New York. Tweto, 0., R. Moench, J. Reed, Jr., 1978. Geologic Map of the Leadville 1° x 2" Quadrangle, Northeastern Colorado. United States Geological Survey, 1979. Streamflow Statistical Summaries for Colorado Streams through September 30, 1975. Volume 2: Colorado - River Basin Above Gunnison River, Open - File Report 79-1060. Volin, M.E. and J.H. Hild, 1950. Investigation of Smuggler Lead - Zinc Mine, Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado. United States Bureau of Mines Report of Investigation 4696. Wesolowski, J.J., Flessol, G.P., Twiss, S., Stanley, R.L., Knight, W.W., - Coleman, G.C., Degarmo, T.E., 1979. The Identification and Elimina- tion of a Potential Lead Hazard in an Urban Park. Archives of Environ- mental Health. 34: 413-418. APPENDIX A GEOCHEMISTRY/WATER QUALITY DATA TABLES 7 m K (1) All results in ug/l unless otherwise designated. (2) Not analyzed. (3) Concentration below minimum detection limits. TABLE A-1 INORGANIC ANALYSES - SURFACE WATER SAMPLES SMUGGLER MINE, ASPEN, COLORADO RESULTS IN ug/11 PARAMETERS SAMPLE DESIGNATIONS FIELD MEASUREMENTS SM -ST -1 SM -ST -1A SM -ST -2 SM -ST -2A Temperature —Fo— 0.5 —a76-- — 0.5 pH (S.U.) 7.90 7.56 7.97 7.57 Conductivity 80 73.5 90 74.0 (umhos/cm) LAB MEASUREMENTS Alkalinity 32 NA2 36 NA (mg/l as CaCO3) " Total Dissolved 52 NA 60 NA Solids (mg/1) ANIONS h oride (mg/1) 0.23 NA 0.23 NA Fluoride (mg/1) 0.45 NA 0.45 NA Sulfate (mg/1) 4.3 NA NA NA METALS DISSOLVED/TOTALS " Aluminum ND(30)/ND(30)3 ND(30)/ ND(30)/ ND(30)/ ND(30 ND(30) ND(30) Antimony NA ND(100)/ NA ND(100)/ «. ND(100) ND(100) Arsenic ND(50)/ND(50) ND(50)/ND(50) ND(50)/ND(50) ND(50)/ND(50) Barium 87/15 68/13 83115 70/13 Beryllium NA ND(lO/ND(10) NA ND(10)/ND(10) '- Cadmium ND(5)/ND(5) ND(5)/ND(5) ND(5)/ND(5) ND(5)/ND(5) Calcium NA NA NA NA Chromium ND(5)/ND(5) ND(5)/ND(5) ND(5)/ND(5) ND(5)/ND(5) Cobalt NA NA NA NA Copper ND(5)/ND(5) ND(5)/ND(5) ND(5)/ND(5) ND(5)/ND(5) Iron 94/146 119/208 234/163 116/211 Lead ND(30)/ND(30) ND(30)/ND(30) ND(30)/ND(30) ND(30)/ND(30) Magnesium NA NA NA NA Manganese 7/8 12/13 19120 12/13 Mercury ND(0.5)/ND(0.5) NA ND(O.5)/ NA ND(O.5) . Mo l ybden un NA NA NA NA Nickel NA ND(30)/ND(30) NA ND(30)/ND(30) Selenium ND(50)/ND(50) ND(50)/ND(50) ND(50)/ND(50) ND(50)/ND(50) Silver ND(5)/ND(5) ND(5)/ND(5) ND(5)/ND(5) ND(5)/ND(5) Sodium NA NA NA NA Thallium; NA NA NA NA Tin NA NA NA NA Vanadiun ND(10)/ND(10) ND(10)/ND(10) ND(10)/ND(10) ND(10)/ND(10) Zinc 18/9 24/5 69/30 22/42 K (1) All results in ug/l unless otherwise designated. (2) Not analyzed. (3) Concentration below minimum detection limits. _ TABLE A-1 (CONTINUED) INORGANIC ANALYSES - SURFACE WATER SAMPLES SMUGGLER MINE, ASPEN, COLORADO RESULTS IN ug/11 PARAMETERS SAMPLE DESIGNATIONS , FIELD MEASUREMENTS SM-ST-3 SM-ST-4 SM-ST-4A --TF-u— —9.b SM-ST-5 SM-ST-5A empera ure pHS.U.) 6.58 7.50 IS .0— 7.05 b.0 8.03 Conductivity 1200 745 1200 740 (umhos/cm) LAB MEASUREMENTS N 178 NA2 179 NA Alkalinity (mg/l as CaCO ) Total Dissolve 0 540 NA 538 NA Solids (mg/1) ANIONS T 0.37 NA 0.35 NA Fluoride �Mm'/Bgg/ 0.62 NA 0.66 NA Sulfate (mg 1) 200 NA 217 NA METALS DISSOLVED/TOTALS 11 "/" 11 �� ��/�� it 11 "/11 3 Aluminum C l / -ND301/ NO 30 3 ND 30 ND(30) Antimony NA ND(100)/ NA _ND 100)/ 0 ND 100) ND 100) Arsenic ND(50)/ ND 501/ ND 501 ND 50) ND 50 ND 50 ND 50 ND 50 Bariun L 113/35 54 36 106/35 