SDMS Document ID

1022097 6.0 UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN DOWNSTREAM OF THE 11-MILE REACH

Consistent with the Work Plan and the Scope of Work, this chapter reviews the existing literature and data sources in order to examine the adequacy of information available for assessing potential natural resource injuries for the upper Arkansas River downstream of the 11-mile reach (Downstream Area). The Downstream Area is defined as the 500-year floodplain below the 11-mile reach, beginning with the confluence of Two-Bit Gulch and continuing for 125 miles to and including Pueblo Reservoir (Figure 6- 1).

To accomplish the above-stated objectives, the consulting team developed the following questions about the data in each resource category that would ultimately allow them to make a determination about whether more data might be necessary:

• How much data are available, including spatial and temporal coverages?

• Is additional information needed in order to make a determination about (1) injury characterization, and/or (2) restoration planning?

• If yes to the above question, then what are the types, amounts, and costs of data required to make a determination about injury characterization and restoration planning?

The information/data were compiled, reviewed, and evaluated in detail with these questions in mind. Responses to the above questions reflect the consensus views of the consulting team and are based upon the information reviewed, as well as on the experience of the team. Using such an approach it is possible to evaluate whether more data might be of use in making informed decisions about the Downstream Area. In assessing if more data are needed, the consulting team considered the formal definitions of what constitutes injury under the Department of Interior Natural Resource Damage Assessment regulations.

In consideration of the high level of review that had occurred, the MOU Parties requested that this chapter also present a characterization of the conditions of the Downstream Area resources and an identification of any injuries that may be attributable to mine-waste. The characterization follows the approach utilized for the 11-mile reach. Given this additional request, the text has been divided to provide an overview of the levels of information available and the relevance of that information to determining injury. This section is followed by a more detailed discussion of that information as it relates to a characterization of injury. A matrix summarizing findings with regard to injury for the Downstream Area is presented at the end of this chapter.

J:\OI0004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-1 Based on the characterization for the 11-mile reach, surface water was identified as the fundamental contaminant transport mechanism and exposure pathway for the Downstream Area. The Downstream Area of the Arkansas River undergoes significant physical and chemical changes from the bottom of the 11-mile reach to Pueblo Reservoir. The obvious impacts associated with deposition of historic mine-waste, diminish over this same distance. The river system is influenced by changes in climate, geology, land-use and resource management. These changes affect water quality characteristics, flow regimes, and river morphology. In turn, the biological communities and their condition can be different based on these characteristics alone, making it difficult to determine what, if any, natural resource injury has occurred as a result of exposure to metals. There are also major changes in the geomorphology of the river that could influence how mine-wastes are distributed.

6.1 Adequacy of Available Information

The following generally describes the nature and extent of information available to characterize conditions and potential injuries for the natural resources comprising the Downstream Area. The range of information for each resource category was reviewed relative to the Work Plan objectives and specific questions discussed above. Additional supporting information (including specific study/data references) is presented on a reach-by-reach basis in Section 6.2 in conjunction with a characterization of injury.

Surface Water Resources

Review of the literature and the electronically compiled data shows that a substantial amount of surface water quality data are available for most reaches in the Downstream Area. The data were determined to be sufficient to characterize the level of natural resource injury. The review indicates that the data are well distributed spatially and temporally, including before and after treatment at the Yak Tunnel and LMDT. Most importantly, sufficient data exists to assess conditions of the surface water within the last few years. Data are available from both the seasonal high and low flow periods at many of the reaches. While the data over the 125-mile section of the Downstream Area are not as extensive as those for the 11-mile reach, the level of resolution provided is consistent with major changes in flow rates and setting.

Available historical and recent data were compared to Colorado's TVSs for the Arkansas River. This comparison showed exceedances of the TVSs for cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc within the Downstream Area, which defines a natural resource injury based on the regulations. On average,

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currem 1 .doc 6-2 concentrations of dissolved metals decrease from Leadville to Pueblo Reservoir, with the majority of TVS exceedances occurring primarily upstream of Lake Creek and prior to the treatment of mine drainage in the Leadville area. It is evident that median concentrations of most metals have decreased significantly since water treatment began. More recent exceedances of TVSs are infrequent and of a lower magnitude than historical exceedances. Comparison of the recent data against the State's TVSs provides a conservative estimate of the potential for aquatic community-level effects. This comparison to the TVSs along with current biological conditions and further comparision to Reach 0, suggests that acute toxicity is not occurring in the 125-mile Downstream Area. Based on review of both sediment and water quality studies, it appears that the most significant source of metals (primarily cadmium, copper, iron, lead, manganese, and zinc) to the Upper Arkansas River has been, and continues to be, the Leadville Mining District. Current levels of dissolved metals in the Downstream Area can primarily be related to water quality in California Gulch.

As stated above, the record of water quality data spans the dynamics of high and low flows across several years. Some reaches contain more data than others. Comparisons between data sets for upstream and downstream locations were conducted to observe if changes in water quality occurred within intermediate reaches. Given the amount of data, as well as its spatial and temporal resolution, it is not expected that additional surface water quality data would provide any new or different information than those already available for the purpose of injury determination. Likewise, additional information for water quality is not expected to provide new thoughts on how restoration might need to proceed. Based on this evaluation, no additional surface water quality data are recommended for collection to assess injury or for restoration planning in the Downstream Area.

Sediment Resources

Spatially, the coverage of sediment quality data for the 125-mile Downstream Area is adequate considering the large distance. Kimball et al. (1995) sampled twice (fall 1988 and spring 1989) at 12 sites from downstream of the 11-mile reach to just upstream of Canon City. Church etal. (1994) collected several sediment quality samples during February 1994, including 15 samples from the end of the 11-mile reach to Pueblo Reservoir. McCulley Frick and Oilman, Inc. (1990) collected 10 samples on one occasion during April 1989, ranging from the bottom of the 11-mile reach to Florence. Ruse (2000) sampled one time during fall 1989, sampling 11 sites from the bottom of the 11-mile reach to Portland. Based on the review of available sediment quality data, the locations where samples were collected suggest that spatially, a reasonable amount of sediment quality data are available, while temporally, the amount of data are more limited. More recent sediment quality data (e.g., within the last two years) were not found. However, the temporal span of the data brackets the period before and after treatment at the

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-3 Yak Tunnel and LMDT, which has been shown to be an important transition in the basin relative to changes in metals concentrations (Figure 6-2). Generally, sediment metal concentrations show decreasing trends from upstream to downstream. With respect to Reach 0, concentrations are elevated for most of the metals to about Reach 6 and from there through Reaches 7 and 8, only zinc is elevated above those concentrations in Reach 0. By Reach 9, all four metals concentrations in sediments are lower than those observed in Reach 0.

Kimball et al. (1995) data provide evidence that the current sediment quality is largely a function of colloidal deposition and resuspension and can therefore be tied to current water quality. California Gulch is currently the largest source of metals, and sources in that drainage have not yet been fully remediated. Clearly, mine-wastes have been transported to and within the river to varying downstream locations, but most all of these (i.e., identifiable deposits) are located within the 11-mile reach (URS 1998). However, overall (and particularly above Canon City), the Arkansas River is a low sediment- transport system.

Evaluation of available sediment data in terms of their usefulness for defining injury is not as straightforward as for surface water. Although the regulations do not provide numerical criteria, sediment concentrations found in the control area (Reach 0) provide a point of reference. However, in a setting like the Arkansas River, consideration must be given to the fact that large portions of the system with the greatest potential for elevated sediment concentrations are of high gradient and have limited capacity to store sediment; therefore, the .importance of this pathway is limited. The work of Kimball et al. (1995) and others is another consideration when evaluating the need for additional sediment data. It is important to recognize that future sediment contamination is more likely a function of water quality rather than erosion of any mine-wastes within and below the 11-mile reach. Releases of metals from the California Gulch Superfund Site will have the greatest influence on future sediment concentrations. Correspondingly, water quality monitoring within the 11-mile reach would provide the greatest level of information on downstream sediment injury potential, as well as on the need for restoration. Given the present amount of information and its utility in assessing injury and planning for restoration, no additional sediment quality data are needed.

Groundwater Resources

Limited data were found in the open literature and in the compiled electronic database. Thus, the spatial and temporal coverages of data are sparse. The Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) database contains information that States must report to USEPA as required by the Safe Drinking Water Act. These requirements take three forms: maximum contaminant levels (the maximum

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-4 level of a specific contaminant that can occur in drinking water), treatment techniques (specific methods facilities must follow to remove certain contaminants), and monitoring and reporting requirements (schedules utilities must follow to report testing results). States report any violations of these three types to USEPA.

Based on knowledge of the hydrology of the 11-mile reach, the lack of significant mine-waste deposits downstream, and the fact that drinking water supply wells within the 11-mile reach meet MCLs, groundwater is not a concern for injury in the Downstream Area. The SDWIS database along with information from the 11-mile reach confirms that groundwater resources have not been injured. Groundwater data may also be available from other regulatory programs, such as the CERCLA smelter sites in Salida and Canon City. However, it is not expected that these or any other additional data are needed for injury determination or restoration planning.

Geologic Resources

The BLM sampled soils in the Downstream Area in July 2000 along transects at 18 separate locations (Figure 6-3). Total metal concentrations were determined for lead and zinc at all sites and for cadmium and copper for a subset of these sites. Plant-available metal concentrations were not determined for soils in the Downstream Area. However, total metal concentration is below levels of concern. The BLM soils data are limited spatially, since only 18 locations were sampled along 125 miles of river between Two-Bit Gulch and Pueblo Reservoir. However, it is unlikely that additional soil sampling would yield different results. Additional soils data are therefore not needed for injury assessment or restoration planning, except where mine-waste deposits occur in Reach 5.

Vegetation

There are no spatial or temporal data for vegetation. For similar reasons as stated for wildlife below, there is no realistic concern about injury to this resource. The limited areas for recent deposition of mine-waste indicate that the potential for storage of metals-enriched soils/sediments is low, hence no significant pathway for metals transfer to vegetation exists. Additional information is not required for injury determination or restoration planning.

Benthic Macroinvertebrates

There are no individual macroinvertebrate surveys for the Downstream Area that are both spatially and temporally comprehensive. The available studies either focus on long term data from a

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_current 1 .doc 6-5 specific station (e.g., station AR-8 in Buena Vista) or were conducted at numerous locations over a limited time period. Long term monitoring at station AR-8 (Reach 6) near Buena Vista showed dramatic improvements in benthic macroinvertebrate communities over the past 10 years, corresponding to significant reductions in metal concentrations (Clements et al. 2002). These data suggest that injury to benthic macroinvertebrates occurred in the past, but that the system has since recovered with improvements in water quality. Recent surveys show that community composition and abundance of sensitive species in Reach 6 are similar to those observed in Reach 0, the control area. Because this station is located at the upper end of the Downstream Area, it is unlikely that additional monitoring would detect significant impacts further downstream.

Although several spatially extensive surveys conducted in the Downstream Area showed differences in community composition as far downstream as Salida, these differences are unlikely due to metals exposure. Compared to the 11-mile reach, spatially and temporally extensive benthic macroinvertebrate data in the Downstream Area are limited. Despite these limited data, additional benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring in the Downstream Area is not required to further define injury or plan for restoration.

Fish

There are fish population data for various sites in the Downstream Area dating back to 1981, but not all stations have been sampled consistently, making it difficult to evaluate temporal trends. The most consistent fish population data have been collected at the Wellsville station below Salida. Evaluation of population data for the Wellsville station does not show statistically significant differences in total biomass relative to control values both "before" and "after" water treatment. However, comparisons among age classes were not done, and further analyses of existing data may be warranted. Based on the improvements seen in water quality and the potentially confounding influence of regulated flows and other factors, collecting additional fish population or community data in the Downstream Area would not be helpful for injury characterization or restoration planning. A general understanding of the ongoing potential for injury to fish can be derived from comparisons of water quality data to toxicity values from the published literature. From a restoration perspective, it is quite clear that addressing the large issues of source control in California Gulch would have the largest potential for restoration benefits in the Downstream Area.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-6 Wildlife Resources

Assessment of the existing literature revealed that two bird studies have been conducted for the Downstream Area. Both studies focused on evaluating metals exposure and potential injury. The tree swallow study data shows that the birds are being exposed to lead and that ALAD suppression is occurring, but not to the extent of defined injury. Based on ALAD suppression, injury was documented in American dippers from Balltown to Granite. At all other sites downstream of Granite, ALAD suppression is occurring but not to the extent of defined injury.

At present, the only substantive wildlife data available are for birds. Spatially, there is enough data to define the effect of metals on birds in the Downstream Area. There are one to three years worth of data, which are expected to be adequate for characterizing current injuries. Based on more detailed sampling within and above the 11-mile reach, injury to the most sensitive species such as dippers can be linked to water quality. Additional exposure data would not be more helpful for injury determination or restoration planning.

No mammalian toxicological data are presently available in the Downstream Area. In addition, very little data exists that could be used to determine possible exposure and the potential for injures using a risk-based approach (i.e., soils and vegetation). Additional data are not necessary to assess potential injury due to the fact that potential for injury in the 11-mile reach is linked to the presence of mine-waste deposits. The Downstream Area has a lower potential for injury to wildlife resources based on its distance from the primary source area in Leadville, limited areas of deposition, and diminishing concentrations in media of concern.

There are many sources of information that are relevant to characterizing the past and present level of injury in the Downstream Area. As would be expected, the spatial and temporal coverages of the data vary between resources. Knowledge gained through a detailed characterization of the 11-mile reach and upstream areas helps to put the question of injury in the Downstream Area into perspective. Available information for the 11-mile reach indicates that, other than in discrete areas where relatively undiluted mine-waste deposits have resulted in high floodplain soil/sediment metals concentrations, the primary potential for injury is to the aquatic system. Absence of significant deposits of mine-waste in the Downstream Area limits the potential for injury beyond the aquatic system. Available information indicates that present injuries within the aquatic system would most likely be linked to metals emanating from the California Gulch Superfund Site and that dilution and attenuation greatly limit the potential for injury below the confluence with Lake Creek. Therefore, although additional detailed studies in the Downstream Area may provide some refinement as to the potential for injury, such information would not

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-7 enhance the level of understanding and would not be useful for restoration planning. For these reasons, additional studies are not recommended. This view is also based on the practical perspective that for such studies to be of any additional value, they would have to be conducted at a very fine spatial scale over many years. Even then the ability to place such study results into the overall context of basin conditions is questionable. The relationship of California Gulch to downstream water quality makes consideration of long-term monitoring of water quality, a more insightful approach than near-term efforts focused on defining the potential for a specific injury.

6.2 Characterization of Injury

This section presents a summary of the information available to characterize injury within the Downstream Area. A determination of injury is first discussed by resource followed by an evaluation of injury for that resource. Specific studies discussed in this chapter are cited throughout and a bibliography that provides a complete listing of relevant information is included as Appendix A, Appendix Ci and Appendix C^.

Approach

This characterization was conducted using the available literature as well as the composite of chemical and physical data to assess the nature and extent of contamination. Correspondingly, this characterization builds upon the detailed base of knowledge developed for the 11-mile reach. In terms of injury to natural resources, information on downstream conditions is considered in conjunction with findings of injury and the cause of any injuries within the 11-mile reach. Within the 11-mile reach, the primary cause of any identified injuries are poor water quality attributable to metals from upstream (e.g., California Gulch) and fluvial mine-waste deposits. These causes diminish with distance downstream within and below the 11-mile reach. Consistent with these findings, the primary focus for the Downstream Area is on water quality and the presence of fluvial mine-waste deposits. These two resource characteristics provide a fundamental means of assessing the potential for downstream injury. However, as discussed in the following text, information on related biological resources are considered. Given the differences in setting, Pueblo Reservoir is discussed separately.

In order to better understand the various environmental settings and flow regimes along the length of the UARB and as a means of recognizing the areas with larger potential for injury, the geomorphology of the river was characterized. The characterization focuses on identifying changes in stream flow and the morphology types that have the highest potential for storing sediments and mine-wastes (i.e.,

J:\OI0004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-8 significant depositional areas). This approach is based on the findings for the 11-mile reach, where metals loading from upstream sources and fluvial mine-waste deposits were identified as the primary pathway for injury. At the same time, the existing literature and supporting data were evaluated by natural resource category, paying special attention to water quality and aquatic biological resources.

To better characterize surface water quality (cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc concentrations) in the Downstream Area, the river was divided into reaches based on major changes in hydrology and geomorphology (Figure 6-1). Based on these attributes, the following reaches were defined:

• Reach 5 - Reach 5 extends from the confluence of Two-Bit Gulch, which is the downstream limit of the 11-mile reach, to the confluence of Lake Creek. Lake Creek delivers a large amount of trans-basin water to the Arkansas River. The river in Reach 5 is in a narrow valley that is flanked by high terraces.

• Reach 6 - Reach 6 extends from the junction of Lake Creek to the junction of Chalk Creek at the upstream extent of Browns Canyon. The upstream limit of this reach is determined by the large discharge contributions from Lake Creek, and the downstream limit is based upon the geomorphic change from open valley with terraces to a canyon. From the Lake Creek confluence to Princeton (Harvard Lakes quadrangle), the river is in a canyon, but from Princeton to Chalk Creek, it flows in an open valley with terraces.

• Reach 7 - Reach 7 extends from Chalk Creek to the junction of the South Fork Arkansas River. The upstream limit is determined by the geomorphic control of Browns Canyon, and the downstream limit is determined by the discharge contribution of South Fork Arkansas River. The river is in a deep canyon (Browns Canyon) from about 2 miles south of Chalk Creek to about Browns Canyon (Salida West quadrangle), where it is confined by terraces to about Squaw Creek, where it then flows in an open valley with a floodplain to Salida and to the confluence of South Fork Arkansas River.

• Reach 8 - Reach 8 extends from the confluence of the South Fork Arkansas River to Canon City. The reach is primarily a canyon composed of the Arkansas River and Royal Gorge, but the valley widens at Wellsville, between Howard and Coaldale and at Parkdale. In the wide sections, the river is flanked by terraces.

• Reach 9 - Reach 9 extends from Canon City to Pueblo Reservoir. This reach is characterized by an open valley with a floodplain. The change from canyon to open valley at Canon City is dramatic.

• Reach 10 -Pueblo Reservoir including the Arkansas River downstream of the reservoir to approximately 1.5 miles downstream of Pueblo Dam. (This additional area was

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-9 included due to the limited amount of data found for the reservoir and to assess if metals appear to be transported from the reservoir.)

Using the surface water data compiled into the database and the reaches described above, summary statistics and graphics were developed to aid in assessing the temporal and spatial trends.

6.3 Geomorphology

The morphology of the Downstream Area is highly variable over it's 125-mile length. However, based upon study of U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic maps, soil survey maps (Wheeler et al. 1995; Fletcher 1975), and field observations, it was possible to identify different valley types for which a characterization could be made of the potential for mine-waste storage in each. The river flows through three diverse valley types:

1. Canyons (Browns Canyon, Arkansas River Canyon, and Royal Gorge);

2. Open valleys with high terraces (north and south of Buena Vista); and

3. Open valleys with floodplains (downstream of Canon City) (the 11-mile reach is of this type).

Available information and field observations indicate the following:

• Canyons: Resistant bedrock is the dominant factor controlling channel characteristics in the canyons. Nevertheless, the channel may be flanked by a narrow high terrace and a low discontinuous bench, and vegetated islands may be present in the channel. However, the confined channel is an efficient conduit of sand-size and finer sediment, and the potential for mine-waste storage is low. Of the approximately 125 miles of the Downstream Area, about 47 miles or 38 percent of linear channel is canyon-bound. Canyon valley types were identified in the Downstream Area at the following locations:

- Granite Quadrangle, downstream from 1 mile below Kobe; - South Peak Quadrangle; - Nathrop Quadrangle, Browns Canyon Quadrangle; - Salida East Quadrangle, from Cleora downstream; Howard Quadrangle, downstream to T49N, R10E, Sec 34; - Cotopaxi Quadrangle, downstream from Gobblers Knob; Arkansas Mountain Quadrangle;

J:\010004\Task3- SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-10 - Echo Quadrangle, downstream from 1 mile below Texas Creek; - Mclntyre Hills Quadrangle, downstream to Parkdale Siding; and - Royal Gorge Quadrangle.

• Open Valleys with High Terraces: Canyons lead to broad basins, which contain alluvium that forms high terraces that confine the river. As in the canyons, discontinuous benches and islands formed of modern alluvium exist. However, the confined channel is an efficient conduit of sand and finer sediments, and the potential for mine-waste storage is low. Of the approximately 125 miles of channel in the Downstream Area, about 45 miles or 36 percent of linear channel is confined by high terraces. Locations where high terraces are present are identified below:

- Harvard Lake Quadrangle; - Buena Vista West Quadrangle; - Buena Vista East Quadrangle, downstream to T145, R78W, Sec 33; - Nathrop Quadrangle, downstream to Browns Canyon; Salida West Quadrangle, downstream to T50N, R8E, Sec 22; - Salida East Quadrangle, downstream to Cleora; Howard Quadrangle, downstream from T49N R10E Sec 34; Coaldale Quadrangle; - Cotopaxi to Cobblers Knob Quadrangle; - Echo Quadrangle, downstream to 1 mile below Texas Creek; - Mclntyre Hills Quadrangle, downstream of Parkdale Siding; and - Royal Gorge Quadrangle, downstream to Parkdale.