66 35 Beryl Iitin NA ID NA ND ) ND 10�/ ND 10 Cadmium L ND(5)/ND(5) ND 5)/ND(5) ND(5)/ND(5) ND 5 ND 51/ Calcium Chromium E NA ND(5)/ND(5) NA ND(5)/ND(5) NA ND(5)/ND(5) NA ND�51/ Cobalt NA NA NA NA Copper C ND(5)/ND(5) ND(5)/ND(5) ND(5)/ND(5) ND Iron 22/1201 ND(10)/773 59/730 N2 10)/ T -' Lead ND ND 30j/ ND�30/ ND�30/ 30/ Magnesium E NA NA NA NA Manganese 450/459 389/386 3811389 304/315 Mercury ND(0.5)/ NA ND(0.5)/ NA D ND 0.5 ND(0.5) Mo 1 d en un NA NA NA NA Nickel NA ND30 NA ND 30 / ND 30 ND 30 Selenium _ ND 50}/ ND 50 / ND 50)/ ND ND 50 / 50 ND 50 ND 50 ND Silver ND 5)/ND(5) ND 5)/ND(5) 150) NND 5 D fl/ ND 5j/ Sodium NA NA NA NA Thallium NA NA NA NA Tin NA NA NA NA Vanadium / / ND 10 ND 10 ND 10�/ ND(10) Zinc 689/730 552/606 585/685 489/556 results in ug/l unless otherwise designated. RiAll Not analyzed. /`n v.. nr•+mss+i.... F.n1n,.� minimum rim+ortinn limitt 41 TABLE A -I (CONTINUED) INORGANIC ANALYSES - SURFACE WATER SAMPLES SMUGGLER MINE, ASPEN, COLORADO RESULTS IN ug/11 PARAMETERS SAMPLE DESIGNATIONS FIELD MEASUREMENTS SM -ST -6 SM -ST -6A SM -ST -7 SM -ST -8 SM -ST -9 emper a ure -7 / .0 8.0 —TZ7T— U7— pH (S.U.)6.41 7.30 7.57 7.40 Conductivity 1100 950 57 61 (umbos/cm) N LAB MEASUREMENTS a I ini y 211 NA2 0 (mg/1 as CaCO ) Total Dissolve 918 NA Solids (mg/1) T ANIONS oride mg/1 0.34 NA 0.22 Fluoride MM 1.67 NA 0.45 Sulfate (mg 1) 316 NA 4.3 METALS DISSOLVED/TOTALS " 11/91 " " 91/" " Aluminum ND(30)! _ ND 30)/ ND(30)/ ND(5)/ND(5) NO 30 ND 30) 77 Antimony NA ND 100 / C NA 1W ND 100) Arsenic ND 50 / ND 50)/ 14 �1� All results in ug/l unless otherwise designated. 2 Not analyzed. 3 Concentration below minimum detection limits. ■ n 32 40 0.18 0.44 4.4 U 11/11 a 3ND 6(30)/ NA NO 50�/ ND 50/ ND 50) ND 50 0 Barium 97 32 48 29 Beryllium NA ND NA 10)/ L Cadmium ND(5)/ND(5) ND 5)/ND(5) Calci un NA NA L Chromium ND(5)/ND(5) ND(5)/ND(5) Cobalt NA NA E Copper ND(5)/ND(5) ND(5)/ND(5) Iron 15/91 ND(10)/10 C Lead ND(30)/ND(30) ND�5;/ NA NDHO� T Magnesium NA NA Manganese 223/237 176/128 Mercury ND(O.5)/ NA E 127/285 ND O.5 09 Molybdenum NA NA Nickel NA ND 30 /ND(30) D Selenium ND 50)/ ND 50 / ND 50 ND 50 15) Silver ND 5 / NO 5 / NO 5 ND Sodium NA NA Th a l l i un NA NA Tin NA NA Vanadium NA 10 / NA ND�10�/ NO 10 Zinc 135/130 12 /1 6 �1� All results in ug/l unless otherwise designated. 2 Not analyzed. 3 Concentration below minimum detection limits. ■ n 32 40 0.18 0.44 4.4 U 11/11 a 3ND 6(30)/ NA NO 50�/ ND 50/ 74 16 83 14 NA NA ND(5)/ND(5) ND ND�53/ NA NA NDJ-551/ ND�5;/ NA NA ND(5)/ND(5) ND45 / NO 127/285 129/ 09 ND 1311 �301/ ND NA NA 7/12 7/9 / 0.5 / ND�0.5 NO NA NA NA ND 50 / ND 50 / ND 50� ND 50 ND NDND 5l/ ND 5l/ SIA NA NA NA NA NA 10/ NO 10/, ND 10) 20 7 64 21 TABLE A-2 INORGANIC ANALYSES - SEDIMENT SAMPLES SMUGGLER MINE, ASPEN, COLORADO RESULTS IN ug/g7 PARAMETERS SAMPLE DESIGNATIONS ANIONS SM -SE -1 SM -SE -2 h oride --T— 2 Fluoride 1 2 Sulfate 47 3 TOTAL METALS A um i n um 0.4 0.7 Antimony NA2 NA Arsenic ND(0.2)3 ND(O.2) Barium ND(O.1) ND(O.1) Beryllium NA NA Cadmiun ND(O.1) ND(O.1) Calcium NA NA Chromium ND(O.1) ND(O.1) Cobalt NA NA Copper ND(O.1) ND(O.1) Iron 1.1 1.7 Lead ND(O.1) ND(O.1) Magnesium NA NA Manganese 0.1 0.4 Mercury ND(0.005) ND(0.005) MoIybden um NA NA Nickel NA NA Selenitin ND(O.2) ND(O.2) Silver ND(O.1) ND(O.1) Sodium NA NA Thallium NA NA Tin NA NA Vanadium ND(O.1) ND(O.1) Zinc