• Open Valleys with Floodplains: In open valleys, where the channel has a floodplain and the potential for mine-waste storage is high, the channel is adjustable and capable of shifting laterally. Locations where floodplains are present are identified below:

Buena Vista East Quadrangle, T14S, R78W, Sees. 33, 34 and T15S, R78W, Sees. 4,3; Salida West Quadrangle from T50N, R8E, Sec. 22 downstream; - Canon City Quadrangle; - Florence Quadrangle; Pierce Gulch Quadrangle; and - Hobson Quadrangle.

As described above, of the approximately 125 miles of channel in the Downstream Area, about 33 miles or 26 percent of the distance has a potential for mine-waste storage. These areas include:

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-11 • A 1.6-mile reach downstream of Buena Vista; • A 5-mile reach upstream of Salida; and • Downstream of Canon City into Pueblo Reservoir.

The potential for mine-waste storage is greatest in the lower downstream portion of the 125-mile reach, including Pueblo Reservoir. With the exception of approximately 1.6 miles of river downstream of Buena Vista and approximately 5 miles of river upstream of Salida, mine-wastes released from the 11- mile reach are most likely flushed through the canyon- and terrace-bound reaches of the river to the wide, alluvial reach downstream of Canon City and to Pueblo Reservoir.

The significant areas of potential sediment (and mine-waste) storage are as follows (Figure 6-4):

Buena Vista East Quadrangle (Figure 6-5): T14S, R78W, Sec. 33; T15S, R78W, Sees. 3, 4 (Champion SWA - Cogan Property).

• Salida West Quadrangle (Figure 6-6): T50N, R8E, parts of Sees. 22, 23, 26, 25, 36, 31, 32 (From Spiral Drive upstream for approximately 5 miles).

• Canon City Quadrangle (Figure 6-7): A narrow floodplain flanks the channel from Canon City to the east.

• Florence Quadrangle (Figure 6-8): A narrow floodplain flanks the channel through T19S, R69W, Sec. 9, 16, 15, 14. In Section 13, the floodplain widens significantly, and it continues to be wide across the Pierce Gulch and Hobson Quadrangles to the Pueblo Reservoir.

6.4 Surface Water

According to NRDA regulations (43 CFR 11), surface water, suspended sediments, and bed, bank, and shoreline sediments comprise the surface water natural resource. Although part of the surface water resource, instream sediments are discussed separately. To the extent possible, water quality data from the individual studies cited are included in the electronic database and are combined with the data from other sources (e.g., STORET, CDPHE, and other state and regional data sources) to assess the spatial attributes and temporal dynamics of the resource.

Summary statistics were calculated and are summarized in Tables 6-1 through 6-6 for dissolved and total metals to assess the spatial and temporal trends of metals in Arkansas River surface waters.

J:\010004\Task3- SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-12 These summary statistics are divided by metal, form of the metal, reach, and flow condition. Metal concentrations measured during Period 3 were used to assess recent conditions as well as to evaluate injury potential to surface waters due to exceedances of TVSs. Based on this assessment, the following trends emerged:

• When data from all time periods for a metal are considered, it appears that seasonal high flows are accompanied by higher concentrations of metals in Reaches 5 to 9 than those observed during low flows. When data from all time periods are considered, dissolved cadmium, copper, and zinc show a steady decline in concentration from upstream to downstream to Reach 8, followed by an increase in Reach 9. Dissolved lead decreases from Reach 5 to 6, then it gradually increases from Reach 6 to 9.

• In contrast, when only Period 3 (1992-present) data are considered, all high-flow mean concentrations show a steady decrease in concentration from Reaches 5 to 9.

• Based on the mean concentrations of metals, the frequency and magnitude of TVS exceedances for all metals generally declines in the Downstream Area reaches when compared to those exceedances observed in Reaches 1 to 4. No samples for any metal exceed their respective TVSs in Reach 9 upstream of Pueblo Reservoir during Period 3 (1992 to present) and, likewise, no exceedances occurred in the Reservoir after 1992. Thus, it appears that the combination of attenuation, dilution due to tributary inflows, increased hardness that increases TVSs, and treatment at the Yak Tunnel and LMDT have all positively affected the Upper Arkansas River.

6.4.1 Supporting Information

The U.S. Geological Survey conducted a water quality assessment of the Arkansas River Basin that described spatial and temporal variations in water quality during the period 1990-1993 (Ortiz et al. 1998). The data for this assessment are reported separately in Dash and Ortiz (1996). They collected water quality data between the LMDT and Pueblo Reservoir at 10 mainstem sites, 12 tributaries, and 2 mine drainage sites. Samples were analyzed for dissolved solids, major ions, trace elements, nutrients, and suspended sediments. Based on previous water quality data, they selected cadmium, copper, iron, lead, manganese, and zinc as the primary trace elements of concern. In addition, water samples collected five times at four sites were analyzed for arsenic, chromium, mercury, nickel, selenium, and silver. The investigators reported that drainage from abandoned mines and mine tailings was the primary cause of elevated trace element concentrations in the Upper Arkansas River Basin. They concluded that dissolved trace element concentrations in the upper basin generally decreased from Leadville to Portland. Following the completion of the water treatment facilities at the LMDT and Yak Tunnel, a statistically

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl .doc 6-13 significant decrease in concentrations of cadmium, copper, manganese, and zinc was observed at several downstream mainstem sites. Tributaries sampled did not provide significant metals loads to the Arkansas River. Water quality standards for trace elements were exceeded in several water samples, but the majority of exceedances occurred prior to water treatment. Other studies reviewed reported water quality data that generally supported the conclusion of Ortiz et al. (1998). They include Crouch et al. (1984), McCulley, Frick and Oilman Inc. (1990), Wetherbee et al. (1991), Clark and Lewis (1997), and Ruse et al. (2000).

Review of the available literature suggests the following:

• Cadmium, copper, iron, lead, manganese, and zinc have been identified as exceeding either acute or chronic aquatic life standards at one or more locations over the entire period of record (Dash and Ortiz 1996; Ortiz et al. 1998).

• The Leadville Mining District is the primary source of metals affecting water quality and sediments in the Downstream Area. While there are local sources contributing metals loads to tributaries of the Arkansas River, none of the tributaries are currently a significant source of metals to the mainstem (McCulley, Frick and Oilman Inc. 1990; Church et al. 1994; Kimball et al. 1995; Ortiz et al.1998; Church et al. 2000).

• The majority of aquatic life water quality standard exceedances occurred prior to water treatment at the LMDT and Yak tunnel (Dash and Ortiz 1996; Ortiz et al.1998).

• Partitioning of metals in the water column from the aqueous dissolved phase to particulate phase actively occurs, especially within the first 10-20 miles downstream of the 11-mile reach, thus decreasing the bioavailability of metals in the water column (McCulley, Frick and Oilman Inc. 1990; Kimball et al. 1995).

• During high flow, colloids are resuspended and transported downstream and contribute to the elevated dissolved metals concentrations observed during high flow and storm events. Colloidal-size particles pass through the filter size, 0.45 urn, used for dissolved metals samples, but they are not necessarily considered to be bioavailable (Kimball et al. 1995; Ortiz et all998).

• When compared to aquatic life standards, arsenic, chromium, mercury, nickel, and selenium do not occur in significant concentrations in the Downstream Area (Dash and Ortiz 1996; Ortiz et al. 1998).

Review of the surface water data compiled in the database for the four metals for Reaches 5 through 9 are shown below (Tables 6-1 through 6-3).

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-14 JLV^Q^ii^^

Given the small size of the reach, limited data are available. Available data were collected from 1975 to 1999 for all four metals from two stations. This represents all of the data available in the database for cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc regardless of the time period considered. Based on the mean dissolved metal concentration data for all Periods combined, metals in Reach 5 remain higher than in the downstream reaches, yet generally remained similar or decreased in concentration compared to upstream concentrations (measured in Reach 3).

During Period 3, mean concentrations of all dissolved metals were greater during high flow relative to low flow concentrations. Dissolved cadmium exceeded the TVSs only once during high flow, and dissolved copper exceeded the chronic TVS in this reach once during low flow. Lead exceeded the chronic TVS during high flow only, while zinc exceeded acute TVSs during both high and low flows. Compared to Reach 0 during Period 3, mean dissolved cadmium was lower, copper and lead were slightly elevated, and zinc was considerably higher in Reach 5 during both flow conditions.

Reach 6

Water quality data were abundant for Reach 6. Almost all the data available in the database for cadmium, copper, and lead were collected between 1986 and 2000. Zinc data were found as far back as 1968, extending to 2000. A small amount of data are available from 1968 to 1975 and the concentrations are variable, whereas the largest proportion of the data for zinc were collected between 1986 and 1999. While no clear trends are observable for zinc, the highest zinc concentrations were collected in 1968- 1969.

Across all time periods and flow conditions, dissolved cadmium, copper, and lead averaged less than concentrations measured in Reach 5, while zinc averaged slightly greater in Reach 6 relative to Reach 5.

During Period 3, dissolved concentrations of all four metals exceeded TVSs during both high and low flows. Copper and lead primarily exceeded the acute TVSs, while cadmium and zinc exceeded the acute TVSs during high and low flows. Compared to Reach 0 mean dissolved metals concentrations during Period 3, cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc were lower in Reach 6 during both flow conditions. Due to inflows from Lake Creek, hardness is reduced during both high and low flows relative to the

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currcntl.doc 6-15 higher hardness values observed in Reach 0 and other upstream reaches, which results in lower TVSs in Reach 6.

Reach 7

Across all time periods and flow conditions, data for cadmium, copper, and lead were collected primarily from 1986 to 2000, while for zinc the same time span applies with additional samples being collected 1968, 1969, and 1975. Considering all the data, mean dissolved cadmium, copper and lead were slightly higher in Reach 7 compared to Reach 6, while zinc was slightly lower.

During Period 3, dissolved concentrations of copper, lead, and zinc exceeded TVSs during both high and low flows on more than one occasion. Cadmium exceeded the TVSs only once during low flows. Copper exceeded the acute TVSs during both flow conditions, while lead only exceeded the chronic TVSs during both flow conditions. Zinc exceeded the acute TVSs during high and low flows.

Reach 8

For dissolved cadmium, data were collected from 1981 to 1998. For dissolved copper, lead, and zinc, data were collected from 1975 to 1998. Across all flow conditions and periods, average dissolved cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc were lower in Reach 8 than average concentrations in Reach 7.

During Period 3, dissolved concentrations of copper, lead, and zinc exceeded TVSs during high flows on more than one occasion, while only lead and zinc exceeded TVSs more than once during low flows. Copper exceeded the acute TVSs during high flow, but only exceeded the chronic TVS once during low flows. Lead exceeded the chronic TVS during both flow conditions. Zinc exceeded the acute TVSs during high and low flows.

Reach 9

For all metals, dissolved data were collected from 1979 to 1997. Across all flow conditions and periods, average dissolved metals concentrations in Reach 9 were higher than metal concentrations in Reach 8.

During Period 3, dissolved concentrations of cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc did not exceed TVSs during either high or low flows. Higher hardness values in Reach 9 (resulting in higher TVSs) and some lower metal concentrations, result in no exceedances.

J:\010004\Task3-SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-16 6.4.2 Summary of Injury Findings: Analysis of Exceedances of Table Value Standards (TVSs) during Period 3

• Surface water resources in Reach 5 are injured primarily due to concentrations of dissolved lead and zinc during high flows and zinc during low flows.

• The December 2000 CDPHE Status of Water Quality Report indicates that the Arkansas River from Lake Fork to Lake Creek is fully supporting its designated recreational and agricultural uses and partially supporting its aquatic life uses.

• Surface water resources in Reach 6 are injured due to concentrations of dissolved cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc during both high and low flow conditions.

• The December 2000 CDPHE Status of Water Quality Report indicates that the Arkansas River below Lake Creek is fully supporting its designated uses.

• Surface water resources in Reach 7 are injured due to concentrations of dissolved copper, lead, and zinc during both high and low flow conditions.

• Surface water resources in Reach 8 are injured due to concentrations of dissolved copper, lead, and zinc during high flows and lead and zinc during low flows.

• No surface water injury occurs in Reach 9 due to concentrations of cadmium, copper, lead, or zinc during either high or low flow conditions.

• The spatial extent of injury to surface water in the Downstream Area extends from Two- Bit Gulch to Canon City.

6.5 Instream Sediments

The evaluation of instream sediment information is relative to concentrations observed in the control area (Reach 0) as well as spatial trends with distance from the Leadville Mining District. Overall, instream sediments are not viewed to be a significant pathway for injury. The low potential for storage of instream sediments within Reaches 5, 6, 7, and 8 limits the potential for water quality effects and biological exposure. This is further supported by the general trend of decreasing metal concentrations with distance from sources and the good condition of the benthic macroinvertebrate communities.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-17 6.5.1 Supporting Information

The most comprehensive sediment study was a three phased study conducted by the USGS. This study documented California Gulch as a metal source to the Arkansas River from Leadville to Pueblo Reservoir. It further determined that the California Gulch site was the primary metal source to Arkansas River sediments.

Phase I of this study was initiated in July 1993 to examine the distribution of elements in sediments from the Arkansas River Basin (Church 1993). The objective of the study was to determine the origin and time-of-deposition of fluvial mine-waste deposits in the Arkansas River immediately downstream of the confluence with California Gulch. They sampled the Arkansas River and its major tributaries to evaluate the contribution of lead from each of the potential sources. Cores of river sediments were taken at selected sites along the Arkansas River to provide sedimentological and geochronological control. They concluded that the mine-wastes in the Arkansas River below California Gulch are predominantly from California Gulch. Studies of lead in cores taken from this same area show sediment intervals beneath the mine-waste deposits that pre-date mining activity in the Leadville area.

In phase II of the study, geochemical data were retrieved from numerous geologic studies conducted over the last several decades in order to prepare geochemical maps showing the distribution of copper, lead, and zinc in the upper Arkansas River Basin (Smith 1994). As a result of this work, they identified ten additional lead source areas in the Arkansas River Basin which exceed the crustal abundance of lead by 8-30 times. Potential source areas include historic mining districts and milling and industrial sites. Using these geochemical maps, they selected seventeen sample sites along the Arkansas River from Leadville to Pueblo Reservoir for geochemical and lead-isotopic analysis (Church et al. 1994). They concluded that greater than 90 percent of the lead and zinc load in Arkansas River sediments between Leadville and the Chalk Creek confluence are from California Gulch NPL site. Lead, zinc, copper, arsenic, and cadmium were elevated from Leadville to the Chalk Creek confluence compared to sediments upstream of California Gulch. Lead and zinc are contributed to the Arkansas River by Chalk Creek, but the total additional metal load is small. Zinc became elevated downstream of Salida, suggesting an additional zinc source. However, Church (personal communication) later suggested that because of the lower gradient in the river at this site, the suspended colloidal load partially settles out and is incorporated into the river bed sediments. Data collected by Kimball et al. (1995) supports this conclusion.

J:\010004\Task3-SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-18 In phase III of the study, tributaries to the Arkansas River were sampled to determine whether additional sources of metal released from historical mining activities elsewhere in the watershed contribute to the metals in streambed sediment in the mainstem of the Arkansas River. Whereas local anthropogenic sources were found in some of the tributaries, the measured chemical and lead-isotopic compositions determined at the mouths of these tributaries indicate that there are not substantial sources of metals from the tributaries that impact the streambed sediment in the Arkansas River (Church et al. 2000).

McCulley, Frick and Oilman, Inc. (1990) conducted a study in April 1989 of sediments and water to determine if trends in metal enrichment were consistent with loading from the Yak Tunnel/California Gulch mining area. They further evaluated the potential for metals to move between the water column r and sediments. They determined that cadmium, copper, and zinc remain elevated in sediments (compared to Arkansas River sediments from upstream of California Gulch) downstream to about Granite. Lead concentrations remained elevated down to about Brown's Canyon. They also noted elevated metals concentrations below Salida. Using sequential extractions of sediments and mass balance calculations, they determined that varying amounts of the aqueous trace metals discharged from California Gulch are partitioned from the liquid phase to the sediment phase, but that remobilization of trace metals from the sediment phase to the liquid phase was probably not significant.

Kimball et al. (1995) conducted studies in fall 1988 and spring 1989 to determine the effects of colloids on metal transport in the Arkansas River. They determined that iron colloids form in California Gulch and move downstream in suspension. While iron dominated the colloid composition, arsenic, cadmium, copper, manganese, lead, and zinc also occurred in the colloids. The colloidal load decreased by one half in the first 30 miles downstream from California Gulch due to aggregated colloids settling to the bed sediments. However, they determined that a substantial colloid load was transported through the entire study reach to Pueblo Reservoir, The dissolved metals were dominated by iron and zinc and the patterns of colloidal iron and zinc suggested that during low flow, dissolved and colloidal loads decrease downstream as metals partition to the colloidal fraction and the aggregated colloids settled to the stream. These colloids are resuspended during high flow at the same time that there is a flushing of metals with snowmelt runoff, creating the greatest metal loads of the year. This same flushing event could occur during thunderstorm runoff as was seen by Horowitz et al. (1990).

Kimball et al. (1995) suggest that some metals (cadmium, copper, iron, lead, and zinc) are remobilized as colloids into the aqueous phase during high flow and transported downstream as far as Pueblo Reservoir. This partitioning is also confirmed by CDOW water sampling reported by USFWS (1993) and is represented in the water quality data reported by McCulley, Frick and Oilman (1990). Ortiz

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currem 1 .doc 6-19 et al. (1998) reported differences in cadmium, copper, lead, manganese and zinc, which can reasonably be explained by partitioning of colloids between bed sediments and the aqueous phase.

6.5.2 Summary of Injury Findings to Instream Sediments

• Sediment metals data were compiled and found to be present for each of the three periods of interest. Period 1 and 2 data were only available for Reaches 6-10, while Period 3 data were available for all of the downstream reaches (Table 6-7).

• Between Periods 1 and 2 there is a substantial shift in metals concentrations. Period 1 data suggest relatively low concentrations of metals compared to upstream concentrations observed in Reach 0 during the same period as well as during Period 3.

• During Period 2, the shift in metals concentrations, particularly for Reaches 6-8 shows a sharp increase. For example, Period 1 mean sediment zinc concentrations of 103.2, 195.8, and 98.3 mg/Kg were observed in Reaches 6, 7, and 8 respectively. During Period 2 mean sediment zinc concentrations of 2,813.3, 1,302.5, and 994.2 mg/Kg were observed in Reaches 6, 7, and 8, respectively. This shift is most likely due to differences in sampling and analytical techniques.

• Elevated levels of zinc in sediments in the reaches described above are present during Period 3, but not at the levels observed during Period 2. At Reaches 6, 7, and 8, zinc concentrations in sediments were 981.1,469.8, and 459.5 mg/Kg, respectively during Period 3.

• During Period 3, the following observations were made for metals compared to those metals concentrations observed in Reach 0: cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc in sediment from Reach 5 are elevated over those concentrations found in Reach 0; copper, lead, and zinc in sediments from Reach 6 are elevated over those concentrations found in Reach 0, but are less than in Reach 5; zinc is the predominant metal in Reach 7 and 8 elevated over concentrations found in Reach 0, yet is lower than in each subsequent upstream reach; and by Reach 9 all mean metals concentrations are lower than concentrations observed in Reach 0.

• It is evident that the overall concentrations of cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc in sediments are declining, both temporally and spatially. This may be due to the importance of colloidal metal transport and deposition, which is largely a function of water quality (Kimball et al. 1995). Metals concentrations in surface waters were substantially decreased after 1992, due to the implementation of treatment at the LMDT and the Yak tunnel.

J:\010004\Task3-SCR\SCR_currentl.doc • 6-20 6.6 Groundwater

A query of all the available data in the database yielded a small amount of data for groundwater resources in the Downstream Area. Of the groundwater quality data found in the database, all were collected between 1970 and 2000 (or from Periods 1 and 3). There were no data available for period 2. There were no data available for Reach 5 or Reach 10. For Reaches 6, 7, 8, and 9 most data were collected from deep groundwater wells (40'-100') that supply communities or groups of houses. The following provides a brief summary of the data available for Reaches 6, 7, 8, and 9.

6.6.1 Supporting Information

Summary data discussed for the following reaches, along with detailed information on well location and type, can be found in Table 6-8.

Reach 6

The data for Reach 6 includes statistical information for total concentrations of cadmium, copper and lead. There was a total of 12 sampling locations from this reach from which data was retrieved. There were no exceedances of the MCLs for any of the metals discussed. All data were retrieved from deep groundwater wells.

Reach 7

The data for Reach 7 includes statistical information for all four metals of concern, with data for both total and dissolved concentrations for copper and lead. Cadmium data only included total concentration, while zinc data only included dissolved concentrations. There were a total of 2 sampling locations in this reach from which data was retrieved. There were no exceedances of the MCLs for any of the metals discussed. All data were retrieved from deep groundwater wells.

Reach 8

The data for Reach 8 includes statistical information for all four metals of concern, with data for both total and dissolved concentrations for cadmium copper and lead with only dissolved concentrations for zinc. There were a total of three sampling locations in this reach from which data was retrieved. There were no exceedances of the MCLs for any of the metals discussed. Data for this reach were

J:\Ol0004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-21 retrieved primarily from deep groundwater wells with the exception of some data being retrieved from wells of unknown depth or type.

Reach 9

The data for Reach 9 included statistical information for only copper, lead and zinc. Only dissolved concentrations were available for the three metals. All data was retrieved from three different sampling locations. There were no exceedances of the MCLs for the metals discussed. Data was retrieved from deep groundwater wells.

6.6.2 Summary of Injury Findings to Groundwater

Based on lack of injury to groundwater within the 11-mile reach and on confirming data for the Downstream Area, no injury to groundwater has occurred.

6.7 Floodplain Soils

Floodplain soils data (BLM 2000) provide a useful indicator of the impact of mine-wastes released from the 11-mile reach. Soil sampling in the control area (Reach 0) along with the 11-mile reach provide a basis for determining potential injury in the Downstream Area from mine-waste storage in the floodplain. Soils data currently available include total concentrations of cadmium, copper, lead and zinc at 18 separate locations between Two-Bit Gulch and Pueblo Reservoir.

6.7.1 Supporting Information

Limited soils data for the Downstream Area are available from BLM sampling in July 2000 (Figure 6-3). Soil samples were collected along 18 transects, with approximately 5 sites sampled along each transect. Soil samples were collected at multiple depths and depths varied with location. All samples were analyzed for lead, zinc, iron, and manganese. A subset of the samples were also analyzed for arsenic, cadmium, copper and silver. Samples were analyzed for total metals using XRF or a total digest procedure. There were no soil samples collected in Reach 5, two transects were sampled in Reach 6, one transect was sampled in Reach 7, nine transects were sampled in Reach 8, and six transects were sampled in Reach 9.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-22 Table 6-9 presents a summary of the BLM (2000) floodplain soils data by reach for lead and zinc. These concentrations are compared to floodplain soils in the control area (Reach 0). The only reach where zinc concentrations are high enough to indicate the presence of mine-waste or some other anthropogenic influence is in Reach 6. There were two sample sites (CCT1B and CCT1C) where zinc concentrations were in the range of 2,000 to 4,000 mg/Kg. These sample sites are at the confluence of Clear Creek and not an area believed to represent a significant potential for mine-waste storage from the 11-mile reach. No other metal concentrations were high enough in any of the downstream reaches to indicate the possible presence of mine-waste material.

Reach 5

There are no data available for floodplain soils along Reach 5. Some small.mine-waste deposits exist in Reach 5, but no data has been collected that characterizes the deposits with respect to surface area, depth, volume, and chemical properties.

Reaches 6-9

Soil chemistry data exists for floodplain soils along Reaches 6-9 (BLM 2000) (Table 6-9). This data includes total metal concentrations for lead and zinc for all sites sampled and cadmium and copper for a subset of these sites. There were approximately 17 transects where soils were sampled along these reaches.

6.7.2 Summary of Injury Findings to Soils

Although there are no floodplain soils data for Reach 5, field reconnaissance of this stretch of river confirm the presence of small deposits of mine-waste with low plant cover. It is assumed that soil metal concentrations and/or pH are affecting plant growth on these deposits, indicating injury to soils at locations where mine-waste deposits occur.

The elevated concentrations of zinc in floodplain soils at the confluence of Clear Creek (Reach 6) indicate the potential for injury in this location. The source of these metals may be from historical mining in the Clear Creek drainage. Total metal concentrations are potentially high enough to cause injury to soils at this location. However, this cannot be confirmed without further soil sampling and analysis.

J:\OI0004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentI.doc 6-23 Other than Reach 5 and two sample sites along Reach 6, there is no other evidence to indicate injury to floodplain soils in the remaining portions of Reach 6 and Reaches 7-9. Floodplain soils are not considered injured in most of Reach 6 and Reaches 7-9 because metal concentrations along these reaches are similar to Reach 0 and riparian vegetation does not show signs of metal toxicity.

6.8 Biological

Consistent with the findings for the 11-mile reach, the potential for mining-related injuries is greatest in aquatic organisms. Information presented in the following sections describes available information on fish, benthic macroinvertebrates, and two species of birds that depend upon macroinvertebrates as a food source, as well as considerations regarding vegetation and terrestrial wildlife.

6.8.1 Vegetation

Currently there is no quantitative vegetation data available for the Downstream Area. Large-scale vegetation mapping has been conducted but no sampling has been completed to describe plant cover, biomass, species composition, or metal tissue concentrations below the 11-mile reach.

6.8.1.1 Supporting Information

Information on vegetation in the Downstream Area is limited to field reconnaissance and large- scale habitat mapping. Inferences regarding injury are primarily based on an understanding of soil conditions within the 11-mile reach that cause injury to vegetation.

6.8.1.2 Summary of Injury Findings to Vegetation

Data are not available for vegetation cover, production or tissue metal concentrations along Reach 5. Field observations confirm that vegetation is healthy and shows no signs of injury that could be associated with elevated metal concentrations in floodplain soils. Mapping conducted by the Colorado Division of Wildlife also indicates that vegetation cover types are consistent with a floodplain setting for non-injured areas. However, plant growth has been observed to be limited in cover and production on

J:\Ol0004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-24 several small mine-waste deposits along Reach 5. This limited plant cover and production indicates injury to vegetation at the few small areas where mine-waste deposits occur in this reach.

Data are not available for vegetation cover, production or tissue metal concentrations along Reach 6-9. However, injury to vegetation in upstream areas is limited to mine-waste deposits. Field reconnaissance and geomorphologic analyses indicate a lack of mine-waste deposits along Reach 6-9; therefore, there is no basis to conclude that injury exists to vegetation growing on floodplain soils along these reaches. Field observations confirm that vegetation is healthy and shows no signs of injury that could be associated with elevated metal concentrations in floodplain soils. Mapping conducted by the Colorado Division of Wildlife also indicates that vegetation cover types are consistent with a floodplain setting for non-injured areas.

6.8.2 Benthic Macroinvertebrates

Benthic macroinvertebrate data provide a useful indicator of the impact from metals in Upper Arkansas River water. Extensive work conducted in the control area (Reach 0) along with the 11-mile reach, provide a basis for understanding the relationship between water and the condition of benthic macroinvertebrate communities. This understanding enhances the value of the existing studies for the Downstream Area in terms of characterizing injury.

6.8.2.1 Supporting Information

A number of studies have examined the relationship between the abundance of macroinvertebrates and heavy metal concentrations in the Upper Arkansas River Basin. Additional studies have investigated the impacts of flow regime and other habitat characteristics on the abundance of macroinvertebrates.

Clements et al. (2002) conducted a long-term (10-year) research program investigating the impact of heavy metals on benthic macroinvertebrate communities in the Downstream Area at station AR-8 (Reach 6) from 1989-1999. This assessment included: 1) quantitative measurements of benthic community composition along a 70 km reach of the upper Arkansas River between Climax and Buena Vista; 2) measurements of heavy metal concentrations in water and other physicochemical characteristics; and 3) measurement of heavy metal concentrations in invertebrates. In addition, limited benthic

J:\Ol0004\Task3-SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-25 . macroinvertebrate data are available from several sampling occasions at station AR-7 in the upper section of Reach 6 at Granite.

Total macroinvertebrate abundance at station AR-8 in Reach 6 of the Downstream Area varied between 200 and 2000 individuals per 0.1 m2 and was generally greater than in Reach 0 (Figure 2-15). Total species richness ranged from 11 to 26.6 species per sample and was similar to Reach 0 (Figure 2- 18). Most other measures of benthic community composition, including abundance of metal-sensitive heptageniid mayflies, were either similar to or greater at station AR-8 compared to Reach 0. The only exception to this pattern was for species richness of mayflies, which did not recover downstream from California Gulch (Figure 2-18).

Temporal variation in benthic community composition was compared to changes in water quality over a ten-year period in order to assess the influence of improvements in water quality below LMDT and California Gulch. Metal concentrations at station AR-8 (Reach 6) were seasonally variable, with the highest concentrations measured in spring (Figure 6-13). Total zinc concentrations at this station were also significantly lower after remediation of California Gulch and LMDT (Figure 6-10). Abundance of dominant macroinvertebrate groups showed little seasonal or long- term variation (Figure 6-14). The only exception was total mayfly abundance and stonefly abundance, which gradually increased after 1995. The increase in abundance of mayflies was primarily a result of a steady increase in the number of metal-sensitive heptageniids (Figure 6-9), which were significantly greater after remediation in 1992 (Figure 6-10). The most consistent pattern in measures of species richness was a decrease in the seasonal variability in the later sampling periods (Figure 6-11).

Some evidence of recovery was also observed in the upper section of Reach 6 at Granite (stations AR-7). Prior to treatment of LMDT and California Gulch, benthic communities at AR-7 were comprised primarily of caddisflies and chironomids (Figure 6-15). Although these metal-tolerant groups dominated benthic communities after 1993, abundance of mayflies and stoneflies also increased. In particular, abundance of baetid mayflies increased by approximately 3 times after 1993 and approached densities observed in Reach 0. While density of heptageniid mayflies also increased during this period, these metal-sensitive organisms were much less abundant than in Reach 0 or in the lower section of Reach 6 (Buena Vista). Similar patterns in recovery were observed for measures of species richness (Figure 6-16). Total species richness and richness of most macroinvertebrate groups increased after treatment of LMDT and California Gulch. However, these values were significantly lower than those observed in Reach 0.

Exposure of benthic macroinvertebrates to heavy metals in the Downstream Area between 1990 and 1999 was assessed by measuring concentrations of zinc in the caddisfly Arctopsyche grandis J:\010004\Task3-SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-26 (Trichoptera: Hydropsychidae). Concentrations of zinc in Arctopsyche collected from Reach 6 (Buena Vista) generally declined over time (Figure 6-12). The only exception to this pattern was a large, unexplained peak in metal levels during spring 1999.

Statistical analyses of metal levels in Arctopsyche among all reaches before (1990-1992) and after (1993-2000) remediation of LMDT and California Gulch show highly significant spatial and temporal variation (Figure 6-17). Metal levels in caddisflies were significantly elevated in Reach 1 and declined downstream. However, metal concentrations at the two stations in Reach 6 (AR-7 and AR-8) were significantly greater than in Reach 0. In general, metal levels in caddisflies declined after 1992.

Kiffney and Clements (1993) carried out a one-year study to determine the extent of metal contamination (cadmium, copper, and zinc) in a benthic community from the Arkansas River. Elevated levels of metals in benthic organisms paralleled elevated concentrations of metals in the water. Levels of heavy metals in most dominant species of benthic macroinvertebrates were generally lower in Reach 6 compared to the 11-mile reach. For most species and most metals, concentrations in the Downstream Area were similar to those measured in Reach 0. The concentration of metals in aquatic macroinvertebrates was a better indicator of metal bioavailabiliry in the Arkansas River than was the concentration of metals in the water.

Data collected by the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service in October of 1995 showed that total abundance of benthic macroinvertebrates at all stations ranged from 176-1,209 individuals per Surber sample. Benthic communities at the six upstream stations (above Balltown, Granite Bridge, Fisherman's Bridge, Highway 291 Bridge, and Stockyard Bridge) were dominated by caddisflies (primarily Brachycentridae and Hydropsychidae) and dipterans (primarily chironomids), which accounted for greater than 90 percent of total macroinvertebrate abundance. Mayfly and stonefly abundances were generally quite low at these upstream stations. In particular, heptageniid mayflies, organisms known to be sensitive to contaminants, were absent or greatly reduced at these upstream sites. There was a gradual shift in benthic community composition at the three furthest downstream stations (Valley Bridge, Lone Pine, Flood Plain), reflecting reduced abundance of caddisflies and increased abundance of mayflies. Stoneflies and mayflies at the three downstream stations accounted for 33-50 percent of total macroinvertebrate abundance. Mayfly assemblages at these downstream stations were dominated by Heptageniidae and Baetidae. The spatial patterns in abundance of dominant groups from upstream to downstream were similar to those reported by Clements et al. 2002 for Reach 6 (stations AR-7 at Granite and AR-8 in Buena Vista) and suggest that benthic communities were impacted by metals in 1995. The more recent data indicate that benthic communities are injured in the upper section of Reach 6, but that recovery has occurred in the lower section at Buena Vista.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-27 In 1984-1985, Ruse et al. (2000a; 2000b) found that metal-tolerant species were common within the 11-mile reach. However, overall species composition at a larger spatial scale (Climax to Pueblo) was primarily influenced by variables related to the longitudinal gradient of the river (distance downstream, elevation, latitude, temperatun nd caddisflies did not increase from upstream to dow / attributed the lack of a downstream increase in specie n\ \Jk_ ^ Dilation, and temperature. The results of this study are es ,/\J^n^ 259km). However, patterns observed at any partic r\SX8Is ;ause these analyses were based on collections of exuviai Ri «a R>£-«XQ eral days after emergence. As a consequence, organisms < .—> ,. _^-^M~--ty^axs-«. e tnat emerged from i<^C§S§3SS23c;;&£2es*ssSfefe_- distant upstream locations.

! Nelson and Roline (19 macroinvertebrate community composition and fl ti and downstream from the confluence with Lake Creek. Results of an extensive literature review showed that most benthic macroinvertebrates are adapted to highly variable flow regimes and can tolerate a wide range of discharge. Results of field studies showed that flow augmentation as a result of trans-mountain diversions have increased stream discharge below Lake Creek. Although subtle differences in benthic communities between upstream and downstream sites were detected, most taxa were collected from both locations. However, these investigators reported that the distribution of one dominant species of caddisfly (Brachycentrus occidentalis) was closely related to streamflow. Because Brachycentrus is a major component of the diet of brown trout in the Arkansas River (Winters 1988), impacts of flow variation on this species may have significant consequences for brown trout growth and condition.

There is a limited amount of lexicological data available for the Downstream Area, most of which has been collected from the upper sections of the Arkansas River (e.g., Lake Creek to Buena Vista). Single species toxicity tests conducted with cladocerans (Ceriodaphnia dubia) and fathead minnows (Pimephales promelus) in 1991 showed some acute effects (for fathead minnows) and chronic effects of water collected from station AR-8 (Reach 6) in Buena Vista (Figure 2-36). In contrast, experiments conducted by U.S. EPA between 1991-1993 showed little acute toxicity of Arkansas River water (Table 2-21).

Frugis (1995) compared effects of heavy metals on chironomids exposed to sediments collected from a reference site (Cache la Poudre River) and station AR-8 in Buena Vista. Percent mortality of chironomids exposed to sediment from AR-8 (40 percent) was higher than control mortality (24.2

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-28 In 1984-1985, Ruse et al. (2000a; 2000b) found that metal-tolerant species were common within the 11-mile reach. However, overall species composition at a larger spatial scale (Climax to Pueblo) was primarily influenced by variables related to the longitudinal gradient of the river (distance downstream, elevation, latitude, temperature). Species richness of chironomids, stoneflies, and caddisflies did not increase from upstream to downstream as predicted for Colorado streams. They attributed the lack of a downstream increase in species richness to the effects of heavy metals, flow regulation, and temperature. The results of this study are especially useful because of the large spatial scale (259 km). However, patterns observed at any particular location should be interpreted cautiously because these analyses were based on collections of exuviae, which may remain on the water surface for several days after emergence. As a consequence, organisms collected at any particular site may represent those that emerged from distant upstream locations.

Nelson and Roline (1996) investigated the relationship between benthic macroinvertebrate community composition and flow characteristics in the Arkansas River upstream and downstream from the confluence with Lake Creek. Results of an extensive literature review showed that most benthic macroinvertebrates are adapted to highly variable flow regimes and can tolerate a wide range of discharge. Results of field studies showed that flow augmentation as a result of trans-mountain diversions have increased stream discharge below Lake Creek. Although subtle differences in benthic communities between upstream and downstream sites were detected, most taxa were collected from both locations. However, these investigators reported that the distribution of one dominant species of caddisfly (Brachycentrus occidentalis) was closely related to streamflow. Because Brachycentrus is a major component of the diet of brown trout in the Arkansas River (Winters 1988), impacts of flow variation on this species may have significant consequences for brown trout growth and condition.

There is a limited amount of toxicological data available for the Downstream Area, most of which has been collected from the upper sections of the Arkansas River (e.g., Lake Creek to Buena Vista). Single species toxicity tests conducted with cladocerans (Ceriodaphnia dubid) and fathead minnows (Pimephales promelus) in 1991 showed some acute effects (for fathead minnows) and chronic effects of water collected from station AR-8 (Reach 6) in Buena Vista (Figure 2-36). In contrast, experiments conducted by U.S. EPA between 1991-1993 showed little acute toxicity of Arkansas River water (Table 2-21).

Frugis (1995) compared effects of heavy metals on chironomids exposed to sediments collected from a reference site (Cache la Poudre River) and station AR-8 in Buena Vista. Percent mortality of chironomids exposed to sediment from AR-8 (40 percent) was higher than control mortality (24.2

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-28 percent); however, this difference was not statistically significant. There was also no significant effect of metals in sediment on growth of chironomids.

Figure 2-33 shows results of a laboratory experiment in which chironomids (Chironomus tentans) were exposed to sediments collected from Reach 6. Despite the fact that metal concentrations in sediments from Reach 6 were similar to those in Reach 0, concentrations of cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc in chironomids exposed to these sediments were generally higher in the Downstream Area. These results indicate that physicochemical factors other than bulk metal concentrations (e.g., grain size, percent organic carbon) determined metal bioavailability in Reach 6.

6.8.2.2 Summary of Injury Findings to Benthic Macroinvertebrates

Available literature indicate the following regarding injury to benthic macroinvertebrates:

• Cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc concentrations in invertebrates have decreased in Reach 6 during the period 1995-1998, and concentrations decrease from upstream to downstream (Table 6-10) (Archuleta et al. 2000).

• Lead concentrations in invertebrates remained elevated in Reach 5 compared to concentrations in Reach 0 (Table 6-10, Table 2-27) (Archuleta et al. 2000).

• Total macroinvertebrate abundance in Reach 6 (Arkansas River at Granite) in the Downstream Area varied between 200 and 900 individuals per 0.1 m2 and was similar to values observed in Reach 0. However, unlike Reach 0 benthic communities were dominated by caddisflies and chironomids (Clements, unpublished data).

• Total macroinvertebrate abundance at station AR-8 in the lower section of Reach 6 (Arkansas River at Buena Vista) in the Downstream Area varied between 200 and 2000 individuals per 0.1 m2 and was generally greater than in Reach 0 (Figure 2-15) (CDOW 1998).

• There was a gradual increase in abundance of mayflies after 1995 at both downstream stations. In the downstream section of Reach 6 (Buena Vista) this was primarily a result of a steady increase in the number of metal-sensitive heptageniids (Figure 6-9), which were significantly greater after water treatment began upstream in 1992 (Figure 6-10) (Clements et al. 2002). In contrast, mayflies in the upstream section of Reach 6 (near Granite) were dominated by baetids. Although heptageniids increased in the upstream section of Reach 6 after remediation, abundance of these metal-sensitive species was relatively low compared to Reach 0 (Clements, unpublished data).

J:\OI0004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-29 • Measures of species richness exhibited less seasonal variability in the later sampling periods (Figure 6-11) (Clements et al. 2002).

• Concentrations of zinc in Arctopsyche collected from Reach 6 generally declined over time and approached levels measured in organisms collected from Reach 0 (Figure 6-12) (Clements et al. 2002).

• Heptageniid mayflies, organisms known to be sensitive to contaminants, were absent or greatly reduced at six upstream site stations in Reaches 5, 6 and 7(above Balltown, Granite Bridge, Fisherman's Bridge, Highway 291 Bridge, and Stockyard Bridge) (USFWS 1995).

• Mayfly assemblages at three downstream stations in Reach 8 (Valley Bridge, Lone Pine, Flood Plain) were dominated by Heptageniidae and Baetidae (USFWS 1995).

• Levels of heavy metals in most dominant species of benthic macroinvertebrates were generally lower in Reach 6 (Buena Vista) compared to the 11-mile reach (Kiffney and Clements 1993).

• Species richness of chironomids, stoneflies, and caddisflies did not increase from upstream to downstream (i.e., from Tennessee Creek near the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel downstream to Pueblo Reservoir) as predicted for Colorado streams. This lack of a downstream increase in species richness may be attributable to the effects of heavy metals, flow regulation, or temperature (Ruse et al. 2000a; 2000b).

• Most benthic macroinvertebrates are adapted to highly variable flow regimes and can tolerate a wide range of discharge. However, the distribution of one dominant species of caddisfly (Brachycentrus occidentalis) was negatively affected by flow regulation.

Benthic macro invertebrate data are lacking from Reach 5. However, because water quality in Reach 5 is similar to that observed in Reach 3 (where injury was observed) and because metal levels in Reach 5 exceed site-specific concentrations known to be toxic to metal-sensitive species, it is likely that benthic macroinvertebrates are injured in Reach 5.

Analysis of community structure for benthic macroinvertebrates collected at stations AR-7 (Granite) and AR-8 (Buena Vista) in Reach 6 shows significant improvement in species richness, diversity and abundance of some metal-sensitive species, hi particular, abundance of Heptageniidae at station AR-8 in the lower section of Reach 6 increased 2-3 times since remediation of LMDT and California Gulch was initiated in 1992. Abundance of these organisms after 1996 was similar to that observed in Reach 0. Limited recovery of these metal-sensitive species was observed in the upper section

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-30 of Reach 6. Metal concentrations in the caddisfly Arctopsyche grandis collected from Reach 6 have decreased since 1994 and are similar to those values measured in Reach 0. The only exception to this pattern is an unexplained spike in zinc concentration in 1999. Zinc levels in periphyton measured at the downstream portion of Reach 6 (1,031-1,273 p.g/g) in 1995 and 1996 were also within the range of values observed in Reach 0 (409-4,200 |o.g/g). We conclude that there is no injury to benthic macroinvertebrates in Reach 6 near Buena Vista.