ND(O.1) ND(O.1) (1) All results in ug/g unless otherwise designated. (2) Not analyzed. (3) Concentration below minimum detection limits. A e SM -SE -3 N T C 0 L L E C T D 1 TABLE A-2 (CONTINUED) INORGANIC ANALYSES - SEDIMENT SAMPLES SMUGGLER MINE, ASPEN, COLORADO A-5 SM -SE -6 I 250 0.6 NA ND(0.2) 0.8 NA ND(O.1) NA ND(O.1) NA ND (0-.1) 0.1 ND(O.1) NA 0.2 ND(0.:05) NA NA ND(0.20) ND(O-1) NA NA NA ND(O.1) 0.1 RESULTS IN ug/g1 PARAMETERS SAMPLE DESIGNATIONS ANIONS SM -SE -4 SM -SE -5 Ch oride �- Fluoride 3 1 Sulfate 130 310 TOTAL METALS Aluminum 1.3 0.2 Antimony NA2 NA Arsenic ND(0.2)3 ND(O.2) Barium 0.8 0.2 Beryllium NA NA Cadmium ND(O.1) ND(O.1) Calcium NA NA Chromium ND(O.1) ND(O.1) Cobalt NA NA Copper ND(O.1) ND(O.1) Iron 0.3 0.3 Lead ND(O.1) ND(O.1) Magnesium NA NA Manganese 0.9 2.1 Mercury ND(0.005) ND(0.005) Molybdenum NA NA Nickel NA NA Selenium ND(O.2) ND(O.2) Silver ND(O.1) ND(O.1) - Sodium NA NA Thallium NA NA Tin NA NA Vanadium ND(O.1) ND(O.1) Zinc 0.1 0.1 (1) All results in ug/g unless otherwise designated. (2) Not analyzed. (3) Concentration below minimum detection limits. A-5 SM -SE -6 I 250 0.6 NA ND(0.2) 0.8 NA ND(O.1) NA ND(O.1) NA ND (0-.1) 0.1 ND(O.1) NA 0.2 ND(0.:05) NA NA ND(0.20) ND(O-1) NA NA NA ND(O.1) 0.1 Id TABLE A-3 INORGANIC ANALYSES - GROUNDWATER SAMPLES SMUGGLER -,MINE, ASPEN, COLORADO RESULTS IN ug/11 - PARAMETERS SAMPLE DESIGNATIONS FIELD MEASUREMENTS SM -PW -1 SM -PW -2 SM -PW -3 SM -PW -4 emperature -Ty.-T— ME -67 13.0 pH (S.U.) 7.70 7.96 7.98 7.96 Conductivity (umhos/cm) 600 66 640 720 LAB MEASUREMENTS Alkalinity 300 33 231 100 (mg/l as CaCO3) Total Dissolved Solids 470 68 408 162 (mg/ 1) ANIONS Ch oride (mg/1) 33.1 0.17 3.3 1.06 Fluoride (mg/1) 0.69 0.35 - 0.53 1.73 Sulfate (mg/1) 49.1 3.4 74.0 17.9 METALS DISSOLVED DISSOLVED DISSOLVED DISSOLVED ATtnn n um NDJ30) ND(30) _ NB 30 ND(30) Antimony NA NA NA NA - Arsenic ND(50)3 ND(50) ND(50) ND(50) Barium 134 77 121 79 Beryllium NA NA - NA NA - - Cadmium ND(5) ND(5) ND(5) ND(5) Calcium NA NA - NA _ NA Chromium ND(5) ND(5) ND(5) ND(5) Cobalt NA NA NA NA Copper 35 ND(5) 6 _ ND(5) Iron 12 185 34 29 Lead ND(30) ND(30) ND(30) ND(30) Magnesium NA NA NA Manganese ND(5) 8A ND(5} ND(5) Mercury ND(O.5) ND(O.5) ND(O.5) ND(O.5) Molybdenum NA NA NA NA Nickel NA NA NA NA Selenium ND(50) ND(50) ND(50) ND(50) - Silver ND(5) ND(5) ND(5) ND(5) Sodium NA NA NA NA Thallium NA NA NA NA Tin NA NA NA NA Vanadium ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) Zinc 956 - 31 462 737 (1) All results in ug/l unless otherwise designated. (2) Not analyzed. - (3) Concentration below minimum detection limits. TABLE A-3 (CONTINUED) INORGANIC ANALYSES - GROUNDWATER SAMPLES SMUGGLER MINE, ASPEN, COLORADO RESULTS IN ug/11 PARAMETERS SAMPLE DESIGNATIONS FIELD MEASUREMENTS SM -PW -5 SM -PW -5A SM -PW -6 SM -PW -7 Temperature 12.5 14 13.0 phi ( S .0 . ) 7.04 7.03 7.48 7.07 Conductivity (umbos/cm) 900 800 435 850 LAB MEASUREMENTS Alkalinity 157 NA2 120 NA (mg/l as CaCO3) Total Dissolved Solids 988 NA 312 NA (mg/1) ` ANIONS Chloride (mg/1) 1.51 NA 1.05 NA Fluoride (mg/1) 1.27 NA 0.90 NA Sulfate (mg/1) 373 NA 90.7 NA METALS DISSOLVED DISSOLVED DISSOLVED DISSOLVED Aluminum ND 30 ND 30 ND(30) —ND(30) Antimony NA ND(100) NA ND(100) .. Arsenic ND(50), ND(50) ND(50) ND(50) Barium 101 58 92 53 Beryllium NA ND(10) NA ND(10) Cadmium 13 8 ND(5) 7 Calcium NA NA NA NA Chromium ND(5) ND(5) 5 ND(5) Cobalt NA NA NA NA Copper 84 168 ND(5) 80 Iron 2340 ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) Lead ND(30) ND(30) ND(30) ND(30) Magnesium NA NA NA NA Manganese 8 9 ND(5) 7 Mercury ND(0.5) NA ND(0.5) NA Molybdenum NA NA NA NA Nickel NA ND(30) NA ND(30) Selenium ND(50) ND(50) ND(50) ND(50) Silver ND(5) ND(5) ND(5) ND(5) Sodium NA NA NA NA Thallium NA NA NA NA Tin NA NA NA NA Vanadium ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) ND(10) Zinc 2717 2118 42 1989 (1) All results in ug/1 unless otherwise designated. (2) Not analyzed. (3) Concentration below minimum detection limits. TABLE A-4 INORGANIC ANALYSES - SOIL SAMPLES SMUGGLER MINE, ASPEN, COLORADO RESULTS IN ug/gl ' PARAMETERS SAMPLE DESIGNATIONS FIELD MEASUREMENTS SM -SO -1 SM -SO -2 SM -SO -3 SM -SO -4 A pH .U. 1 7.5$- ANIONS Ch oride 3 2 28 Fluoride 14 4 4 Sulfate 2700 450 370 TOTAL METALS WEAK ACID`ACID "/" "�" " EXTRACTION/DIGEST Aluminum ND�0.1)/4860 1.4/4160 N 2.8/6080 Antimony NA NA NA Arsenic ND(0.2)3/44 ND(0.2)/53 0 ND(O.2)/39 Barium 0.5/2570 0.6/5620 0.4/13 - Beryllium NA NA T NA Cadmium 0.1/27 0.1/24 ND(0.1)/53 Calcium NA NA NA Chromium ND(0.1)/8.8 ND(0.1)/6.3 C ND(0.1)/9.0 Cobalt NA NA NA Copper ND(0.1)/104 ND(0.1)/138 0 ND(0.1)/56 - Iron 0.1/19900 0.5/16300 1.1/22300 Lead ND(0.1)/8530 ND(0.1)/3790 L ND(O.1)/7620 Magnesium NA NA NA Manganese ND(0.1)/715 ND(0.1)/1270 L ND(0.1)/3460 Mercury ND(0.005)/0.30 ND(0.005)/0.40 ND(0.005/0.30 Molybdenum NA NA E NA Nickel NA NA NA Selenium ND(0.2)/NA ND(0.2)/NA C ND(0.2)/NA Silver ND(0.1)/61 ND(0.1)/28 ND(0.1)/1S Sod ian NA NA T NA Thallium NA NA NA Tin NA NA E NA Vanadium ND(0.1)/10 ND(0.1)/8.3 ND(O.1)/13 Zinc 4.7/2730 0.2/3500 D 74/6990 1 All results in ug/9 unless otherwise designated. 2 Not analyzed. 3 Concentration below minimum detection limits. TABLE A-4 (CONTINUED) INORGANIC ANALYSES - SOIL SAMPLES SMUGGLER MINE, ASPEN ,COLORADO RESULTS IN ug/gl PARAMETERS SAMPLE DESIGNATIONS FIELD MEASUREMENTS SM -SO -5 SM -SO -6 SM -SO -7 SM -SO -8 PH S.U. -7.1 � ANIONS oride 3 4 4 3 Fluoride 7 3 3 10 Sulfate 1820 1240 64 7300 TOTAL METALS WEAK ACID/ACID EXTRACTION DIGEST Aluminum 0.1/4290 ND(0.1)/4730 4.7/6800 ND(0.1)/5850 Antimony NA2 NA NA NA Arsenic ND(O.2)/39 ND(O.2)/30 ND(0.2)/33 ND(O.2)/83 Barium 0.4/1460 0.4/1130 0.2/889 0.3/3840 Beryllium NA NA NA NA Cadmium ND(0.1)/31 ND(0.1)/24 ND(0.1)/7.2 ND(0.1)/26 Calcium NA NA NA NA Chromium ND(0.1)/7.2 ND(0.1)/6.4 ND(0.1)/6.5 ND(0.1)/11 Cobalt NA NA NA NA Copper ND(0.1)/55 ND(0.1)/36 0.1/23 ND(0.1)/88 Iron 0.1/17800 0.1/11700 2.3/11500 0.1/18300 Lead ND(0.1)/4110 ND(0.1)/3360 0.2/547 ND(0.1)/3500 Magnesium NA NA NA NA Manganese ND(0.1)/989 ND(0.1)/436 0.1/320 0.1/670 Mercury ND(0.005)/0.30 ND(0.005)/0.10 ND(0.005)/0.05 ND(0.005)/0.03 Molybdenum NA NA NA NA Nickel NA NA NA NA Selenium ND(0.2)NA ND(O.2)/NA ND(0.2)/NA ND(0.2)/NA Silver ND(0.1)/30 ND(0.1)/9.5 ND(0.1)/4.0 ND(0.1)/25 Sodium NA NA NA NA Thallium NA NA NA NA Tin NA NA NA NA Vanadium ND(0.1)/9.8 ND(0.1)/9.9 ND(0.1)/12 ND(0.1)/13 Zinc 101/3230 1.2/2200 0.3/535 1.1/1830 1 All results in ug/g unless otherwise designated. 2 Not analyzed. 