Despite improvements in water quality and macroinvertebrate communities over time, data collected from the upper section of Reach 6 near Granite suggest injury to benthic organisms. Abundance of metal-sensitive mayflies and species richness of mayflies and stoneflies are significantly lower at station AR-7 than in Reach 0. Based on a comparison of the upper and lower sections of Reach 6, we conclude that recovery of benthic macroinvertebrates occurs somewhere between Granite and Buena Vista.

Few data are available from Reaches 7 and 8 of the Arkansas River, However, microcosm experiments conducted in 1998 showed that exposure of benthic communities to a mixture of cadmium, copper, and zinc at concentrations similar to those measured at Reaches 7 and 8 had no effect on community composition, species richness of mayflies, or abundance of metal-sensitive species. Quantitative collections of benthic macroinvertebrates by the USFWS showed no spatial trends that could be related to heavy metals in Reaches 7 and 8, as well as further downstream. Based on these results, we conclude that there is no injury to benthic macroinvertebrates from heavy metals in Reaches 7 and 8. Furthermore, the dramatic recovery of benthic macroinvertebrates observed in Reach 6 (Buena Vista) following remediation of upstream metal sources suggests that injury to benthic macroinvertebrates below Reach 5 is unlikely.

6.8.3 Fish

The Downstream Area of the Arkansas River supports a naturally reproducing brown trout population and a growing rainbow trout population, which is supported by stocking (CDOW 1998). Neither brown nor rainbow trout are native to the Arkansas River Basin, but brown trout have been the primary fishery management focus for the CDOW. Other fish species present in the Arkansas River include Snake River cutthroat trout, brook trout, white suckers, and longnose suckers. Fishery related data currently available include population data based on electrofishing surveys, and limited laboratory toxicity testing.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-31 6.8.3.1 Supporting Information

The CDOW has reported results of their population sampling efforts at various sampling stations since 1981. These data include number of each species captured and lengths and weights for each fish captured. Sampling stations have been located from just upstream of Granite to downstream at Coaldale. However, not every station has been sampled every year and some stations are sampled during spring while others are sampled during fall. The preferred approach to evaluating fish population data or natural resource injury is to compare total abundance, biomass, and length frequency distributions at downstream locations to a reference location. However, because the Arkansas River changes both physically and chemically from the bottom of the 11-mile reach to Pueblo Reservoir, it is difficult to compare populations upstream to those downstream over the 125-mile stretch. In addition, different sampling techniques were used upstream (backpack shocking) and downstream (boat shocking). Therefore, evaluation of temporal trends at each sampling station where sufficient data exists is presented. The most continuous and extensive data set is available for the Wellsville station, which begins at Wellsville and extends upstream to the Stockyard Bridge just below Salida. With the exception of 1987 and 1989, this location has been sampled yearly from 1981 to the present, representing the most continuous and extensive data set available (CDOW 1999). Additional survey sites include: above Granite, Tezak, Loma Linda, Coaldale, and Big Bend.

Historically, there was an absence of large brown trout in the Downstream Area, which was attributed to a variety of factors including metal toxicity, post spawning conditions, and the lack of forage fish (Nehring 1986). Winters (1988) conducted a detailed investigation of brown trout feeding habits, growth and condition at a single site approximately 30 km downstream from Salida. He reported that brown trout fry feed extensively on small, drifting invertebrates (especially Baetis), followed by a switch to caddisflies in older age classes. He characterized the general condition of brown trout in the Arkansas River as poor. The high rate of mortality observed in older fish and the absence of+4 age class in the Arkansas River was attributed to poor or unreliable food quality and the lack of forage fish.

More recently, Policky (1998) reported that brown and rainbow trout are living to an approximate age of 7 in the Downstream Area. Restrictive regulations (e.g., flies and lures only, 2 fish > 14 inches) and anglers practicing catch and release has maximized the brown trout population to carrying capacity of the habitat; therefore, some fish in the Wellsville area are in poor condition.

Based on Instream Flow Incremental Methodology analysis (BLM 2000), when optimum flows are reached at the Wellsville gage they will consistently protect habitat for all life stages and species of

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_current 1 .doc 6-32 trout from Leadville to Canon City. Fish habitat has an optimum value at a certain velocity and depth. Trout habitat is optimized from 250 - 450 cfs (at Wellsville gage) throughout the year. Useable habitat rapidly decreases as flows exceed 550 cfs (BLM 2000), which frequently produce unfavorable habitat conditions for trout. In addition, macroinvertebrate densities are also influenced by high flows - optimum velocity values are exceeded above 500 cfs.

On 18 and 19 August 1988, a large fish kill occurred in the Arkansas River following water releases from Clear Creek Reservoir that had been treated with rotenone on 9 August 1988. Colorado Division of Wildlife personnel were treating the reservoir with rotenone to eliminate an over-population of suckers. The fish kill was estimated to have eliminated 100 percent of the fish community for 20 miles downstream and have significant effects for another 15 miles downstream (USFWS 1988). According to CDOW reports, brown trout recovered within 5 years and rotenone is not considered a limiting factor for downstream populations.

6.8.3.2 Summary of Injury Findings to Brown Trout

The following information is related to fish population data collected at the Wellsville station:

• Between 1982 and 1999, the number offish per acre at the Wellsville station has remained at about 200 fish/acre (based on two-sample T-Test a = 0.05 using data from CDOW 1999).

• There is no significant difference in the average number offish per acre and average pounds per acre at the Wellsville station from 1992-1999 compared to 1981-1991 (based on two-sample T-Test a = 0.05 using data from CDOW 1999).

• There is no significant difference in the average number offish per acre greater than 14 inches at the Wellsville station during the period 1992-1998 compared to 1981-1991 (based on two-sample T-Test a = 0.05 using data from CDOW 1999).

• Adult brown trout in the Wellsville area are in poor condition, probably due to overcrowding and a lack of sizable forage (Krieger 2000; Policky et al. 2000; Winters 1988).

Brown trout data from Reach 5 are lacking. However, because water quality in Reach 5 was similar to that measured in Reach 3 (where injury was observed), it is concluded that there is injury to brown trout in this downstream reach.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-33 Metal concentrations decrease significantly downstream from Lake Creek, and mean values approach the regulatory threshold levels in Reach 6 and are consistent with concentrations measured in the control reach (Reach 0). Significant reduction in abundance (71 percent) and biomass (24 percent) of brown trout was observed in the upper section of Reach 6 (Granite) compared to Reach 0. Inspection of length frequency distributions of brown trout also showed relatively poor recruitment in Reach 6, with few juvenile fish present. The brown trout population in Reach 6 was characterized by reduced overall abundance but somewhat larger individuals compared to the reference reach.

Because of natural and anthropogenic changes in physical characteristics of the Arkansas River, particularly flow alterations associated with discharge from Lake Creek, it is possible that flow alterations immediately downstream from Lake Creek impact fish populations. However, there are no quantitative data showing direct effects of these flow modifications on brown trout. Although metals concentrations occasionally exceeded the TVSs downstream from Reach 6, there is no indication of injury to brown trout.

6.8.4 Terrestrial Wildlife

Information directly describing the potential for injury to terrestrial wildlife is not available for the Downstream Area. Any assessment for the potential for injury must be based upon a comparison to the 11-mile reach.

6.8.4.1 Supporting Information

Information describing the presence or absence of injury to terrestrial wildlife for the 11-mile reach is limited to small mammals. This information indicates that small mammals living in and around discrete deposits of mine waste may have exposure to elevated metals concentrations resulting in injury. Data for large mammals were not available, however, building upon the information available for small mammals, an exposure analysis for large mammals was conducted. As for small mammals, the potential for injury to large mammals is also linked to exposure in and around discrete floodplain deposits of mine waste.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-34 6.8.4.2 Summary of Injury Findings to Terrestrial Wildlife

As mine-waste deposits are limited to a few small areas within the floodplain of Reach 5, the potential for injury to terrestrial wildlife is limited to small mammals residing in those areas. This is further supported by the fact that for most of the Downstream Area, water quality and floodplain soils metals concentrations are similar to Reach 0.

Reach 5

Due to the lack of small mammal data for Reach 5, it is not known if there is injury to this resource. Characterization of the metals concentrations in Reach 5 fluvial deposits, floodplain soils, vegetation, and terrestrial invertebrates would provide data to evaluate potential injury to small mammals.

Reaches 6-9

There are no small mammal data for Reaches 6-9. Because there are no known fluvial mine- waste deposits in Reaches 6-9 and because floodplain soils concentrations are relatively low, the potential for injury to terrestrial wildlife is not present.

6.8.5 Birds

Information on swallows and dippers from recent USFWS & USGS studies provide a basis for evaluating injury. These species are exposed due to their reliance on various life stages of benthic macroinvertebrates as a food source. Data from Reach 0 and the 11-mile reach enhance the understanding of data from the Downstream Area.

6.8.5.1 Supporting Information

The USFWS sampled blood and livers from American dippers at 12 sites in the Downstream area (Reaches 5-8) between 1995 and 1998 (Archuleta et al. 2000). Blood and liver samples were analyzed for metals and blood was also analyzed for ALAD. In addition, aquatic invertebrates (dipper food items) were collected from 19 sites and analyzed for metals. Aquatic invertebrate samples were generally comprised of one composite sample per nest site per year with the exception of 1998 when a composite sample was collected in April and a second composite sample collected in October from most sites. The

J:\OI0004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_cunrcntl.doc 6-35 USGS sampled blood and liver from tree swallows at 4 locations (Reaches 6-9) in the Downstream Area between 1997 and 1998 (Custer et al. 2003 In Press). Tree swallow liver samples were analyzed for metals concentrations and blood was analyzed for ALAD activity. Swallow stomach contents were analyzed for metals and food boli were evaluated to determine diet composition. These are the only known bird studies that attempt to evaluate metals exposure and effects on migratory birds in the Downstream Area.

For all Downstream Reaches, dipper blood metal concentrations were similar to concentrations from Reach 0 with the exception of lead in Reach 5. Blood lead in Reach 5 was approximately two times the concentration in Reach 0 (Table 6-12). ALAD in dipper samples was reduced in Reaches 5-7 compared to Reach 0 by 17 percent, 28 percent, and 14 percent respectively. Compared to the Study Reference, ALAD was reduced by 49 percent, 56 percent, 48 percent, and 25 percent in Reaches 5-8 respectively (Table 6-13).

In dipper liver samples, copper concentrations were higher in Reaches 5-7 compared to Reach 0, but not abnormally high. Lead liver concentrations were significantly higher in Reaches 5 and 6 compared to Reach 0. However, none of the metals in any of the Downstream reaches exceeded literature-based benchmarks.

Average lead and zinc concentrations in aquatic invertebrate samples were much higher in Reaches 5 and 6 compared to Reach 0 (Table 6-10). In samples collected between 1995-1998, the highest average concentrations for each metal of concern occurred in Reach 6 in 1995. Generally, all metal concentrations decreased from 1995 to 1998 in all reaches. Averaged over all years, Reaches 5 and 6 had the highest average concentrations for all metals of concern. The most recent samples collected in 1998, show that lead in Reaches 7 and 8 and zinc in Reaches 5-8 exceed the dietary benchmark for birds (Tables 6-10 and 6-11).

In swallow liver samples, cadmium was at least two times higher in Reaches 6-8 compared to Reach 0. Copper and zinc concentrations for all reaches were similar to Reach 0 and lower than the study reference. Lead concentrations in Reach 8 were significantly higher than the other Reaches and Reach 0 (Table 6-15). None of the metals in any of the Downstream reaches exceeded literature-based benchmarks.

Compared to the Study Reference, ALAD was suppressed in tree swallows by 22 percent, 1 percent, and 35 percent respectively in Reaches 6-8 respectively. None of the Downstream reaches had suppressed ALAD compared to Reach 0.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-36 Emergent adult aquatic invertebrates (swallow food items) had metal concentrations which were generally 2-3 times lower than nymph stage aquatic invertebrates for all metals of concern and only zinc exceeded the dietary threshold for birds (Custer et al. 2003 In Press).

6.8.5.2 Summary of Injury Findings to Birds

Findings of these studies and those of other investigators, related to the potential for injury, are presented below:

• Injury is occurring to American dippers from lead exposure in Reaches 5 & 6 (between Granite and Balltown). Levels of d-aminolevulinic acid dehydratase (ALAD) activity are suppressed in American dippers by approximately 50 percent compared to the reference area (Archuleta et al. 2000).

• At all other downstream sites, ALAD activity is suppressed in American dippers (25-48 percent compared to a reference area) indicating the birds are exposed to lead, but injury is not occurring (Archuleta et al. 2000).

• For all downstream sites, ALAD activity is suppressed in tree swallows (1-35 percent compared to reference area), indicating the birds are exposed to lead, but injury is not occurring (Custer et al. 2003 In Press).

• Migratory birds are exposed to metals (cadmium, lead, zinc) in the Downstream Area, but reported levels are typically below threshold values associated with lethal and sublethal (e.g., behavioral and/or physiological) effects (Archuleta et al. 2000; Custer et al. 2003 In Press).

Reaches 5-6

• Based on greater than 50 percent ALAD suppression, there is injury to American dippers when compared to Reach 0 (49 percent suppression for Reach 5 and 56 percent for Reach 6).

• There is no injury to tree swallows based on less than 50 percent ALAD suppression compared to Reach 0 (28 percent for Reach 6).

• Metal concentrations in liver, blood, and eggs of birds were all below benchmark values.

J:\010004\Task3 -SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-37 No reproductive impairment (data for tree swallows only).

Reaches 7-8

There is no injury to American dippers based on less than 50 percent ALAD suppression compared to Reach 0 (48 percent for Reach 7 and 25 percent for Reach 8).

There is no injury to tree swallows based on less than 50 percent ALAD suppression compared to Reach 0 (1 percent for Reach 7).

Metal concentrations in liver, blood, and eggs of birds were all below benchmark values.

No reproductive impairment (data for tree swallows only).

Reach 9

No data are available for migratory birds. However, downstream water and sediment quality continue to improve and metal concentrations in invertebrates are lower than Reach 0 (Table 6-11). Injury to migratory birds is not expected in Reach 9.

6.9 Pueblo Reservoir (Reach 10)

Pueblo Reservoir is discussed separately because of the many differences in physical setting from other upstream reaches. Overall, there are few metals data for Pueblo Reservoir relative to the amount of data collected from upstream sites. In the database, water quality data were found extending from about the mid 1980s to early in 1990. Most studies reviewed, investigated water and sediment quality, and a few of those included data on biota. None of the studies reviewed were specifically designed to determine if injuries to natural resources occur at Pueblo Reservoir. Assessment of injury over all time periods is limited by the paucity of data for all natural resource categories (per NRDA regulations) for Pueblo Reservoir. For example, the most recent water quality data are from 1989, and most biological data are from a reconnaissance study investigating irrigation drainage in 1988. However, limited data on the fundamental resources of surface water and sediments coupled with upstream data provide the basis for a reasonable assessment of the potential for injury.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentI.doc 6-38 6.9.1 Supporting Information

Surface Water

Herrmann and Mahan (1977) studied the concentration changes in inorganic chemicals pre- (1972-1974) and post- (1974-1976) impoundment of Arkansas River at Pueblo Reservoir. Dissolved and suspended levels of all inorganic constituents (Ag, Cu, Fe, Mn, Zn, Co, Pb, Cd, Li, Na, K, Ni, Mg, Ca, Hg) averaged less than recommended or maximum permissible limits for beneficial uses of reservoir water during this study. Seasonal, surface, and spatial trends were also observed for most constituents. Generally, constituents in water samples had higher winter concentrations and lower summer concentrations associated with high runoff. Based on spatial and surface trends, evaporation has somewhat of a concentrating effect on dissolved solids, and certain metals (iron, manganese, zinc and possibly copper, cadmium, and lead) appeared to be precipitating into the sediments. Although iron, manganese, and zinc did not follow the general trends, they showed depth profiles (samples taken at 3-5m intervals from the surface to the bottom) with higher dissolved concentrations in water near the bottom that indicate an exchange is taking place between the reservoir water and sediments. Additionally, dissolved oxygen tended to decrease with depth. Zinc concentrations were highly variable (range: 1- 38 p.g/1) and may be related to the concentration of suspended matter carried into the reservoir by the Arkansas River (Herrmann and Mahan 1977).

Mueller et al. (1991) conducted a reconnaissance investigation of water quality, sediment, and biota associated with irrigation drainage in the middle Arkansas River Basin, which included a sample site at Pueblo Reservoir in the spring and fall of 1988. Water quality data show the same seasonal trend as Herrmann and Mahan (1977) observed, although zinc concentrations were not as variable.

McNight et al. (1991) examined the chemical characteristics of particulate organic carbon in water from one site in Pueblo Reservoir. Most major elements had comparable dissolved and colloid concentrations indicating they are primarily dissolved components. However, iron, manganese, and zinc had significantly greater concentrations in the organic colloid fraction indicating they are associated with that fraction in some way. Concentration ratios of the filtrate to the organic colloid for iron, manganese, and zinc exceed 500, 99, and 21 respectively (McNight et al. 1991), also indicating association with the organic colloid fraction. Based on this and other studies (e.g., Kimball et al. 1989), organic colloids may be important in the downstream transport of trace elements.

The recommended aquatic life criterion for total-recoverable iron (1,000 (j.g/1) (U.S. EPA 1986) near the reservoir bottom was exceeded in 12 samples during 1986-1989 (Lewis and Edelmann 1994). J:\010004\Task3 -SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-39 All samples that exceeded water quality standards for iron were collected from June through September, and the authors attributed the iron concentrations to large concentrations of sediment and iron in the Arkansas River inflow. The sampling site where 11 exceedances were observed is located in a well- oxygenated area of the reservoir and it is unlikely that iron released from sediments contributed to the elevated iron concentrations (Lewis and Edelmann 1994).

The public water-supply standard for dissolved manganese (50 |ig/l) (CDPHE 1990) near the reservoir bottom was exceeded in 26 samples during 1986-1989 (Lewis and Edelmann 1994). The authors attributed 14 of those exceedances to elevated concentrations of dissolved manganese in the Arkansas River during summer runoff and the other 12 exceedances were attributed to the mobilization of dissolved manganese from reservoir bottom sediments during periods of low dissolved-oxygen. Lewis and Edelmann (1994) reported that manganese releases from the sediments diminished after fall turnover mixes the deepest waters of the reservoir with well-oxygenated water from near the surface.

Generally, trace elements occur in relatively low concentrations in water (near surface and near bottom) of Pueblo Reservoir (Lewis and Edelmann 1994). A comparison of total-recoverable and dissolved concentrations of the predominant trace elements indicates that < 50 percent of the iron, manganese, and zinc concentrations are dissolved, which suggests that a large percentage of those elements in Pueblo Reservoir are sorbed to suspended sediment that is transported by the Arkansas River (Lewis and Edelmann 1994).

Reach 10 water quality data for cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc are limited to Periods 2 and 3. The data period of record (POR) is from 1982 to 1998, but is not consistent for each of the metals. Considering all of the available dissolved data for each metal over the POR, there is a clear decreasing trend of concentrations for cadmium, copper, and lead through time. No trends were obvious for zinc. Tables 6-2 and 6-3 show that all TVS exceedances occurred during Period 2 and no TVS exceedance occurred during Period 3. Cadmium and lead are the only metals that had exceedances of the TVSs during Period 2.

During Period 3, Reach 10 had not exceeded the TVSs for any of the four metals evaluated. Mean dissolved cadmium and lead are slightly elevated in Reach 10 compared to Reach 9, while copper is lower compared to Reach 9. Mean zinc concentrations are virtually identical between Reaches 9 and 10. Compared to Reach 0, mean dissolved concentrations of all four metals in Reach 10 are lower.

Available literature indicates the following:

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl .doc 6-40 • Overall, few exceedances of water quality standards have occurred (primarily during Period 2); however, standards were exceeded several times for two trace elements (iron and manganese) between 1986 and 1989 (Lewis and Edelmann 1994).

• Metals-contaminated sediment and water from the Upper Arkansas River Basin are being deposited in Pueblo Reservoir; however, concentrations are generally low (Herrmann and Mahan 1977; Callendar et al. 1988; Church et al. 1994; Lewis and Edelmann 1994).

• Metals concentrations (cadmium, lead, zinc) in water tend to be higher near the sediment - water interface (within 1m of the bottom) compared to surface samples (Herrmann and Mahan 1977; Lewis and Edelmann 1994).

• Average metals (cadmium, lead, and zinc) concentrations in tissues of birds tend to be below threshold values associated with lethal and sublethal (e.g., behavioral and/or physiological) effects (Mueller et al. 1991; Custer et al. 2003 In Press).

• Certain layers within sediment core samples from the reservoir show deposits that correspond to discharges from the Yak Tunnel (Callendar et al. 1988; Church et al. 1994).

• Iron, manganese, and zinc appear to be transported to and within the reservoir by colloids (McKnight et al. 1991).

• Based on the existing data, injuries to natural resources are not currently occurring at Pueblo Reservoir due to releases of hazardous substances from the Upper Arkansas River Basin (Herrmann and Mahan 1977; Mueller et al. 1991; Lewis and Edelmann 1994; Custer et al. 2003 In Press).