3 Concentration below minimum detection limits. N PARAMETERS FIELD MEASUREMENTS PH .U. ANIONS TABLE A-4 (CONTINUED) INORGANIC ANALYSES - SOIL SAMPLES SMUGGLER MINE, ASPEN, COLORADO RESULTS IN ug/gl SAMPLE DESIGNATIONS SM -SO -9 .57 SM SM Ch Tor de 8 Fluoride 7 Sulfate 210 TOTAL METALS WEAK ACIYACID ND(O.2)/25 EXTRACTION DIGEST Aluminum 3.7/5070 Antimony NA2 Arsenic ND(0.2)/75 Barium 0.3/4070 Beryllium NA Cadmium ND(0.1)/22 Calcium NA Chromium ND(0.1)/9.3 Cobalt NA Copper 0.1/94 Iron 1.6/16800 Lead ND(0.1)/2740 - Magnesium NA Manganese 0.1/474 Mercury ND(0.005)/0.02 Mo 1 ybd en um NA Nickel NA Selenium ND(O.2)/NA Silver ND(0.1)/23 Sod i tin NA - Thallium NA Tin NA Vanadium ND(0.1)/12 �. Zinc 0.2/1270 4 3 46 4 1710 1280 11 M/11 11 H 1 /11 11 SM -SO -12 6.62- 1 2 2 11 ill 11 0.2/4240 0.7/3110 7.9/6650 NA NA NA ND(0.2)/98 ND(O.2)/105 ND(O.2)/25 0.4/3380 0.4/3240 0.1/135 NA NA NA ND(0.1)/34 ND(0.1/23 ND(0.1)/4.4 NA NA NA ND(0.1)/10 ND(0.1)/7.2 ND(0.1)/8.6 NA NA NA ND(O.1)/111 ND(0.1)/684 ND(0.1)/14 0.1116500 0.3/12300 3.7/13500 ND(0.1)/5720 ND(0.1)/5830 ND(0.1)/59 NA NA NA ND(0.1)/566 ND(0.1)/450 0.11430 ND(0.005)/0.80 ND(0.005)/0.40 ND(0.005/ ND(0.05) NA NA NA NA NA NA ND(0.2)/NA ND(O.2)/NA ND(0.2)/NA ND(0.1)/68 ND(0.1)/68 ND(0.1)/ ND(.5) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA ND(0.1)/13 ND(0.1)/8.8 ND(0.1)/12 0.612440 0.2/1910 0.1/176 1 All results in ug/g unless otherwise designated. 2 Not Analyzed. 3 Concentration below minimum detection limits. 11 TABLE A-4 (CONTINUED) INORGANIC ANALYSES - SOIL SAMPLES SMUGGLER MINE, ASPEN, COLORADO RESULTS IN ug/gl PARAMETERS SAMPLE DESIGNATIONS FIELD MEASUREMENTS SM -SO -13 SM -SO -14 SM -SO -15 pH .U. ANIONS oride 3 3 Fluoride 5 9 Sulfate 2750 160 TOTAL METALS WEAK ACIDIACID EXTRACTION DIGEST Aluminum 0.2/4830 1.1/4000 Antimony NA2 NA Arsenic ND(0.3)3/136 ND(0.2)/303 Barium 0.4/14 0.5/2740 Beryllium NA NA Cadmium ND(0.1)/43 ND(0.1)/13.8 Calcium NA NA Chromium ND(0.1)/12. ND(0.1)/5.9 Cobalt NA NA Iron 0.1/19100 0.8/9850 . Lead ND(0.1)/5560 ND(0.1)/1360 Magnesium NA NA Manganese 0.1/725 ND(0.1)/462 Mercury ND(C.005)/1.00 ND(O.005)/0.20 Mo 1 yb d en un NA NA Nickel NA NA Selenium ND(O.2)/NA ND(0.2)/NA Silver ND(0.1)/62 ND(0.1)/12 Sodium NA NA Thallium NA NA Tin NA NA Vanadium ND(0.1)/17 ND(0.1)/8.3 Zinc 0.8/2660 0.1/845 1 All results in ug/g unl.,ss otherwise designated. 2 Not analyzed. 3 Concentration below minimum detection limits. N 0 T C 0 L L E C T E D SM -SO -16 N 0 T C 0 L L E C T E D TABLE A-4 (CONTINUED) INORGANIC ANALYSES - SOIL SAMPLES SMUGGLER MINE, ASPEN, COLORADO RESULTS IN ug/g1 PARAMETERS SAMPLE DESIGNATIONS FIELD MEASUREMENTS SM -SO -17 SM -SO -18 SM -SO -19 PH S.U. 6.85 ANIONS oride NA2 Fluoride NA Sulfate NA TOTAL METALS WEAK AC IYAC I D EXTRACTION DIGEST Aluminum 2.2/4720 Antimony • Arsenic NA ND(0.2)3/20 Barium N N .10/411 Beryllium 0 0 NA Cadmium T T ND(.10)/3.5 Calcium NA Chromium ND(.10)/4.3 Cobalt NA - Copper ND(.10)/16 Iron C C 1.319490 Lead 0 0 ND(.10)/191 Magnesium L L NA Manganese L L 0.10/431 Mercury E E NA/ND(0-05) Molybdenum C C NA Nickel T T NA Selenium E E ND(0.20)/NA Silver D D ND(0.10)/2.6 Sodium NA Thallium NA Tin NA Vanadium ND(.10)/8.2 Zinc .10/134 1 All results in ug/g unless otherwise designated. 2 Not Analyzed. 3 Concentration below minimum detection limits. Ph 1n M W 01 TABLE A-5 INORGANIC ANALYSES - TAILINGS SAMPLES SMUGGLER MINE, ASPEN, COLORADO 41 RESULTS IN ug/91 P PARAMETERS FIELD MEASUREMENTS PH (S.U.) ANIONS Z76 ride Fluoride Sulfate TOTAL METALS Aluminum Antimony Arsenic Bari um Beryl 1 i an Cadmi un Calcium Chromri um Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Molybdenum Nickel Selenium Silver Sodium Thallium Tin Vanadium Zinc MINERAL ANALYSIS Carbonate, Mineral SAMPLE DESIGNATIONS SM -TA -1 T.166- 10 22,500 WEAK ACID/ACID EXTRACTIO DIGEST ND 0.1)/3310 ND(0.2)3/53 0.2/350 NA 0.9/48 NA ND(0.1)/6.0 NA ND(0.1)/80 ND(0.1)/18700 ND(0.1)/5670 NA ND(0.1)/1030 ND(0.005)/0.10 NA NA ND(0.2)/NA ND(0.1)/29 NA NA NA ND(0.1)/8.8 10.814090 9.8% SM -TA 2 56 46100 11,11 a ND(0.1)/6540 NA ND(0.2)/50 0.3/53 NA 2.1/62 NA ND(0.1)/6.6 NA ND(0.1)/65.1 0.1/20100 0.2/4520 NA 0.1/1090 ND(0.005)/1.10 VIP NA -ND-(0.2)/NA ND(0.1)/51 NA NA NA ND(0.1)/8.8 39/6840 6.4% 1 All results in ug/9 unless otherwise designated. 2 Not analyzed. 3 Concentration below minimum detection limits. SM -TA -3 F� ND(0.1)/1350 NA ND(0.2)/25 0.31425 NA 2.4/20 NA ND(0.1)/3.7 NA ND(0.1)/29 ND(0.1)/18700 1.0/6810 NA 13.5/552 ND(0.005)/0.60 NA NA ND(O.2)/NA ND(0.1)/20 NA NA NA ND(0.1)/4.8 106/3100 12.5% TABLE A-5 (CONTINUED) INORGANIC ANALYSES - TAILINGS SAMPLES SMUGGLER MINE. ASPEN, COLORADO RESULTS IN ug/g1 - PARAMETERS SAMPLE DESIGNATIONS FIELD MEASUREMENTS SM -TA -4 SM -TA -5 SM -TA -6 ANIONS Uil or1de 2 3 2 Fluoride 42 29 17 Sulfate 35200 910 26000 TOTAL METALS WEAK ACIYACID EXTRACTION DIGEST Aluminum ND�0.1)/1380 ND(0.1)/1420 ND(0.1)/1190 - Antimony NA NA NA Arsenic ND(O.2)3/38 ND(O.2)/39 ND(O.2)/80 Barium _ 0.11381 0.1/16 0.1/86 Beryllium NA NA NA Cadmium 1.4/48 2.1/87 2.5/72 Calcium NA NA NA . Chromium ND(0.'1)/7.6 ND(0.1)/7.2 ND(O.1)/11 Cobalt NA NA NA Copper ND(0.1)/52 ND(0.1)/129 ND(0.1)/232 Iron 0.1/20600 ND(0.1)/27200 ND(0.1)/18200 Lead 0.6/13900 0.2/7970 0.7/9840 �+ Magnesium NA NA NA Manganese 4.7/1640 0.2/1670 0.1/1400 Mercury ND(0.005)/2.10 ND(0.005)/1.30 ND(0.005)/1.00 Molybdenum NA NA NA Nickel NA NA NA Selenium ND(0.2)/NA ND(0.2)/NA ND(0.2)/NA Silver ND(0.1)/22 ND(0.1)/29 ND(0.1)/49 Sodium NA NA NA Thallium NA NA NA Tin NA NA NA Vanadium ND(0.1)/5.7 ND(0.1)6.9 ND(0.1)/10 Zinc 48/6210 37/9510 79/11100 MINERAL ANALYSIS Carbonate, Mineral 17.9% 21.2% 27.6% ( as CO3) _ (1) All results in ug/g unless otherwise designated. (2) Not analyzed. a (3) Concentration below minimum detection limits. A-14 TABLE A-6 INORGANIC ANALYSES - FIELD BLANK SAMPLES $ SMUGGLER MINE, ASPEN, COLORADO RESULTS IN ug/11 PARAMETERS SAMPLE DESIGNATIONS FIELD MEASUREMENTS SM -BL -1 SM -BL -20 SM -BL -21 SM -BL -22 empera u --zu-.u— 14.0NA — pH(S.U.) . 6.45 5.10 NA NA on uctivity (umbos/cm) 1 0 NA NA :W Arsenic Bari in Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Molybdenum Nickel Selenium Silver Sodium Thal 1 i um Tin Vanadium Zinc NA/ND(50) NA/ND�10) NA/ND. 5) NA/ND(5) NA NA/ND(5) NA NA/ND(5) NA/306 NA/ND(30) NA NA/ND(5) NA NA NA NA/ND(50) NA/ND(5) NA NA NA NA/ND(10) NA/83 NA NA ND(10)3 NA NA NA r 11/61 is ND 30)/ ND 30 ND 100)/ ND 100) -ND 50 )1 ND 50 22 ND(10) ND 1Q / ND 10 ND 5)/ ND 5 NA ND(5l/ NA ((5 ND 5ND / ND 10 / ND 10 ND 30 / ND 30 NA ND �5�/ NA NA ND 30)/ ND 30 ND 50 / ND 50 ND 5)/ ND 5 ) NA NA NA ND(10 / ND 10 6/ND( ) M( ) All res Its in ug/l unless otherwise designated. () Not analyzed. 