• Based on analyses of the data from the electronic database, as of 1990 no measured metals concentrations have exceeded their respective TVSs in the reservoir. Prior to 1990, TVS exceedances in the reservoir were rare.

Sediments

Callender et al. (1988) collected sediment cores from Pueblo Reservoir for metals analysis and, based on the vertical distribution of normalized metals data, interpreted the peaks of increased metals to represent the 1983 and 1985 Yak Tunnel surges. Church et al. (1994) analyzed specific core intervals from Callender et al.'s (1988) sediment samples and found lead-isotopic compositions that were similar to mineral deposits at Leadville. For lead, copper, and zinc there is a significant increase in total concentrations in specific intervals from 2 of 5 sediment cores from Pueblo Reservoir. Church et al.

J:\OI0004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 6-41 (1994) concluded that those core intervals contained surge deposits formed as result of releases from the Yak Tunnel, supporting the interpretation made by Callender et al. (1988).

Herrmann and Mahan (1977) observed some metals (e.g., zinc, copper, cadmium, lead, manganese, iron) loading of the sediments in Pueblo Reservoir near the inlet. The average zinc concentration in the sediments was 3-4 times greater than the zinc content of pre-impoundment floodplain sediments (Table 6-16). Increased metals loading in Pueblo Reservoir was attributed to sediments from the Leadville Mining District (Herrmann and Mahan 1977). Mueller et al. (1991) collected sediment samples from one site near the inlet of Pueblo Reservoir. All metals concentrations except zinc were near pre-impoundment levels (Table 6-16). Lewis and Edelmann (1994) reported elevated lead and zinc concentrations in reservoir bottom sediments when compared to values from Shacklette and Boerngen (1984). Those elements are common constituents of mine drainage in the upper Arkansas River Basin. Weathering of sedimentary rock in the lower half of the Basin is another source of iron and manganese to the reservoir.

• Sediment metals data were compiled and found to be present for each of the three Periods of interest for Reach 10, Pueblo Reservoir (Table 6-7). Sediment data for Pueblo Reservoir were limited for Periods 1 and 3, with only a single sample collected during either period.

• Mean lead and zinc concentrations were higher in Period 2 over the single measurement point available for Period 1, while cadmium and copper are lower during Period 2.

• Compared to Period 2, mean concentrations of cadmium, copper, and lead are slightly greater during Period 3, while zinc was lower during Period 3.

• Compared to Reach 0, the single sediment sample collected for Reach 10 during Period 3 shows that concentrations of cadmium, lead, and zinc are lower in Reach 10 than the mean values observed for Reach 0.

Biological

Custer et al. (2003 In Press) sampled livers from barn and tree swallows from Pueblo Reservoir in 1997-98. They were able to sample only 3 birds in 1997 and 3 birds in 1998. Average concentrations for all metals were less than Reach 0 and all samples were less than the literature-based thresholds.

Mueller et al. (1991) sampled adult and juvenile waterfowl and shorebirds from Pueblo Reservoir and analyzed livers for metals. Only cadmium in adult birds exceeded the concentrations from Reach 0,

J:\010004\Task3-SCR\SCR_currentl.doc ' 6-42 but it did not exceed the literature-based benchmark. However, adult birds sampled from Pueblo Reservoir are not a valid indicator of exposure from Pueblo Reservoir as the birds may have been exposed at another site. Cadmium and lead in juvenile birds were all less than the detection limit. Some juvenile birds had zinc concentrations that were higher than Reach 0, but the average zinc concentration was less than the literature-based benchmark.

Mueller et al. (1991) also sampled fish in June and October from Pueblo Reservoir. They analyzed whole-body composite samples of several different species (bluegill, common carp, gizzard shad, channel catfish, and small mouth bass). Neither cadmium nor lead had detectable concentrations and zinc concentrations were below benchmark values.

6.9.2 Summary of Injury Findings for Pueblo Reservoir

• Available information on water quality indicates that injury to surface water is not present within Pueblo Reservoir. Surface water quality data do not show exceedances of the TVSs.

• The December 2000 CDPHE Status of Water Quality Report indicates that the Pueblo Reservoir and the Arkansas River downstream of the reservoir is fully supporting its designated uses.

• Sediment concentrations also indicate lack of injury. Although limited in numbers, data from about 20 years suggests that Pueblo Reservoir sediments are of similar or better quality than those found in the upstream reference, Reach 0.

• Corresponding to the lack of injury in surface water and sediment, no injuries were observed or are expected for aquatic or terrestrial biological resources within Pueblo Reservoir.

6.10 Baseline Considerations

There are many land use and resource management factors influencing the condition of the Downstream Area. This overview makes no attempt to characterize those influences. It should be noted that there are several historic mining districts located in the Downstream Area within the Arkansas River Basin. They include the Twin Lakes Mining District located above Twin Lakes, the Monarch Mining District located in the Chalk Creek area, the Rosita Hills Mining District located near Westcliff, and the Cripple Creek Mining District near Cripple Creek and Victor. In addition, there are three hazardous J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_current 1 .doc 6-43 waste sites that are either on the National Priorities List or proposed for listing. They include Smeltertown located just North of Salida, Lincoln Park located southwest of Canon City, and College of the Canons located southwest of Canon City. The influences of any of these mining districts or sites on the condition of the UARB resources were not explored.

There have been numerous attempts by state and federal agencies to evaluate the role of non- mining impacts on the physical, chemical, and biological resources of the Upper Arkansas River. The Downstream Area is heavily managed, influenced by a variety of factors that have an effect on water quality, including:

• Trans-mountain diversions and flow augmentation from various tributaries; • Urban development; • Irrigation for agricultural uses; • Hydroelectric power generation; • Treatment of municipal and industrial waste; • Recreational uses; • Flood control; and • Maintenance of the fishery.

Five major population centers are located in the Arkansas River Basin: Leadville; Colorado Springs; Pueblo; Las Animas; and Lamar. The Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment reported 88 permitted point source discharges in the Arkansas Basin, not including those covered by general permits: 55 domestic waste treatment facilities, twelve hardrock and mine dewatering permits, eleven industrial plants, six power plants, two hot springs pools, one water treatment plant, and two fish hatcheries (CDPHE 2002).

Particular emphasis has been placed upon flow regulation as it relates to recreation and influences on aquatic life (BLM 2000). The situation is then further complicated by the extensive use of the river between Buena Vista and the Pueblo Reservoir for recreational purposes. This stretch of the Arkansas River is reportedly the most widely used river in Colorado (CDPHE 2002). The main issue is how water delivery (scale and timing) influences recreational uses (i.e., rafting) versus the quality of the fishery. There is a difference between water releases to promote maintenance of the fishery versus flows appropriate for recreational rafting. A suitable hydrograph for brown trout was illustrated earlier in this report. The timing of peak flows and lower summer flows for fish does not necessarily correspond with those flows more suitable for good Whitewater rafting in the mid to late summer. These are conflicting management issues that not only affect water quality due to dilution and flushing, but also the biological resources due to quality of water as well as quantity.

J:\OI0004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl .doc 6-44 TABLES Table 6-1

Summary Statistics for Dissolved Metals Concentrations in Surface Waters from the Downstream Area during Period 1, Table Value Standards (TVS), and Exceedences of TVSs for Each Metal during High and Low Flows

Sta Avg Acute Chronic By Flow Period Across all Flows Reach Analyte Flow n Min Max Avg Stdev >Acute >Chronic Cnt Hard TVS TVS %>Acute %>Chronic %>Acute %>Chronic H 1 8 0.0004 0.004 0.0015 0.0013 ND ND ND ND ND ND Cd L 1 10 0.001 0.004 0.0025 0.0014 ND ND ND ND ND H 1 6 0.0003 0.009 0.0052 0.0036 ND ND ND ND ND ND Cu L 1 5 0.0003 0.244 0.0523 0.1072 ND ND ND ND ND 5 H 1 8 0.0002 0.00157 0.0008 0.0005 ND ND ND ND ND ND Pb L 1 10 0.00013 0.00122 0.0006 0.0004 ND ND ND ND ND H 1 8 0.00008 0.00025 0.0001 0.0001 ND ND ND ND ND ND Zn L 1 11 0.00013 0.02 0.0021 0.0059 ND ND ND ND ND Cu L 1 1 0.002 0.002 0.002 81.9 0.0111 0.0076 0 0 0 0 6 H 1 5 0.17 0.39 0.264 0.1108 44.95 0.0595 0.0598 5 5 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 Zn L 3 15 0.21 0.82 0.4387 0.2018 81.9 0.0989 0.0995 15 15 100.00 100.00 Cu L 1 1 0.002 0.002 0.002 103.98 0.0139 0.0093 0 0 0 0 7 Zn L 2 3 0.11 0.19 0.14 0.0436 103.98 0.1211 0.1217 1 1 33.33 33.33 H 1 1 0.00005 0.00005 0.0001 78.03 0.0028 0.0019 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cd L 1 1 0.001 0.001 0.001 133.93 0.0051 0.0028 0 0 0 0 H 1 1 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 78.03 0.0106 0.0072 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cu L 1 1 0.002 0.002 0.002 133.93 0.0177 0.0115 0 0 0 0 8 H 1 1 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 78.03 0.0492 0.0019 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pb L 3 3 0.002 0.002 0.002 0 133.93 0.0886 0.0035 0 0 0 0 H 1 1 0.033 0.033 0.033 78.03 0.095 0.0955 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zn L 1 2 0.08 0.11 0.095 0.0212 133.93 0.1501 0.1509 0 0 0 0 H 1 2 0.0005 0.001 132.1 0.005 0.0027 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cd 0.0008 0.0004 L 1 5 0.0005 0.001 0.0006 0.0002 248.11 0.0099 0.0044 0 0 0 0 H 1 2 0.004 0.011 0.0075 0.005 132.1 0.0175 0.0114 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cu L 1 3 0.002 0.003 0.0023 0.0006 248.11 0.0316 0.0195 0 0 0 0 9 H 1 2 0.001 0.069 132.1 0.0873 0.0034 0 0 50 0 33.33 Pb 0.035 0.0481 1 L 1 1 0.001 0.001 0.001 248.11 0.171 0.0067 0 0 0 0 H 2 3 0.02 9.6 132.1 0.1484 0.1491 1 33.33 33.33 30 30 Zn 3.2133 5.531 1 L 2 7 0.008 6.4 1.7869 3.017 248.11 0.2531 0.2544 2 2 28.57 28.57 Note: Only reaches where data are available are shown. ND-No data Table 6-2

Summary Statistics for Dissolved Metals Concentrations in Surface Waters from the Downstream Area during Period 2, Table Value Standards (TVS), and Exceedences of TVSs for Each Metal during High and Low Flows

Sta Avg Acute Chronic By Flow Period Across all Flows Reach Analyte Flow n Min Max AVR Stdev >Acute >Chronic Cnt Hard TVS TVS %>Acute %>Chronic %>Acute %>Chronic H 1 5 0.0002 0.001 0.0008 0.0004 ND ND ND ND ND ND Cd ND L 1 4 0.001 0.002 0.0013 0.0005 ND ND ND ND ND H 1 3 0.0004 0.001 0.0008 0.0003 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Cu L 1 1 0.001 0.001 0.001 ND ND ND ND ND 5 H 1 5 0.00022 0.00056 0.0004 0.0001 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Pb L 1 4 0.00014 0.0003 0.0002 0.0001 ND ND ND ND ND H 1 5 0.00005 0.00019 0.0001 0.0001 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND Zn L 1 4 0.0001 0.00017 0.0001 0.00003 ND ND ND ND ND H 6 84 0.00005 0.00101 0.0004 0.0002 47.93 0.0017 0.0013 0 0 0 0 0.72 1.44 Cd L 7 55 0.00005 0.005 0.0005 0.0007 68.39 0.0025 0.0017 1 2 1.82 3.64 H 5 42 0.0003 0.032 0.0035 0.005 47.93 0.0067 0.0048 2 7 4.76 16.67 3.30 8.79 Cu L 6 49 0.0005 0.138 0.0046 0.0195 68.39 0.0094 0.0065 1 1 2.04 2.04 6 H 7 45 0.0001 0.014 0.0014 0.0025 47.93 0.0288 0.0011 0 8 0 17.78 0 15.31 Pb L 8 53 0.0005 0.006 0.0009 0.001 68.39 0.0426 0.0017 0 7 0 13.21 H 5 48 0.00001 0.17 0.0746 0.0368 47.93 0.0628 0.0632 26 26 54.17 54.17 52.13 50.00 Zn L 5 46 0.005 0.62 0.1114 0.0975 68.39 0.0849 0.0854 23 21 50.00 45.65 H 4 38 0.00005 0.001 0.0003 0.0002 55.98 0.002 0.0015 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cd L 4 35 0.00005 0.001 0.0004 0.0003 92.9 0.0034 0.0021 0 0 0 0 H 4 18 0.001 0.049 0.0069 0.0112 55.98 0.0078 0.0055 2 4 11.11 22.22 6.25 10.42 Cu L 4 30 0.001 0.0175 0.0037 0.0031 92.9 0.0125 0.0084 1 1 3.33 3.33 7 H 4 21 0.0005 0.026 0.0036 0.0061 55.98 0.0342 0.0013 0 9 0 42.86 0 39.62 Pb L 4 32 0.0005 0.014 0.0026 0.003 92.9 0.0596 0.0023 0 12 0 37.50 H 4 20 0.023 0.091 0.0503 0.0184 55.98 0.0717 0.072 3 2 15.00 10.00 9.43 7.55 Zn L 4 33 0.019 0.19 0.066 0.0313 92.9 0.1101 0.1107 2 2 6.06 6.06 ND-Nodnta

Page 1 of 2 Table 6- tinued AYR Acute Chronic By Flow Period Across all Flows Reach Analyte Flo Sta n Min Max Avg Stdev >Acute >Chronic w Cnt Hard TVS TVS %>Acute %>Chronic %>Acute %>Chronic H 8 60 0.00005 0.01 0.0007 0.0014 70.51 0.0025 0.0017 3 4 5.00 6.67 2.46 3.28 Cd L 10 62 0.00005 0.002 0.0004 0.0005 109.3 0.0041 0.0024 0 0 0.00 0.00 H 6 29 0.001 0.022 0.0047 0.0046 70.51 0.0097 0.0066 3 4 10.34 13.79 3.70 11.11 Cu L 8 52 0.0005 0.0141 0.0033 0.0034 109.3 0.0146 0.0097 0 5 0.00 9.62 8 H 9 50 0.0005 0.025 0.0027 0.0043 70.51 0.0441 0.0017 0 18 0.00 36.00 0.00 31.53 Pb L 10 61 0.0005 0.009 0.0019 0.0021 109.3 0.0711 0.0028 0 17 0.00 27.87 H 6 32 0.005 0.067 0.0301 0.0176 70.51 0.0872 0.0876 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Zn L 8 54 0.006 0.115 0.0332 0.0234 109.3 0.1264 0.127 0 0 0.00 0.00 H 2 37 0.00005 0.003 0.0006 0.0006 113.92 0.0043 0.0025 0 1 0.00 2.70 0.00 4.49 Cd L 3 52 0.00005 0.004 0.0007 0.001 189.94 0.0074 0.0036 0 3 0.00 5.77 H 2 39 0.0005 0.034 0.0077 0.0077 113.92 0.0152 0.01 4 7 10.26 17.95 5.32 9.57 Cu L 3 55 0.0005 0.028 0.0042 0.0045 189.94 0.0246 0.0155 1 2 1.82 3.64 9 H 2 37 0.00025 0.014 0.0024 0.0033 113.92 0.0744 0.0029 0 7 0.00 18.92 0.00 10.23 Pb L 3 51 0.00025 0.013 0.0013 0.0021 189.94 0.1289 0.005 0 2 0.00 3.92 H 2 38 0.001 0.16 0.0194 0.0262 113.92 0.1309 0.1315 1 1 2.63 2.63 1.14 1.14 Zn L 2 50 0.0015 0.12 0.024 0.0214 189.94 0.2018 0.2028 0 0 0.00 0.00 H 4 96 0.00005 0.024 0.0016 0.0034 170.27 0.0066 0.0033 3 10 3.13 10.42 1.54 7.18 Cd L 4 99 0.00005 0.004 0.001 0.001 184.52 0.0072 0.0035 0 4 0.00 4.04 H 4 81 0.0005 0.009 0.0023 0.0015 170.27 0.0222 0.0141 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Cu L 4 92 0.0005 0.013 0.0027 0.0021 184.52 0.0239 0.0151 0 0 0.00 0.00 10 H 4 95 0.00025 0.006 0.0018 0.0013 170.27 0.1147 0.0045 0 2 0.00 2.11 0.00 6.84 Pb L 4 95 0.00025 0.022 0.002 0.0029 184.52 0.125 0.0049 0 11 0.00 11.58 H 4 75 0.0005 0.06 0.0085 0.0108 170.27 0.184 0.1849 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Zn L 4 91 0.0005 0.12 0.0094 0.0154 184.52 0.1969 0.1979 0 0 0.00 0.00 Note: Only reaches where data are available are shown.

Page 2 of 2 Table 6-3

Summary Statistics for Dissolved Metals Concentrations in Surface Waters from the Downstream Area during Period 3, Table Value Standards (TVS), and Exceedences of TVSs for Each Metal during High and Low Flows

Sta Avg Acute Chronic By Flow Period Across a11 Flows 171 nu; Min AVg Cfripv Cnt Hard TVS TVS %>Acute %>Chronic %>Acute %>Chronic H 1 10 0.00015 0.00254 80.76 0.0029 0.0019 0 1 0.00 10.00 0.00 4.55 C(\ 0.0008 0.0007 L 1 12 0.00035 0.00107 0.0006 0.0003 109.58 0.0041 0.0024 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.55 Pll H 1 10 0.0021 0.0073 0.0042 0.0017 80.76 0.011 0.0075 0 0 0.00 c L 12 0.0012 0.0127 0.0038 0.003 109.58 0.0146 0.0097 0 1 0.00 8.33 H 9 0.001 0.0035 80.76 0.0511 0.002 0 4 0.00 44.44 0.00 20.00 Ph 0.0017 0.0009 L 11 0.001 0.001 0.001 0 109.58 0.0713 0.0028 0 0 0.00 0.00 H 10 0.059 0.568 0.2217 0.1632 80.76 0.0978 0.0983 6 6 60.00 60.00 50.00 50.00 7n L 12 0.051 0.347 0.149 0.081 109.58 0.1266 0.1273 5 5 41.67 41.67 H 9 212 0.00005 0.029 47.05 0.0016 0.0013 10 4.25 4.72 4.51 4.76 PH 0.0006 0.0026 9 L 9 187 0.00005 0.0025 0.0003 0.0005 62.79 0.0022 0.0016 9 9 4.81 4.81 H 9 210 0.0001 0.017 0.0027 0.0016 47.05 0.0066 0.0047 2 17 0.95 8.10 0.51 4.82 uPHu L 9 184 0.0001 0.0079 0.0018 0.0014 62.79 0.0087 0.006 0 2 0.00 1.09 H 9 199 0.0005 0.031 0.0022 47.05 0.0282 0.0011 1 13 0.50 6.53 0.26 3.94 Ph 0.0008 L 10 182 0.0005 0.007 0.0006 0.0005 62.79 0.0388 0.0015 0 2 0.00 1.10 H 8 213 0.005 0.64 0.0683 0.0729 47.05 0.0619 0.0622 67 66 31.46 30.99 31.15 30.89 7n L 8 169 0.004 0.371 0.0762 0.0562 62.79 0.079 0.0794 52 52 30.77 30.77 H 3 100 0.00005 0.0012 0.0002 54.7 0.0019 0.0014 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.53 0.53 PH 0.0002 L 3 89 0.00005 0.066 0.001 0.007 76.19 0.0028 0.0018 1 1 1.12 1.12

p., H 3 102 0.0001 0.041 0.0024 0.0044 54.7 0.0076 0.0053 2 4 1.96 3.92 1.60 3.21 7 L 3 85 0.0001 0.0124 0.0018 0.002 76.19 0.0104 0.0071 1 2 1.18 2.35 H 3 101 0.005 54.7 0.0333 0.0013 0 12 0.00 11.88 0.00 16.58 Ph 0.0005 0.0008 0.0008 L 3 86 0.0005 0.0253 0.0015 0.003 76.19 0.048 0.0019 0 19 0.00 22.09 H 3 103 0.004 0.137 0.0273 54.7 0.0703 0.0706 12 12 11.65 11.65 7.57 7.57 7n 0.0398 L 3 82 0.004 0.14 0.0396 0.0246 76.19 0.0931 0.0935 2 2 2.44 2.44 ND-No data

Page 1 of 2 Table 6- itinued Sta Avg Acute Chronic By Flow Period Across all Flows Reach Analyte Flow n Min Max Avg Stdev >Acute >Chronic Cnt Hard TVS TVS %>Acute %>Chronic %>Acute %>Chronic H 6 194 0.00005 0.0009 0.0001 0.0001 75.72 0.0027 0.0018 0 0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Cd L 8 199 0.00005 0.0021 0.0001 0.0002 107.48 0.004 0.0024 0 0 0.00 0.00 H 6 187 0.0001 0.039 0.0019 0.0033 75.72 0.0103 0.0071 2 3 1.07 1.60 0.52 1.04 Cu L 7 197 0.0001 0.0101 0.0012 0.0013 107.48 0.0144 0.0095 0 1 0.00 0.51 8 H 6 196 0.0005 0.0131 0.0008 0.0014 75.72 0.0476 0.0019 0 12 0.00 6.12 0.25 4.25 Pb L 7 204 0.0005 0.1677 0.0017 0.012 107.48 0.0699 0.0027 1 5 0.49 2.45 H 6 191 0.003 0.226 0.0407 0.0343 75.72 0.0926 0.0931 16 15 8.38 7.85 5.42 5.15 Zn L 7 178 0.001 0.175 0.036 0.025 107.48 0.1246 0.1252 4 4 2.25 2.25 H 2 12 0.00005 0.00025 0.0007 0.0001 118.61 0.0045 0.0025 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cd L 3 23 0.00005 0.0002 0.0006 0.00003 159.76 0.0062 0.0032 0 0 0 0 H 2 12 0.0003 0.004 0.0012 0.0012 118.61 0.0158 0.0104 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cu L 3 25 0.0001 0.0077 0.0013 0.0019 159.76 0.0209 0.0134 0 0 0 0 9 H 2 11 0.00025 0.002 0.0006 0.0005 118.61 0.0777 0.003 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pb L 3 28 0.00025 0.001 0.0005 0.0002 159.76 0.1071 0.0042 0 0 0 0 H 2 12 0.0015 0.061 0.0241 0.0192 118.61 0.1354 0.1361 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zn L 3 20 0.0015 0.05 0.0148 0.0133 159.76 0.1743 0.1752 0 0 0 0 H 2 21 0.00005 0.0001 0.0001 0.00002 167.59 0.0065 0.0033 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cd L 2 20 0.00005 0.0003 0.0001 0.0001 200.38 0.0079 0.0037 0 0 0 0 H 2 21 0.0005 0.003 0.0007 0.0006 167.59 0.0219 0.0139 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cu L 2 20 0.0002 0.002 0.0007 0.0004 200.38 0.0259 0.0162 0 0 0 0 10 H 2 22 0.0005 0.002 0.0006 0.0004 167.59 0.1128 0.0044 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pb L 2 20 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0 200.38 0.1364 0.0053 0 0 0 0 H 2 18 0.003 0.047 0.0216 0.0155 167.59 0.1815 0.1824 0 0 0 0 0 0 Zn L 2 17 0.003 0.048 0.0143 0.0143 200.38 0.2112 0.2123 0 0 0 0 Note: Only reaches where data are available are shown. ND-No data

Page 2 of 2 Table 6-4

Summary Statistics for Surface Water Concentrations of Total Cadmium, Copper, Lead, and Zinc in the Downstream Area during Period 1

Reach Analyte Flow StaCnt n Min Max Avg StdDev H 1 2 0.001 0.009 Cd 0.005 0.0057 L 1 10 0.0004 0.0014 0.0008 0.0003 H 1 2 0.013 0.021 0.017 0.0057 Cu L 1 13 0.002 0.015 7 0.007 0.0033 H 1 5 0.007 0.039 0.0226 0.0115 Pb L 1 10 0.004 0.04 0.0116 0.0115 H 1 6 0.08 0.48 0.2017 0.1518 Zn L 1 26 0.05 0.22 0.1258 0.0451 H 3 9 0.00019 0.049 0.0079 0.0155 Cd L 2 16 0.0003 0.004 0.0013 0.0012 H 2 7 0.0047 0.039 0.0137 0.0123 Cu L 1 18 0.002 0.046 0.0096 8 0.0091 H 2 8 0.0005 0.14 0.0421 0.0528 Pb L 1 17 0.007 0.105 0.0205 0.0275 H 2 11 0.059 0.86 0.2508 Zn 0.2481 L 1 27 0.02 0.65 0.1341 0.1439 H 3 7 0.00015 0.0041 0.002 0.0016 Cd L 2 13 0.00015 0.01 0.0012 0.0027 H 2 6 0.003 0.058 0.0196 Cu 0.0225 L 2 18 0.0025 0.033 0.0073 0.0072 9 H 2 6 0.0045 0.12 0.0579 0.0501 Pb L 2 18 0.002 0.094 0.0119 0.0215 H 2 6 0.04 0.77 0.3483 0.269 Zn L 2 19 0.01 0.27 0.0826 0.065 ND-No data Table 6-5

Summary Statistics for Surface Water Concentrations of Total Cadmium, Copper, Lead, and Zinc in the Downstream Area during Period 2

Reach Analyte Flow StaCnt n Min Max Avg StdDev H 7 91 0.00005 0.01 Cd 0.0012 0.0017 L 7 64 0.00005 0.01 0.0014 0.0024 H 6 47 0.0005 0.064 0.0107 Cu 0.0081 L 7 59 0.0005 0.175 6 0.006 0.0226 H 4 39 0.0005 0.043 0.0085 0.0118 Pb L 5 53 0.0005 0.038 0.0043 0.0078 H 6 51 0.019 0.84 0.1714 Zn 0.1601 L 1 61 0.005 0.94 0.1329 0.1412 H 4 50 0.00005 0.005 0.001 0.0011 Cd L 4 64 0.00005 0.01 0.0009 0.0018 H 4 23 0.0023 0.06 0.0133 0.0125 Cu L 4 51 0.0011 0.0158 0.0027 7 0.0056 H 4 20 0.0005 0.05 0.0168 0.0156 Pb L 4 55 0.0005 0.021 0.0061 0.0048 H 4 27 0.04 0.67 Zn 0.1901 0.1469 L 4 58 0.045 0.27 0.1236 0.0506 H 7 64 0.00005 0.01 0.0015 0.0022 Cd L 9 79 0.00005 0.01 0.0011 0.0022 H 6 38 0.0018 0.08 0.0139 Cu 0.0126 L 9 70 0.0005 0.18 0.0107 0.0261 8 H 6 35 0.0005 0.053 0.0142 Pb 0.0149 L 9 74 0.0005 0.043 0.006 0.0073 H 6 43 0.003 0.82 0.1892 Zn 0.1879 L 8 76 0.02 0.3 0.0814 0.0549 H 3 24 0.00005 0.005 0.0025 0.0021 Cd L 4 43 0.00005 0.005 0.0016 0.0021 H 3 20 0.005 0.07 0.0223 0.0178 Cu L 4 34 0.0022 0.026 0.0079 0.006 9 H 3 19 0.004 0.098 0.0209 0.0213 Pb L 4 35 0.0005 1 0.0346 0.1681 H 3 20 0.005 0.79 0.187 0.1642 Zn L 4 36 0.005 0.24 0.0682 0.0556 H 4 84 0.00005 0.01 Ce\ 0.0027 0.003 L 4 85 0.00022 0.01 0.0031 0.0029 H 4 88 0.001 0.43 0.0103 0.0455 V_fnU irt L 4 89 0.0012 0.048 0.0072 0.0072 H 4 85 0.0005 0.025 0.0042 0.0039 Ph L 4 85 0.0005 0.08 0.0055 0.009 H 4 92 0.001 0.515 7n 0.0174 0.0535 L 4 103 0.0025 0.1 0.0162 0.0169 Table 6-6

Summary Statistics for Surface Water Concentrations of Total Cadmium, Copper, Lead, and Zinc in the Downstream Area during Period 3

ReachJAoalyte Flow StaCnt n Min Max Avg StdDev H 1 10 0.00034 0.00349 Cd 0.0013 0.0011 L 1 12 0.00042 0.00119 0.0008 0.0002 H 1 10 0.0028 0.015 0.0058 0.0038 Cu L 1 12 0.0014 0.0052 5 0.0029 0.001 H 1 10 0.0038 0.045 0.0123 0.0125 Pb L 1 12 0.001 0.0074 0.0048 0.002 H 1 10 0.082 0.692 0.2762 0.2092 Zn L 1 12 0.052 0.393 0.1813 0.0871 H 9 216 0.00005 0.028 0.0009 0.0024 Cd L 8 189 0.00005 0.008 0.0005 0.0008 H 9 214 0.0005 0.075 0.0047 0.0057 Cu L 8 187 0.0005 0.0066 0.0023 0.0012 6 H 9 204 0.0005 0.0408 0.0063 0.0088 Pb L 8 176 0.0005 0.013 0.00.14 0.0022 H 9 218 0.01 1 0.1226 0.1198 Zn L 8 189 0.005 0.461 0.0902 0.0718 H 2 100 0.00005 0.0055 0.0005 0.0008 Cd L 2 57 0.00005 0.001 0.0003 0.0003 H 2 100 0.0005 0.055 0.0053 0.0092 Cu L 2 55 0.0005 0.0111 0.0021 7 0.0029 H 2 100 0.0005 2.721 0.0307 0.2719 Pb L 2 57 0.0005 0.0264 0.0019 0.0048 H 2 101 0.005 0.354 0.076 0.0689 Zn L 2 57 0.005 0.268 0.0587 0.045 H 6 220 0.00005 0.005 0.0004 0.0005 Cd L 6 207 0.00005 0.00218 0.0002 0.0004 H 6 218 0.0005 0.089 0.0078 Cu 0.0053 L 6 202 0.0005 0.045 0.0036 0.0047 8 H 6 221 0.0005 0.0703 0.0069 0.0103 Pb L 6 205 0.0005 0.2 0.0029 0.0149 H 6 218 0.005 0.482 0.102 0.0846 Zn L 6 200 0.005 0.45 0.0551 0.053

Page 1 of 2 Table 6-6 Continued Reach|Analyte Flow StaCnt n Min Max Avg StdDev H 2 14 0.00005 0.002 0.0004 0.0005 Cd L 3 28 0.00005 0.002 0.0003 0.0004 H 2 14 0.0026 0.0293 0.0084 0.0074 Cu L 3 28 0.0015 0.034 0.0046 0.006 9 H 2 13 0.0005 0.04 0.0081 0.0124 Pb L 3 29 0.0005 0.043 0.0033 0.008 H 2 14 0.025 0.323 0.0953 Zn 0.0976 L 3 28 0.011 0.14 0.0349 0.023 H 2 21 0.00005 0.001 0.0003 Cd 0.0002 L 2 25 0.00005 0.001 0.0003 0.0004 H 2 21 0.0005 0.0068 0.0015 Cu 0.0023 L 2 25 0.0005 0.0041 0.0009 10 0.0015 H 2 21 0.0005 0.0061 0.0015 Pb 0.0013 L 2 25 0.0005 0.003 0.0007 0.0005 H 2 21 0.005 0.06 Zn 0.0243 0.0155 L 2 25 0.005 0.056 0.014 0.0127

Page 2 of 2 Table 6-7

Concentrations of Cadmium, Copper, Lead, and Zinc (dry weight) in Reach 0 Sediments and the Downstream Area Sediments in Periods 1, 2, and 3

Period Reach Analyte StaCnt n Min Max Avg Stdev Cadmium 1 1 18 18 18.0 Copper 1 1 73 73 73.0 0 Lead 1 1 162 162 162.0 Zinc 1 1 3,963 3,963 3,963.0 Cadmium 8 8 2.5 9 3.3 2.3 Copper 8 8 16 46 30.6 10.1 6 Lead 8 8 2.5 128 50.7 37.1 Zinc 8 8 25 168 103.2 54.5 Cadmium 5 5 2.5 2.5 2.5 0.0 Copper 5 5 27 48 36.2 8.5 7 Lead 5 5 27 105 63.6 32.2 1 Zinc 5 5 33 533 195.8 199.1 Cadmium 3 3 2.5 2.5 2.5 0.0 Copper 3 3 34 41 37.7 3.5 8 Lead 3 3 24 47 39.3 13.3 Zinc 3 3 54 161 98.3 55.8 Cadmium 3 3 2.5 6 3.7 2.0 Copper 3 3 11 42 31.0 17.3 9 Lead 3 3 9 30 18.0 10.8 Zinc 3 3 28.5 157 103.2 66.7 Cadmium 1 1 2.5 2.5 2.5 Copper 1 1 26 26 26.0 10 Lead 1 1 7 7 7.0 Zinc 1 1 99.5 99.5 99.5 Cadmium 3 3 11 21 15.3 5.1 Copper 3 3 65 121 87.3 29.7 6 Lead 3 3 241 526 346.7 156.1 Zinc 3 3 2,160 3,600 2,813.3 729.2 Cadmium 1 2 5 9 7.0 2.8 Copper 1 2 47 58 52.5 7.8 7 Lead 1 2 143 221 182.0 55.2 Zinc 1 2 925 1,680 1,302.5 533.9 Cadmium 4 5 3 7 4.2 1.6 Copper 4 5 40 52 44.0 4.7 2 8 Lead 4 5 45 111 83.8 24.8 Zinc 4 5 708 1,520 994.2 310.1 Cadmium 11 20 0.13 5.9 1.1 1.4 Copper 10 18 17 40 29.9 6.2 9 Lead 11 20 11 93 44.9 23.3 Zinc 11 20 83 863 309.9 168.1 Cadmium 13 21 0.37 3.7 0.8 0.7 Copper 13 21 11 36 23.6 7.4 10 Lead 13 22 5.6 90 36.7 25.8 Zinc 13 22 46 390 182.5 114.2 Table 6-7 Continued Period Reach Analyte | StaCnt n Min Max Avg Stdev Cadmium 2 6 1 23 6.2 8.5 2 13 24.7 44.5 0 Copper 3.18 170 Lead 1 10 24 510 88.9 152.0 Zinc 2 17 25 2,500 345.0 646.7 Cadmium 3 5 5.48 16 10.4 4.6 Copper 3 5 23.58 63 40.5 16.7 5 Lead 2 2 602 770 686.0 118.8 Zinc 3 5 310.85 2800 1,543.7 906.4 Cadmium 11 17 1.35 15.4 4.8 3.5 Copper 11 17 7.04 79.78 29.8 18.1 6 Lead 8 8 67.6 550 287.3 142.8 Zinc 11 17 238.39 2,559 981.1 559.4 Cadmium 4 4 0.69 3.04 1.4 1.1 Copper 4 4 8.74 32 20.3 9.5 3 7 Lead 4 4 38.5 127 89.4 38.7 Zinc 4 4 206 653 469.8 189.9 Cadmium 15 17 0.342 4.52 1.8 1.3 Copper 15 17 7.57 40.5 22.8 8.8 8 Lead 15 17 7.54 130 47.2 26.3 Zinc 15 17 88 840 459.5 234.4 Cadmium 3 3 0.415 2 1.1 0.8 Copper 3 3 8.35 34 21.8 12.9 9 Lead 3 3 12.8 53 31.9 20.2 Zinc 3 3 94.4 560 288.1 242.4 Cadmium 1 1 2 2 2.0 Copper 1 1 31 31 31.0 10 Lead 1 1 37 37 37.0 Zinc 1 1 180 180 180.0 Table 6-8 Summary Table of Groundwater Data (mg/L) in Reaches 5 through 10 for Periods 1, 2, and 31 Deep Wells Reach Date Cadmium Copper' Lead' Zinc' Well-ID Data Source 6 6/4/85 0.016 1 08800-00 1 @ Shangri La TC, Well ft 1 68 6 2/16/88 0.00004 108550-001 @ Mt Princeton MHP & RVP, Well #1 68 6 3/26/91 0.00005 < 0.001 108450-001 @ Collegiate Valley MV, Block Well 68 6 3/26/91 0.009 108550-001 @ Mt Princeton MHP & RVP, Well #1 68 108100-001 ©Snowy Peaks RV& MHP, Well #1 - 6 12/17/92 0.0025 < 0.02 0.01 < Irrigation only 68 6 5/10/93 0.006 108350-001 @ Buena Vista Correctional Fac., Cistern 68 6 5/10/94 0.0005 < 0.007 0.0005 < 108950-001 @ Valley MHP, Blend Tank #1 68 6 6/3/94 0.0001 25 < 0.08 0.0025 < 108050-001 @ Pinon Pines MHP, Well #1 68 6 6/8/94 0.0005 < 0.004 0.002 108800-001 @ Shangri La TC, Well #1 68 6 6/19/94 0.001 108100-002 @ Snowy Peaks RV & MHP, Well #2 68 6 6/29/94 0.008 108450-001 @ Collegiate Valley MV, Block Well 68 6 7/19/94 0.012 0.002 108550-001 @ Mt Princeton MHP & RVP, Well #1 68 1081 00-004 @ Snowy Peaks RV & MHP, Well #4 (aka 6 7/27/94 0.02 0.005 NEW WELL) 68 6 9/9/96 0.000125 < 0.017 0.0005 < 108350-001 @ Buena Vista Correctional Fac., Cistern 68 6 5/12/97 0.004 1 08800-00 1 @ Shangri La TC, Well # 1 68 6 5/20/97 0.02 108100-002 @ Snowy Peaks RV & MHP, Well #2 68 6 6/16/97 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 < 108950-001 @ Valley MHP, Blend Tank #1 68 6 6/17/97 0.004 0.002 108550-001 @ Mt Princeton MHP & RVP, Well #1 68 6 6/23/97 0.000125 < 0.004 0.0005 < 108050-001 @ Pinon Pines MHP, Well #1 68 6 6/26/97 0.007 108450-001 @ Collegiate Valley MV, Block Well 68 6 6/7/99 0.0001 5 < 0.035 0.002 108350-001 @ Buena Vista Correctional Fac., Cistern 68 6 1/31/00 0.0001 5 < 0.16 0.0005 < 208200-OOJjg Chateau Chaparral CG, Well #1 68 6 1/31/00 0.0001 5 < 0.002 < 0.0005 < 208200-002 @ Chateau Chaparrel CG, Well #2 68 6 4/27/00 0.00005 < 108550-001 @ Mt Princeton MHP & RVP, Well #1 68 6 5/9/00 0.00005 < 1 08950-00 1 @ Valley MHP, Blend Tank # 1 68 6 5/10/00 0.0001 5 < 1 08800-00 1 @ Shangri La TC, Well # 1 68 6 5/18/00 0.0001 5 < 108050-001 @ Pinon Pines MHP, Well #1 68 6 5/31/00 0.00005 < 1 08450-001 @ Collegiate Valley MV, Block Well 68 108100-005 @ Snowy Peaks RV & MHP, Pipeline for 6 6/21/00 0.0012 Wells #2 & #4 68 7 4/27/73 0.01 < 0.003 0.03 383254 1 060 1 0200 @ NA0500093 1 BAB 31 7 5/12/92 0.14 108400-001 @ Fesslers MHP, Well #1 / West 68 7 5/2/94 0.000125 < 0.076 0.0025 < 108400-001 @ Fesslers MHP, Well #1 / West 68 7 6/18/97 0.000125 < 0.015 0.0005 < 108400-001 @ Fesslers MHP, Well #1 / West 68 7 4/24/00 0.000 15 < 1 08400-003 @ Fesslers MHP, Wells #1 and #2 68 8 4/26/73 0.001 < 0.25 38291 2 105225200® SCI 8-71-1 8BBB 31 8 4/27/73 O.OK 0.003 0.12 382310105460800 @ NA04801 129ACC 31 8 4/29/73 0.002 0.09 3822 15 10541 2000 @ NA04801231BBD 31 8 5/4/94 0.000125 < 0.002 < 0.0025 < 108600-001 @ Mountain Vista Village, Pump House Tank 68 8 6/29/94 0.000125 < 0.2 0.0025 < 108200-001 @ Big Springs TP, Big Spring 68 8 4/7/97 0.000125 < 0.013 0.0005 < 108600-001 @ Mountain Vista Village, Pump House Tank 68 8 6/16/97 0.393 1 08200-00 1 @ Big Springs TP, Big Spring 68 8 6/19/00 0.0004 1 08200-00 1 @ Big Springs TP, Big Spring 68 8 6/26/00 0.00015 < 108600-001 @ Mountain Vista Village, Pump House Tank 68 9 4/15/72 0.01 0.03 382359105070900 @ SC01906916BAD3 31 9 4/26/73 0.002 0.03 3820361 04555600 @ SC02006706BAD 31 9 5/26/73 0.03 0.06 381846104514100 @ SC02006714BAC 31

Other (springs, etc) Reach Date Cadmium Capper Lead Zinc Well-ID Data Source 8 9/29/75 0.001 < 0.0045 < 0.02 382557 105 1 54600 @ CANON CITY HOT SPRING 31 8 10/10/75 0.01 < 382907105544100 @ WELLSVILLE WARM SPRINGS 31 8 6/2/1976 0.001 < 0.02 382849105532500 @ SWISSVALE WARM SPRING A 31

Well Depth Unknown Reach Date | Cadmium Copper Lead Zinc Well-ID Data Source 8 4/27/73 0.01 < 0.007 0.02 382842 1 055341 00 @ NA49-1 0-20CDD 31 8 4/27/73 0.005 0.38 382843105534300 @ NA49-IO-20CDC 31 Data is from Consulting Team database. :MCL = 0.005 mg/L. 3There is no MCL for copper, but it has a drinking water supply standard of 1.3 mg/L in Colorado. JTher is no MCL for lead, but it has an action level of 0.015 mg/L in Colorado. 5MCL = 5.0 mg/L. < Indicates non-detect. For non-detects. one half of the detection limit is shown in this table as the data value. For data set 68 CDPHE data, values are for total metals concentrations. For all other data sets, values are dissolved metals concentrations. Table 6-9

Total Soil Concentrations for Lead and Zinc for Floodplain Soils in the Control Area (Reach 0) and for Reaches 6-9

Zinc Reach Lead Mean Range St. Dev. Mean Range St. Dev 0 238 97-464 136 428 184-857 224 6 376 20-1,603 457 868 40-4,393 1,213 7 86 32-180 44 328 105-1,232 332 8 40 20-126 28 281 42-813 160 9 20 20-29 1.3 71 40-150 29 Table 6-10