3 Concentration below minimum detection limits. A -1T NA NA NA NA NA NA 11/Ii 11 ND 30)/ ND 30) ND 100)/ ND 100) ND 50 / ND 50 26 ND 10) ND 10 / ND 10 ND 5}/ ND 5 NA NO 5j/ NA ND 5)/ ND 5 NO 1)0 / ND 10 ND 30 / ND 30 NA ND(5)/ ND 5 NA NA ND 30 / ND 30 NO 50 / ND 50 ND 5)/ ND 5 NA NA NA ND 10/ ND 10 22 ND 5) NA f►'T.J NA NA NA NA ND 30)/ ND 30 ND 100)/ ND 100) ND 50 / ND 50 18 ND 10) ND 10 / ND 10 ND 5)/ ND 5 NA ND(5)/ NA ND 5 / ND 5 ND 1 / ND 10 ND 30 / ND 30 NA ND 5/ NA NA ND 30/ ND 30 ND 50/ ND 50 ND 5)/ ND%5 NA NA NA ND 10�/ ND 10 ND 5)/ ND 5 LAB MEASUREMENTS NA2 a gni (mg/1 as yy CaCO3) Total Dissolved Solids 18 Cyanide (ug/1) NA ANIONS pride(mg/1} NA Fluoride Sulfate (mg/1 (mg/1) NA NA METALS DISSOLVED/TOTALS uminum NA/70 Antimony NA :W Arsenic Bari in Beryllium Cadmium Calcium Chromium Cobalt Copper Iron Lead Magnesium Manganese Mercury Molybdenum Nickel Selenium Silver Sodium Thal 1 i um Tin Vanadium Zinc NA/ND(50) NA/ND�10) NA/ND. 5) NA/ND(5) NA NA/ND(5) NA NA/ND(5) NA/306 NA/ND(30) NA NA/ND(5) NA NA NA NA/ND(50) NA/ND(5) NA NA NA NA/ND(10) NA/83 NA NA ND(10)3 NA NA NA r 11/61 is ND 30)/ ND 30 ND 100)/ ND 100) -ND 50 )1 ND 50 22 ND(10) ND 1Q / ND 10 ND 5)/ ND 5 NA ND(5l/ NA ((5 ND 5ND / ND 10 / ND 10 ND 30 / ND 30 NA ND �5�/ NA NA ND 30)/ ND 30 ND 50 / ND 50 ND 5)/ ND 5 ) NA NA NA ND(10 / ND 10 6/ND( ) M( ) All res Its in ug/l unless otherwise designated. () Not analyzed. 3 Concentration below minimum detection limits. A -1T NA NA NA NA NA NA 11/Ii 11 ND 30)/ ND 30) ND 100)/ ND 100) ND 50 / ND 50 26 ND 10) ND 10 / ND 10 ND 5}/ ND 5 NA NO 5j/ NA ND 5)/ ND 5 NO 1)0 / ND 10 ND 30 / ND 30 NA ND(5)/ ND 5 NA NA ND 30 / ND 30 NO 50 / ND 50 ND 5)/ ND 5 NA NA NA ND 10/ ND 10 22 ND 5) NA f►'T.J NA NA NA NA ND 30)/ ND 30 ND 100)/ ND 100) ND 50 / ND 50 18 ND 10) ND 10 / ND 10 ND 5)/ ND 5 NA ND(5)/ NA ND 5 / ND 5 ND 1 / ND 10 ND 30 / ND 30 NA ND 5/ NA NA ND 30/ ND 30 ND 50/ ND 50 ND 5)/ ND%5 NA NA NA ND 10�/ ND 10 ND 5)/ ND 5 APPENDIX B HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT DATA TABLES TABLE B-1 HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT - SOILS ROUTE SMUGGLER MINE, ASPEN, COLORADO OBSERVED SAFE SAMPLE ID SUBSTANCE ADI CONCENTRATION CONCENTRATION RISK* (m9/K9) (Ppm) (ppm) SM -SO -11 FE .0085 19900 850 23.4118 " PB .0014 8530 140 60.9286 " MN .0014 715 140 5.10714 SM -SO -21 FE .0085 16300 850 19.1765 11 11 PB .0014 3790 140 27.0714 61 to MN .0014 1270 140 9.07143 SM -SO -41 CD .00029 53 29 1.82759 It IN FE .0085 22300 850 26.2353 " PB .0014 7620 140 54.4286 It to MN .0014 3460 140 24.7143 SM -SO -51 CD .00029 31 2; 1.06897 " FE .0085 17800 850 20.9412 It PB .0014 4110 140 29.3571 " MN .0014 989 140 7.06429 SM -SO -61 FE .0085 11700 650 13.7647 -It " PB .0014 3360 140 24 MN .0014 436 140 3.11429 SM -SO -71 FE .0085 11500 850 13.5294 It BePB .0014 547 140 3.90714 WIN it It MN .0014 320 140 2.28571 SM -SO -81 FE .0085 18300 850 21.5294 " PB .0014 3500 140 25 - SM -50-91 BA .029 4070 2900 1.40345 ItIt FE .0085 16800 850 19.7647 "It PB .0014 2740 140 19.5714 IN it MN .0014 474 140 3.38571 * A metal whose calculated risk value is 41.0 is omitted. This may include the complete omission of a sampling site. 1 ADI or NOEL from literature. TABLE B-1(Cont.) HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT - SOILS ROUTE SMUGGLER MINE, ASPEN, COLORADO z It A metal whose calculated risk value is <1.0 is omitted. This may include I ~ the complete omission of a sampling site. M 1 ADI or NOEL from literature. '" B-2 OBSERVED SAFE SAMPLE ID SUBSTANCE ADI