Average Metals Concentrations in Mixed Invertebrate Species by Reach and by Year from the Downstream Area (ppm, wet weight)'

Year (sample size) Cadmium Copper Lead Zinc Reach 5 1995 (n=l) 2.1 12.0 20.5 244.5 1996 (n=l) 3.2 7.9 25.3 338.0 1997(n=l) 0.3 9.6 1.9 108.6 1998 (n=3) 0.8 7.4 12.8 198.0 Reach 6 1995(n=l) 3.8 13.1 88.2 671.8 1996 (n=4) 3.5 12.2 34.9 352.8 1997 (n=2) 0.8 7.7 8.7 143.6 1998 (n=4) 0.8 6.4 11.0 170.3 Reach 7 1998 (n=3) 0.6 6.6 | 1.7 153.7 Reach 8 1995 (n=3) 0.5 5.6 6.9 142.5 1996 (n=3) 1.5 7.6 6.2 184.3 1997 (n=7) 0.9 8.9 4.9 188.6 1998 (n=17) 0.3 6.7 1.3 109.3 Reach 9 1998 (n=2) 0.1 4.9 1.5 41.4 'Data from Archuleta ct al. (2000) Table 6-11

Average Metal Concentrations in Mixed Invertebrate Species by Downstream Reach Compared to Reach 0 (ppm, wet weight)'

Reach (sample size) Cadmium Copper Lead Zinc Reach 0 (n= 12) 1.6 5.6 2.5 119.7 Reach 5 (n=6) 1.3 8.5 14.3 214.2 Reach 6 (n= 11) 2.1 9.3 26.3 277.4 Reach 7 (n=3) 0.6 6.6 1.7 153.7 Reach 8 (n=30) 0.6 7.1 3.2 138.6 Reach 9 (n=2) 0.1 4.9 1.5 41.4 Benchmark 2.0 NR 2.0 50.0

NR - Not Reported Table 6-12

Average Metals Concentrations in American Dipper Blood and Liver Samples From Reaches 5-8 (ppm, wet weight)1

Blood n Cadmium Copper Lead Zinc Reach 5 5 0.04 0.29 0.22 6.29 Reach 6 10 0.01 0.16 0.13 3.77 Reach 7 4 0.01 0.07 0.04 2.88 ReachS 30 0.01 0.13 0.05 4.00 Reach 0 14 0.04 0.23 0.11 13.93 Study 27 0.01 0.16 0.04 4.09 Reference Benchmark -- NR-1 NR 0.20 60.00 Liver 1 1 Reach 5 2 0.14 10.00 0.61 25.86 Reach 6 4 2.00 8.09 0.84 29.79 Reach 7 2 0.03 10.00 0.04 22.18 ReachS 13 0.17 5.86 0.09 25.57 Reach 0 4 0.84 5.39 0.19 34.31 Study 14 0.21 Reference 6.90 0.01 21.38 Benchmark -- 40.00 NR 2.00 60.00

2Study Reference Site: Poudre River, Colorado 3NR - Not Reported Table 6-13

American Dipper ALAD for Reaches 5, 6, 7, 8, 0 and the Study Reference1

% ALAD Reduction % ALAD Reduction Location N ALAD Activity Compared to the Compared to Reach 0 Study Reference2 Reach 5 4 612 49 17 Reach 6 9 530 56 28 Reach 7 4 629 48 14 Reach 8 - 24 903 25 0 Reach 0 10 735 39 Study Reference 23 1203 'From Archuleta et al. 2000 2Study Reference Site: Poudre River, Colorado Table 6-14

Tree Swallow ALAD for Reaches 7, 8, 0 and the Study Reference1

% ALAD Reduction % ALAD Reduction Location N ALAD Activity Compared to the Compared to Reach 0 Study Reference Reach 7 62 65 12 0 Reach 8 6 48 40 13 Reach 0 21 55 31 — Study Reference2 20 74 - 0

2Study Reference Site: Casper, WY, Pueblo, CO, and Agassiz National Wildlife Refuge, Minnesota Table 6-15

Average Metals Concentrations in Tree Swallow Liver Samples from Reaches 6-8 (ppm, wet weight)1

Liver n Cadmium | Copper Lead Zinc Reach 6 10 0.16 5.95 0.06 22.45 Reach 7 9 0.13 5.64 0.05 21.17 ReachS 3 0.12 9.04 0.21 20.77 Reach 0 10 0.05 5.16 0.06 21.09 Study 30 17.71

NR - Not Reported < - Less Than Detection Limit Table 6-16

Average Metals Concentrations (M-g/g) in Sediment Samples at Pueblo Reservoir from 1972 to 1988

Cadmium Copper Lead Zinc Pre-impoundment ( 1972- 1974) ' 4.20 31.1 65.0 113 Post-impoundment (1974-1976) ' 4.40 37.2 99.92 394 Mueller etal. (1991) 2 2.0 40 61 360 Lewis and Edelmann (1994) 3 35 52 278 — 1 Data from Herrmann and Mahan (1977) 1 One Sampling Site 1 Mean From All Samples FIGURES Color Map(s)

The following pages contain color that does not appear in the scanned images.

To view the actual images, please contact the Superfund Records Center at (303) 312-6473. -J : -RA\DS-BASE.G; EXPLANATION Hydrology

River or Stream ^^— Watershed Boundary •^^^^— Downstream Area of Arkansas River

Other Features Town or Landmark

ArkR5 Two Hii (iiilch to Above l.ak

Lake Creek lo Above Chalk Creek

Buena Vista

Ark R7 Chalk Creek 10 Ahcne S. I ork Arkansas Ri\cr

SCAI.H1N Mil.IS

10 10 PuebU UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN Re sen SITE CHARACTERIZATION SUMMARY FIGURE 6-1

DOWNSTREAM AREA

PROJECT 010004.3 DATE: OCT 22, 2002 REV: 1 BY: MCP I CHK: SAW MFC, Inc. consulting scientists and engineers 25000

20000

15000 - • 1988 Ext a • 1988 Tot D 1993 Ext N D 1993 Tot 10000

5000

I 1 D 1 I (H itll HI ml ril rfifl • m ml ml fill rfi m o m o CN CN OO CM CM CM CM CM Distance (km) downstream from Climax

Figure 6-2

Comparison of Total (Tot) and Extractable (Ext) Zinc in Sediment Samples Collected during Kimball's 1988 and Church's 1993 Sediment Assessments 22-01T-: ;ML: N: ARCPRffOIOOMMlDS-BLMSOILAML EXPLANATION Hydrology

River or Stream Watershed Boundary < \A/ Downstream Area of Arkansas River

Other Features

• BLM 2000 Soil Sample (CLEAR CREEK) Location CCHA- E Town or Landmark

Colorado Spri'ngs ^- !

Buena Vista

(CHAMPION) CHT1A-E

(FLOODPLAIN) (PARKDALE FPT1A-E REC SITE) (BIG BEND) (PARKDALE PDT1A-C BBT1A- E Saliday BRIDGE) i PBT1A-D (PINNACLE ROCK) PiRoTIA Canon City (SPIKE BUCK) SBT1A FBI SCALE IN MILES (VALLEY BRIDGE) 5 VB SALT LICK) (GRAPE CREEK) SLT1A-E GCT1A- D T2A-H UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN (TEXAS CREEK) SITE CHARACTERIZATION SUMMARY TCT1A-E

BLM 2000 SOIL SAMPLES IN THE DOWNSTREAM AREA

PROJECT 010004.3 DATE: OCT22, 2002 BY: MCP | CHK: MFC, Inc. consulting scientists and engineers

I 22-OCT-2CC- II - :VEG.AML EXPLANATION Hydrology

River or Stream Watershed Boundary Downstream Area of Arkansas River

Other Features

Open Valley Floodplains

Colorado Springs

Buena Vista Open Valley > Floodplain \ (Figure 6-5) .-''

Open Valley Floodplain (Figure 6-6) Canon City

Open Valley SCALE INMILHS Open Valley ; Floodplain Floodplain 8.0 8.0 (Figure 6-7) \(Figure 6- 8) UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN SITE CHARACTERIZATION SUMMARY FIGURE 6-4 POTENTIAL SEDIMENT DEPOSITION AREAS IN THE DOWNSTREAM AREA

PROJECT 010004.3 DATE: OCT 22. 2002 REV: 1 BY: MCP | CHK: SAW f MFC, Inc. consulting scientists and engineers 22-OCT-2002 GRA: NMRCPRJMIOOMGRffiDS-Ri". - 3VEG.AML EXPLANATION Hydrology

xx« ,• ".

Open Valley Floodplains

Vegetation in the vicinity of open valley f loodplains

Urban Open Water - Lentic - Open Water • Riverine - Riparian Evergreen Riparian Herbaceous (Standing Water Riparian Herbaceous (waterlogged Soils] Willow -.. Cotton wood •

I

. I •--;-•

. '

- - '

"-';•••

- \ r~ •*

• UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN SITE CHARACTERIZATION SUMMARY FIGURE 6-5 - 7m '••;" RIPARIAN VEGETATION AND / POTENTIAL SEDIMENT DEPOSITION ; I - AREAS IN THE BUENA VISTA AREA

PROJECT 010004.3 DATE: OCT 22, 2002

2?M >•;'.-».- consulting scientists and enqineers 224CT-2002GRA:NttRCPRJM1'>: . ::RJ2010004W.' '_ fn EXPLANATION Hydrology

River or Stream

Other Features Open Valley Floodplains

\\ Vegetation in the vicinity o of open valley f loodplains

Open Water • Lentic -:\\ Open Water - Riverine Riparian Evergreen Riparian Herbaceous (general) i t \- Riparian Herbaceous (Standing Water) x^> Riparian Herbaceous (waterlogged Soils) Riparian Shrub (general) 11 D Willow ^ Cotton wood •**\ - Upland Shrub

^ ' •

.

\2T

I v.-«'

Vffl

* ;-

. ' SCALE IN MILES

0.4 0.4 ,—"' J.••-••] UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN SITE CHARACTERIZATION SUMMARY

I FIGURE 6-6 RIPARIAN VEGETATION AND Mar ret Alexand POTENTIAL SEDIMENT DEPOSITION 1 I'lr I AREAS IN THE SALIDAAREA . I PROJECT 010004.3 DATE: OCT 22, 2002 .' . REV:1 BY: MCP | CHK: SAW ! MFG, Inc. 22-OCT-20026RA:NJ'ARCPRJ2\0100M'£RA\DS-RIPVEG3.6r- - ____ EXPLANATION Hydrology

---- Open Valley Floodplains

Vegetation in the vicinity of open valley f loodplains

i r if •*. >; Cotton wood Riparian Evergreen

~\' - r . .S Upland Grass Riparian Shrub (generall Open Water - Lentic Open Water - Riverine Riparian Herbaceous (Standing Waterl Riparian Herbaceous (waterlogged Soils) Willow Tamarisk Upland Shrub

County 14 Airpo-t -:^v

^\

fssyl^T^S ^m&z />

UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN SITE CHARACTERIZATION SUMMARY ! i\ IM _^, UOlUnioOn H jhland ,---' \ Coal Cr$ek T COTI FIGURE 6-7 j . I ^ /•- --- p RIPARIAN VEGETATION AND POTENTIAL SEDIMENT DEPOSITION AREAS IN THE 9 _/ CANON CITY AREA

PROJECT 010004.3 DATE: OCT 22. 2002 ^-o- ^r ^\ , j ^ . j>-'~~ ^ - consulting scientists and engineers 22-OCT-2002GRAN:iARC- EXPLANATION Hydrology [ River or Stream •^^^^— Watershed Boundary

Other Features

Open Valley Floodplains

Vegetation in the vicinity of open valley f loodplains

Urban Open Water - Lentic Open Water - Riverine Riparian Herbaceous (Standing Water) Riparian Herbaceous (waterlogged Soils) Riparian Shrub (general) Willow Tamarisk Cotton wood Sandbar Upland Shrub Upland Tree ra 1 S t ->v -•

1 / ^ - -

:^ v5 f" . ' :.yi •&"••} " '~Z,~^-~~ '^--

\ Jr SCALI: IN MILES

UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN

SITE CHARACTERIZATION SUMMARY

FIGURE 6-8

RIPARIAN VEGETATION AND POTENTIAL SEDIMENT DEPOSITION AREAS IN THE l .-e^ FLORENCE AREA i ;- PROJECT 010004.3 DATE: OCT22, 2002 REV: 1 BY: MCP | CHK: SAW MFC, Inc. consulting scientists and engineers Downstream of the 11 mile reach (station AR8)

600 200 1BO Baetidae Heptageniidae soo 160. r-J 140 ^ 400 d 120 j° 300 100 £ 80 | 200 60 D 40 100 20

35 160 i Chloroperlidae Brachycentridae 30 140 120 NE 25 100 ° 20 s. BO 1S I 60 I 10 40 20 0 3l 250 Rhyacophilidae Hydropsychidae 200 j: 2 d 150

100

50

o 1400 Elmidae Chironomidae 1200.

NE 3 1000. 600

600-

400-

200.

0

Date Date

Figure 6-9

Abundance of Dominant Macroinvertebrate Taxa in the Arkansas River Downstream of the 11-Mile Reach (Station AR-8). 10000 n

D) 1000 - oC S -4— » 0) O o o N

10 EF5 AR1 AR3 AR5 AR8

EF5 AR1 AR3 AR5 AR8 Station

Figure 6-10

Changes in Total Zn Concentration and Number of Heptageniidae in Reach 0 (EF-5, AR-1), Reach 1 (AR-3), and Reach 3 (AR-5) before and after Remediation of LMDT and California Gulch. These Values are Compared to Data Collected below the 11-Mile Reach (AR-8). Downstream of the 11 mile reach (station AR8)

10 Mayfly 8 i Stonefly Richness Richness 6

Caddisfly Dipteran CN Richness Richness

O 6 0) Q. 4

2

EPT Total Species

CM 20 Richness

0 15 0) Q. i_ 10

Date Date

Figure 6-11

Species Richness of Major Macroinvertebrate Groups in the Arkansas River Downstream of the 11-Mile Reach (Station AR-8). 1400 n

1200-

.£> 1000 D)

C g 800 ^ '•4—< CO "c 600- c o

200-

0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 Year

Figure 6-12

Metal Concentrations in the Caddisfly Arctopsyche grandis Collected from Stations AR-1 (Reach 0) and AR-8 (Downstream Area) of the Arkansas River. 1000 n

800 -

O) c 600 g *5 ra 'c 0) o 400 - c o o c N 200 -

4? Date

Figure 6-13

Total Zn Concentration (ug/L) Measured from 1989 to 1999 at Station AR-8 in the Downstream Reach. Downstream of the 11 mile reach (station AR8)

600 100, Mayfly Stonefly Abundance CM 500 Abundance 80

T 400 60 « 300 40 jj 200 E J| 100 20 •

0 0 300 1600 Dipteran Caddisfly 1400 CM 250- Abundance Abundance 1200

200- 1000

800. 0) 150- Q. 600 (5 .0 too 400. E 200. 50- z 0 0 35 i 2200, Other 2000. Total Abundance 30 Abundance 1600. E 25 1600 T- 1400 • CD 20 i_ 1200 Q. 15 1000 10 800- 600 5 400 0 200 0

Date Date

Figure 6-14

Abundance of Major Macroinvertebrate Groups in the Arkansas River Downstream of the 11-Mile Reach (Station AR-8). 180

160 • Baetidae 140 D Heptageniidae • Chloroperlidae ® 120 Q. ZO Brachycentridae E • Hydropsychidae 03 CO 100 - Chironomidae l_ 0) 80 - 05 60

40

20

0 1989-1992 1993-1999 600

Ephemeroptera Plecoptera 500 - Trichoptera Total Abundance

V 400 Q.

03 CO 300

C 03 (U 200 -

100 -

0 -1- 1989-1992 1993-1999 Treatment Figure 6-15 hanges in Abundance of Dominant Macroinvertebrate Groups in Reach 6 (station AR-7 near Granite) before (1989-1992) and after (1993-1999) Treatment of LMDT and California Gulch 7 -i

6 - Mayfly Taxa Stonefly Taxa 5 - Caddisfly Taxa Diptera Taxa CL CO 4 i_ 0) Q. c 3 CO (D

2 -

1 -

0 1989-1992 1993-1999 25

EPT Taxa 20 - Total Taxa

_CD Q. E 15-1 CO C/D i_ CD Q. TO 10 SiSH CD

^J-^i-.aV.:-' 5 - •n

1989-1992 1993-1999 Treatment Figure 6-16

Changes in Species Richness of Dominant Macroinvertebrate Groups in Reach 6 (station AR-7 near Granite) before (1989-1992) and after (1993-1999) Treatment of LMDT and California Gulch 3000 Date: F= 6.76; p = 0.0102 Reach: F = 25.59 p < 0.0001 2500 - O)

2000 - c o ro 1500 - c 0) o c o 1000 - B o c N I 500 -

0 Reach 0 Reach 1 Reach 3 Reach 6 Reach

Figure 6-17

Mean (+SD) Zinc Concentrations (rag/kg) Measured in the Caddisfly Arctopsyche grandis before (1990-1992) and after (1993-1999) Remediation of LMDT and California Gulch 1

1 Letters indicate results of multiple range tests. Across all dates, reaches with the same letter were not significantly different. MATRIX SUMMARIZING INJURY CHARACTERIZATION FOR THE DOWNSTREAM AREA OF THE UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN 1. Surface Water Resources: A. Surface Water B. Sediments Working Draft

Surface Water 1992 to 2000 (Period 3) Reach 5 - Two Bit Gulch to Lake Creek [2.2 river miles (RM)] High Flow Low Flow Regulatory Acute and chronic TVSs* based on mean hardness Acute and chronic TVSs* based on mean hardness Thresholds for each reach for cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc... for each reach for cadmium, copper lead, and zinc... For Injury [43CFR 11.62(b)] [43 CFR 1 .62(b)] Summary Data - Mean (min, max) me/L Summary Data - Mean (min. max) mg/L Diss Cd = 0.00078 (0.000 1 5, 0.00254) Diss Cd = 0.0006 1 (0.00035, 0.00 1 1 ) Diss Cu = 0.0042 (0.002 1 , 0.0073) DissCu= 0.0038(0.0012,0.0127) DissPb= 0.0017(0.001,0.0035) DissPb= 0.001(0.001,0.001) Diss Zn = 0.222 (0.059, 0.568) DissZn= 0.149(0.051,0.347) Regulatory Thresholds for Injury (mg/L) Regulatory Thresholds for Injury (mg/L) Analyte Acute Chronic Hardness Analyte Acute Chronic Hardness Cadmium 0.0029 0.0019 80.76 Cadmium 0.0041 0.0024 109.58 Copper 0.011 0.0075 80.76 Copper 0.0146 0.0097 109.58 Lead 0.0511 0.002 80.76 Lead 0.0713 0.0028 109.58 Zinc 0.0978 0.0983 80.76 Zinc 0.127 0.1273 109.58 Exceedence Data (# exceeding Regulatory Exceedence Data (# exceeding Regulatory Thresholds) Thresholds) Analyte Total n Station > Acute > Chronic Analyte Total n Station > Acute > Chronic Cadmium 10 1 0 1 Cadmium 12 1 0 0 Copper 10 1 0 0 Copper 12 1 0 1 Lead 9 1 0 4 Lead 11 1 0 0 Zinc 10 1 6 6 Zinc 12 1 5 5 Related Summary metals statistics for Reach 5 show elevated concentrations when compared to Reach 0. Benchmark Comparisons Statement of Injury: Surface waters in Reach 5 are injured during high flow due to concentrations of lead and zinc that exceed TVSs. Surface waters in Reach 5 are injured during low flow due to concentrations of zinc that exceed TVSs. A single exceedence for cadmium and copper was noted during both high and low flow, respectively. Commentary: Exceedences for the four metals evaluated, except for zinc, are relatively infrequent. Based on mean concentrations, zinc exceeds TVSs during high flow and low flow. On average, zinc was roughly twice the chronic TVS. Exceedences can be linked to poor water quality upstream of Reach 5. The December 2000 CDPHE Status of Water Quality Report indicates that the Arkansas River from Lake Fork to Lake Creek is fully supporting its designated recreational and agricultural uses and partially supporting its aquatic life uses. The primary cause of non-support is zinc concentrations in surface waters. Representativeness of Data: The amount of data available from this reach is limited; however, there are no substantial changes in flow or water quality in Reach 5 relative to Reaches 3 & 4 suggesting that collection of additional data would likely not provide any new insights about water quality in this reach. The spatial distribution of sample locations in Reach 5 shows that two points fall about one mile apart. One sampling point is located in the upper part of the reach just southwest of Holmes Gulch and the second point is located in the lower part of the reach just north of Lake Creek. The data, therefore, are considered to be representative. Data Gaps: None. Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? As with Reach 4 upstream, the data for Reach 5 provide an adequate assessment of the extent of water quality impacts from upstream sources. There are only a few small mine-waste deposits in the upper portion of Reach 5, and the length of Reach 5 is relatively short. Collection of new water quality data in Reach 5 would provide no additional information about restoration planning. Related Text: Sections 6.4, 6.4.1 and 6.4.2