CONCENTRATION CONCENTRATION RISK* (m9/K9) (Ppm) (Ppm) SM -SO -101 BA .029 3380 2900 1.16552 of No CD .00029 34 29 1.17241 *41 FE .0085 16500 850 19.4118 PB .0014 5720 140 40.8571 MN .0014 566 140 4.04286 SM -SO -111 BA .029 3240 2900 1.11724 " FE .0085 12300 850 14.4706 * PB .0014 5830 140 41.6429 MN .0014 450 140 3.21429 SM -SO -121 FE .0085 13500 850 15.8824 -Is " MN .0014 430 140 3.07143 40 SM -SO -131 CD .00029 43 29 1.48276 " FE .0085 19100 850 22.4706 " PB 5560 140 39.7143 .0014 " MN .0014 725 140 5.17857 - SN -SO -141 AS .0014 303 140 2.16429 FE .0085 9850 850 11.5882 " PB .0014 1360 140 9.71429 ` It it MN .0014 462 140 3.3 - SM -SO -191 FE .0085 9490 850 11.1647 " " PB .0014 191 140 1.36429 " MN .0014 431 140 3.07857 1 z It A metal whose calculated risk value is <1.0 is omitted. This may include I ~ the complete omission of a sampling site. M 1 ADI or NOEL from literature. '" B-2 * A metal whose calculated risk value is <1.0 is omitted. This may include the complete omission of a sampling site. A 1 ADI or NOEL from literature. B-3 TABLE B-2 HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT - TAILINGS ROUTE SMUGGLER MINE, ASPEN, COLORADO OBSERVED SAFE SAMPLE ID SUBSTANCE ADI CONCENTRATION CONCENTRATION RISK* (m9/K9) (ppm) (Ppm) - 5M -TA -11 CD .00029 48 29 1.65517 FE .0085 18700 850 22 PB .0014 5670 140 40.5 " MN .0014 1030 140 7.35714 SM -TA -21 CD .00029 62 29 2.13793 of FE .0085 20100 850 23.6471 is " PB .0014 4520 140 32.2857 " " MN .0014 1090_ 140 7.78571 SM -TA -3l FE .0085 18700 850 22 It PB .0014 6810 140 48.6429 " MN .0014 552 140 3.94286 TA -41 CD .00029 48 29 1.65517 - FE .0085 20600 850 24.2353 It PB .0014 13900 140 99.2857 It " MN .0014 1640 140 11.7143 SM -TA -51 CD .00029 87 29 3 " FE .0085 27200 850 32 it 11PB .0014 7970 140 56.9286 " go MN .0014 1670 140 11.9286 SM -TA -61 CD .00029 72 29 2.48276 " " FE .0085 18200 850 21.4118 " " PB .0014 9840 140 70.2857 " MN .0014 1400 140 10 * A metal whose calculated risk value is <1.0 is omitted. This may include the complete omission of a sampling site. A 1 ADI or NOEL from literature. B-3 TABLE B-3 HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT - GROUNDWATER ROUTE SMUGGLER MINE, ASPEN, COLORADO OBSERVED SAFE SAMPLE ID SUBSTANCE ADI CONCENTRATION CONCENTRATION RISK* (mg/Kg) (ppm) (ppm) SV -PW -51 FE 8.57143E-03 2.34 0.3 7.8 * A metal whose calculated tisk value is -1.0 is omitted. This may include the complete omission of a sampling site. 1 Maximum contaminant level. B-4 TABLE B-4 s HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT - SURFACE WATER ROUTE - SMUGGLER MINE, ASPEN, COLORADO ' SAMPLE ID SUBSTANCE ADI (m9/K9) OBSERVED CONCENTRATION (ppm) SAFE CONCENTRATION (ppm) RISK* SM -ST -41 FE 8.57143E-03 1.201 0.3 4.00333 " MN 1.42857E-03 0.459 0.05 9.18 " ZN 0.0142857 0.73 0.5 1.46 SM -ST -01 FE 8.57143E-03 0.773 0.3 2.57667 " " MN 1.42857E-03 0.389 0.05 7.78 SM -ST -51 FE 8.57143E-03 0.73 0.3 2.43333 ' MN 1.42857E-03 0.3B9 0.05 7.78 ZN 0.0142857 0.685 0.5 1.37 - SM -ST -5A1 FE 8.57143E-03 0.529 0.3 1.76333 " MN 1.42857E-03 0.315 0.05 6.3 ZN 0.0142857 0.556 0.5 1.112 SM -ST -61 MN 1.42857E-03 0.237 0.05 4.74 Sf.-ST-6A1 MN 1.42857E-03 0.176 0.05 3.52 * * A metal whose calculated risk value is c1.0 is omitted. This may include the complete omission of a sampling site. I Maximum contaminant level. B-5