* Both acute and chronic numbers adopted as stream standards are levels not to be exceeded more than once every three years on the average. 2 The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Surface Water 1992 to 2000 (Period 3) Reach 6 - Lake Creek to Chalk Creek (29.5 RM) High Flow Low Flow Regulatory Acute and chronic TVSs* based on mean hardness for Acute and chronic TVSs* based on mean hardness for Thresholds each reach for cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc... [43 each reach for cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc... [43 For Injury CFR11.62(b)] CFR ll.62(b)] Summary Data - Mean (min, max) me/L Summarv Data - Mean (min, max) me/L Diss Cd = 0.00064 (0.00005, 0.029) Diss Cd = 0.0003 (0.00005, 0.0025) Diss Cu = 0.0027 (0.000 1 , 0.0 1 7) DissCu= 0.00176(0.0001,0.0079) Diss Pb = 0.0008 (0.0005, 0.03 1 ) Diss Pb = 0.00062 (0.0005, 0.007) Diss Zn = 0.068 (0.005, 0.64) Diss Zn = 0.076 1 (0.004, 0.371) Regulatory Thresholds for Injury (mg/L) Regulatory Thresholds for Injury (mg/L) Analyte Acute Chronic Hardness Analyte Acute Chronic Hardne ss Cadmium 0.0016 0.0013 47.05 Cadmium 0.0022 0.0016 62.79 Copper 0.0066 0.0047 47.05 Copper 0.0087 0.006 62.79 Lead 0.0281 0.0011 47.05 Lead 0.0388 0.0015 62.79 Zinc 0.0618 0.0621 47.05 Zinc 0.079 0.0794 62.79

Exceedence Data (# exceeding Regulatory Exceedence Data (# exceeding; Regulatory Thresholds) Thresholds) Analyte Total n Stations > Acute > Chronic Analyte Total n Stations > Acute > Chronic Cadmium 212 9 9 10 Cadmium 187 9 9 9 Copper 210 9 2 17 Copper 184 9 0 2 Lead 199 9 1 13 Lead 182 10 0 2 Zinc 213 8 67 66 Zinc 169 8 52 52

Related Lake Creek discharges a substantial volume of water to the Arkansas River and alters the hydrology as well as Benchmark the water chemistry. As a result, zinc concentrations in Reach 6 are one half of those in Reach 5 and are Comparisons similar to Reach 0. Statement of Injury: Surface waters in Reach 6 are injured during high and low flow due primarily to concentrations of zinc that exceed TVSs. Occasional exceedences were identified for surface waters in Reach 6 during high and low flow for cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc. Commentary: Hardness values during both high and low flows are lower in this reach of the Arkansas River, resulting in lower TVSs. During both high and low flows, the frequency of exceedences for cadmium, copper, and lead is very low (8% or less), and high flow exceedences are more frequent than low flow exceedences. Zinc exceeds both the acute and chronic TVSs in about 30% of the samples during both high and low flows; however, on average, concentrations of zinc during high and low flow are very close to the TVSs. The December 2000 CDPHE Status of Water Quality Report indicates that the Arkansas River below Lake Creek is fully supporting its designated uses. The South Fork of Lake Creek is listed as partially supporting its aquatic life use due to metals. Discharge of this creek is through Twin Lake Reservoir, which is listed as fully supporting its designated uses. Additional metals may come from this drainage, although loading is expected to be small. Representativeness of Data: The spatial and temporal distribution (1992-1999) of the sample data for this reach is the best of all of the downstream reaches with between 7 and 10 sample stations covering most of the reach. The spatial distribution of sample locations in Reach 6 shows there are multiple sample points that fall both in the upper and lower sections of the reach. Data are spatial and temporally representative for the reach. Data Gaps: None. Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes. Related Text: Sections 6.4, 6.4.1 and 6.4.2

' Both acute and chronic numbers adopted as stream standards are levels not to be exceeded more than once every three years on the average.

The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Surface Water 1992 to 2000 (Period 3) Reach 7 - Chalk Creek to South Fork Arkansas River (21.2 RM) High Flow Low Flow Regulatory Acute and chronic TVSs* based on mean hardness for Acute and chronic TVSs* based on mean hardness for Thresholds each reach for cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc.. . [43 each reach for cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc... [43 For Injury CFR 11.62(b)] CFR 11.62(b)] Summary Data - Mean (min, max) me/L Summary Data - Mean (min, max) me/L DissCd= 0.0002(0.00005,0.0012) Diss Cd = 0.000997 (0.00005, 0.066) DissCu= 0.0024(0.0001,0.041) Diss Cu = 0.00 1 82 (0.000 1 , 0.0 1 24) Diss Pb = 0.00078 (0.0005, 0.005) Diss Pb = 0.0015 1 (0.0005, 0.0253) Diss Zn = 0.0398 (0.004, 0. 1 37) DissZn= 0.0396(0.004,0.14) Regulatory Thresholds for Injury (mg/L) Regulatory Thresholds for Injury (mg/L) Analyte Acute Chronic Hardness Analyte Acute Chronic Hardne ss Cadmium 0.0019 0.0014 54.7 Cadmium 0.0028 0.0018 76.19 Copper 0.0076 0.0053 54.7 Copper 0.0104 0.0071 76.19 Lead 0.0333 0.0013 54.7 Lead 0.048 0.0019 76.19 Zinc 0.0703 0.0706 54.7 Zinc 0.0931 0.0935 76.19 Exceedence Data (# exceeding Regulatory Exceedence Data (# exceeding Regulatory Thresholds) Thresholds) Analyte Total n Stations > Acute > Chronic Analyte Total n Stations > Acute > Chronic Cadmium 100 3 0 0 Cadmium 89 3 1 1 Copper 102 3 2 4 Copper 85 3 1 2 Lead 101 3 0 12 Lead 86 3 0 19 Zinc 103 3 12 12 Zinc 82 3 2 2

Related Compared to Reach 6 upstream, average concentrations of zinc during high and low flow typically decrease in Benchmark Reach 7. This is consistent with the trend observed from upstream reaches for zinc. Mean cadmium, copper, Comparisons and lead in Reach 7 are similar to concentrations in Reach 6 during low flows and decrease during high flows. Mean concentrations are less than Reach 0. Statement of Injury: Surface waters in Reach 7 are injured during high flow primarily due to concentrations of lead and zinc that exceed TVSs. Surface waters in Reach 7 are injured during low flow due primarily to concentrations of lead that exceed TVSs. Occasional exceedences of cadmium and copper were also identified during high flow, while occasional exceedences of cadmium, copper, and lead were observed during low flow. Commentary: The number of high and low flow exceedences of acute TVSs in Reach 7 for cadmium, copper, and lead is smaller than that observed in Reach 6, indicating that the concentrations of these metals are decreasing. No acute or chronic exceedences of TVSs were observed for cadmium during high flow, and only one each was observed during low flow. Zinc exceedences during high flow were greater than during low flow. Exceedences of TVSs in Reach 7 are slightly lower for both flow conditions than those observed for Reach 6. Mean concentrations are below the TVSs for both high and low flows. The December 2000 CDPHE Status of Water Quality Report indicates that the Arkansas River below Lake Creek is fully supporting its designated uses. Chalk Creek may serve as an additional source of metals in this reach due to historical mining, and is listed as partially supporting its aquatic life use. Representativeness of Data: Reach 7 data are considered to be representative both temporally and spatially for the reach. Data are temporally well distributed from 1992 to 1997. No post-1997 data were available. The spatial distribution of sample locations in Reach 7 shows that there are approximately nine points located throughout the middle and lower section of the reach, however, there are no sample points in the upper quarter of the reach, which covers approximately 6 miles. Data Gaps: None. Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes. Related Text: Sections 6.4, 6.4.1 and 6.4.2

* Both acute and chronic numbers adopted as stream standards are levels not to be exceeded more than once every three years on the average. 4 The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Surface Water 1992 to 2000 (Period 3) Reach 8 - South Fork Arkansas River to Canon City (58.1 RM) High Flow Low Flow Regulatory Acute and chronic TVSs* based on mean hardness Acute and chronic TVSs* based on mean hardness for Thresholds for each reach for cadmium, copper, lead, and each reach for cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc... [43 For Injury zinc... [43CFR 11.62(b)] CFR 1 1 .62(b)]

Summary Data - Mean (min, max) mg/L Summary Data - Mean (min, max) mg/L Diss Cd = 0.0001 1 (0.00005, 0.0009) Diss Cd = 0.0001 1 (0.00005, 0.0021) DissCu= 0.0019(0.0001,0.039) DissCu= 0.00124(0.0001,0.0101) Diss Pb = 0.0008 (0.0005, 0.0131) DissPb= 0.0017(0.0005,0.1677) Diss Zn = 0.041 (0.003, 0.226) DissZn= 0.036(0.001,0.175)

Regulatory Thresholds for Injury (mg/L) Regulatory Thresholds for Injury (mg/L) Analyte Acute Chronic Hardness Analyte Acute Chronic Hardness Cadmium 0.0027 0.0018 75.72 Cadmium 0.004 0.0024 107.48 Copper 0.0103 0.0071 75.72 Copper 0.0144 0.0095 107.48 Lead 0.0476 0.0019 75.72 Lead 0.0699 0.0027 107.48 Zinc 0.0926 0.0931 75.72 Zinc 0.1246 0.1252 107.48

Exceedence Data (# exceeding Regulatory Exceedence Data (# exceeding Regulatory Thresholds) Thresholds) Analyte Total n Stations > Acute > Chronic Analyte Total n Stations > Acute > Chronic Cadmium 194 6 0 0 Cadmium 199 8 0 0 Copper 187 6 2 3 Copper 197 7 0 1 Lead 196 6 0 12 Lead 204 7 1 5 Zinc 191 6 16 15 Zinc 178 7 4 4

Related Compared to Reach 7, mean concentrations of the metals evaluated in Reach 8 are typically similar to, or Benchmark less than, those observed in Reach 7 during both high and low flows. Mean zinc concentrations between the Comparisons two reaches are almost identical. Hardness increased in Reach 8 when compared to Reach 7, suggesting inputs from tributaries and effects of local land uses.

Statement of Injury: Surface waters in Reach 8 are injured during high flow due to concentrations of lead and zinc that exceed TVSs. Surface waters in Reach 8 are injured during low flow due to concentrations of lead, and zinc that exceed TVSs. Copper was also identified as occasionally exceeding the TVS.

Commentary: Cadmium does not exceed TVSs during either high or low flows. Copper exceedences are infrequent. Lead exceedences of the chronic TVSs were measured more frequently during high versus low flows. Occurrences of zinc exceedences are similar to Reach 7. Average values for cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc are well below the TVS. Based on mean concentrations, none of the evaluated metals exceed TVSs during either high or low flows. The December 2000 CDPHE Status of Water Quality Report indicates that the Arkansas River below Lake Creek is fully supporting its designated uses.

Representativeness of Data: Reach 8 data for Period 3 are temporally well distributed. Reach 8 is one of the longest of the downstream reaches evaluated. The spatial distribution of sample locations in Reach 8 shows there are multiple points that fall throughout the reach, however, there are two considerable gaps in between sample locations. One, located below Badger Creek, is 12 miles long and another, that is approximately 18 miles in length, is located between Texas Creek and Currant Creek. However, spatial distribution of the sample locations is adequate. Data are considered to be representative for the reach.

Data Gaps: None.

Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes.

Related Text: Sections 6.4, 6.4.1 and 6.4.2

1 Both acute and chronic numbers adopted as stream standards are levels not to be exceeded more than once every three years on the average.

The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Surface Water 1992 to 2000 (Period 3) Reach 9 - Canon City to Pueblo Reservoir (29 RM) High Flow Low Flow Regulatory Acute and chronic TVSs* based on mean hardness for Acute and chronic TVSs* based on mean hardness for Thresholds each reach for cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc... [43 each reach for cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc... [43 For Injury CFR11.62(b)] CFR 1

Summary Data - Mean (min. max) mg/L Summary Data - Mean (min. max) mg/L

Diss Cd = 0.00007 (0.00005, 0.00025) Diss Cd = 0.00006 (0.00005, 0.0002) Diss Cu = 0.0012 (0.0003, 0.004) Diss Cu = o.OO 133 (0.0001, 0.0077) Diss Pb = 0.00061 (0.00025,0.002) Diss Pb = 0.00046 (0.00025, 0.001) Diss Zn = 0.0241 (0.0015,0.061) Diss Zn = o.0148 (0.0015, 0.05)

Regulatory Thresholds for Injury (mg/L) Regulatory Thresholds for Injury (mg/L) Analyte Acute Chronic Hardness Analyte Acute Chronic Hardness Cadmium 0.0045 0.0025 118.61 Cadmium 0.0062 0.0032 159.76 Copper 0.0158 0.0104 118.61 Copper 0.0209 0.0134 159.76 Lead 0.0777 0.003 118.61 Lead 0.1071 0.0042 159.76 Zinc 0.1354 0.1361 118.61 Zinc 0.1743 0.1752 159.76

Exceedence Data (# exceeding Regulatory Exceedence Data (# exceeding Regulatory Thresholds) Thresholds) Analyte Total n Stations > Acute > Chronic Analyte Total n Stations > Acute > Chronic Cadmium 12 2 0 0 Cadmium 23 3 0 0 Copper 12 2 0 0 Copper 25 3 0 0 Lead 11 2 0 0 Lead 28 3 0 0 Zinc 12 2 0 0 Zinc 20 3 0 0

Related Hardness and, correspondingly, the TVSs increase relative to Reach 8. At the same time, average and Benchmark maximum concentrations decreased relative to upstream reaches. Comparisons Statement of Injury: Surface waters in Reach 9 are not injured during high or low flow.

Commentary: Within Reach 9 the Arkansas River changes from a high gradient, canyon stream to a wide floodplain stream. The December 2000 CDPHE Status of Water Quality Report indicates that the Arkansas River below Lake Creek is fully supporting its designated uses.

Representativeness of Data: The temporal distribution is limited (1992-1996) during the period, with most of the data collected closer to 1992. The spatial distribution of sample locations in Reach 9 shows there are multiple points that are located throughout the reach. There are three sample points in the upper section of the reach, two in the middle section and the remainder in the lower section. Available data are consistent with the downstream trend of improving water quality.

Data Gaps: None.

Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes.

Related Text: Sections 6.4, 6.4.1 and 6.4.2

* Both acute and chronic numbers adopted as stream standards are levels not to be exceeded more than once every three years on the average.

The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended 10 be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Surface Water 1992 to 2000 (Period 3) Reach 10 - Pueblo Reservoir (inlet to a point 1.5 miles below the outlet; 8.1 RM total) High Flow Low Flow Regulatory Acute and chronic TVSs* based on mean hardness Acute and chronic TVSs* based on mean hardness Thresholds for each reach for cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc. for each reach for cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc. For Injury [43CFR11.62(b)] [43CFR11.62(b)] Summary Data - Mean (min, max) mg/L Summary Data - Mean (min. max) mg/L DissCd= 0.00006(0.00005,0.0001) Diss Cd = 0.00008 (0.00005, 0.0003) Diss Cu = 0.00067 (0.0005, 0.003) Diss Cu = 0.00069 (0.0002, 0.002) Diss Pb = 0.00061 (0.0005, 0.002) Diss Pb = 0.0005 (0.0005, 0.0005) Diss Zn = 0.02161 (0.003, 0.047) DissZn= 0.01429(0.003,0.048) Regulatory Thresholds for Injury (mg/L) Regulatory Thresholds for Injury (mg/L) Analyte Acute Chronic Hardness Analyte Acute Chronic Hardness Cadmium 0.0065 0.0033 167.57 Cadmium 0.0079 0.0037 200.38 Copper 0.0219 0.0139 167.59 Copper 0.0259 0.0162 200.38 Lead O.H28 0.0044 167.59 Lead 0.1364 0.0053 200.38 Zinc 0.1815 0.1824 167.59 Zinc 0.2112 0.2123 200.38 Exceedence Data (# exceeding Regulatory Exceedence Data (# exceeding Regulatory Thresholds) Thresholds) Analyte Total n Stations > Acute > Chronic Analyte Total n Stations > Acute > Chronic Cadmium 21 2 0 0 Cadmium 20 2 0 0 Copper 21 2 0 0 Copper 20 2 0 0 Lead 22 2 0 0 Lead 20 2 0 0 Zinc 18 2 0 0 Zinc 17 2 0 0 Related Similar to Reach 9, none of the metals evaluated exceed the TVSs. Benchmark Comparisons Statement of Injury: Surface waters in Reach 10 are not injured during high or low flow. Commentary: Period 3 data used for Reach 10 analyses reflect reservoir tailwaters to approximately 1.5 miles downstream. No surface water quality data for metals were available during Period 3 in the reservoir. Data collected at the tailwaters of the reservoir indicate that none of the evaluated metals exceed TVSs during either high or low flows. When considered with that from Reach 9, which showed a similar trend, the data suggests that metals concentrations in the reservoir do not likely exceed TVSs. The December 2000 CDPHE Status of Water Quality Report indicates that the Pueblo Reservoir and the Arkansas River downstream of the reservoir is fully supporting its designated uses. Representativeness of Data: Sample locations for Period 3 data are located immediately downstream of the reservoir as well as about 1.5 miles downstream and provide adequate spatial coverage. The temporal distribution of the data extends from 1992 to about 1998. Although no surface water quality data for metals are available for the reservoir during the evaluation period, tail water quality is directly influenced by discharge from the reservoir; therefore, these data are considered to provide a representative picture of the metals concentrations for this reach. This evaluation is augmented by reservoir data from prior to 1991 that shows relatively good water quality during the pre-LMDT and Yak Tunnel treatment era. Data Gaps: None. Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes. Related Text: Sections 6.9, 6.9.1 and 6.9.2

1 Both acute and chronic numbers adopted as stream standards are levels not to be exceeded more than once every three years on the average.

The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Instream Sediment 1992 to 2000 (Period 3) Reach 5 - Two Bit Gulch to Lake Creek (2.2 RM) Regulatory Concentrations and duration of substances sufficient to have caused injury as defined in paragraphs (c), (d), Thresholds (e), or (f) of this section to groundwater, air, geologic, or biological resources when exposed to surface water, For Injury suspended sediments, or bed, bank, or shoreline sediments... [43 CFR 1 1.62(b)(l)(v)].

Summary Data (mg/kg)

Analyte River D • A \ **• ** Station (dry weight) Reach Penod AvS Mm Max Count n Cadmium ArkRS Periods 10.4 5.48 16 3 5 Copper ArkRS Period 3 40.5 23.6 63 3 5 Lead Ark R5 Period 3 686 602 770 2 2 Zinc ArkRS Periods 1,543.7 310.85 2,800 3 5

Related Sediment metals concentrations are elevated in Reach 5 over those found in Resich 0. Mean concentrations of Benchmark cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc are about 1.7, 1.6, 7.7, and 4.5 times greater, r<:spectively, in Reach 5 Comparisons sediments when compared to Reach 0 sediments.

Statement of Injury: No definitive criteria are available for sediments in the regulations. Given the small sediment load, it is not expected that metals in sediment are causing injury to groundwater or surface water resources. For additional information about the potential for injury, see the suri ace water and/or biological sections of the matrix.

Commentary: Sources of metal-enriched sediments are largely believed to be from upstream areas such as California Gulch and other tributary streams where historical mining has occum;d. There is a limited amount of recent data available for this reach and concentrations for each metal are similar to those observed in Reach 4, which also had little data available for sediments. Due to the fluvial d;/namics of this system, retention of fine sediments is low. Additionally, the quantity of fine-grained sec iments in this reach was observed to be small. Collecting additional sediment quality data in a system that is routinely flushed would not provide any additional insights on overall sediment quality.

Representativeness of Data: The spatial distribution of sample locations in Rea(;h 5 shows there are only three sample points, which are in close proximity to one another at the extreme s outh end of the reach, Further sampling is not anticipated to provide significant additional information for metals in sediments. Available data are not spatially or temporally diverse; however, these data are c Dnsidered to be adequate for injury characterization.

Data Gaps: None.

Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes.

Related Text: Sections 6.5. 6.5.1 and 6.5.2

The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Instream Sediment 1992 to 2000 (Period 3) Reach 6 - Lake Creek to Chalk Creek (29.5 RM) Regulatory Concentrations and duration of substances sufficient to have caused injury as defined in paragraphs (c), (d), Thresholds (e), or (f) of this section to groundwater, air, geologic, or biological resources when exposed to surface water, For Injury suspended sediments, or bed, bank, or shoreline sediments... [43 CFR 1 1.62(b)(l)(v)]

Summary Data (mp/kg)

Analyte River ., . , . »,. A, Station (dry weight) Reach Penod Av§ Min Max Count Cadmium Ark R6 Period 3 4.80 1.35 15.4 11 17 Copper Ark R6 Period 3 29.10 7.04 79.78 11 17 Lead Ark R6 Period 3 296.94 67.6 550 8 8 Zinc Ark R6 Period 3 1,046.63 238.39 2,559 11 17

Related Sediment metals concentrations for copper are slightly elevated in Reach 6 over those found in Reach 0 (e.g., Benchmark 1.1 times greater). Mean concentrations of lead and zinc are 3.2, and 2.8 times greater, respectively, in Reach Comparisons 6 sediments when compared to Reach 0 sediments. Cadmium in sediments was not elevated in Reach 6 compared to Reach 0. On average, concentrations are lower than in Reach 5.

Statement of Injury: No definitive criteria are available for sediments in the regulations. Given the small sediment load and large dilution flows of Lake Creek, it is not expected that metals in sediment are causing injury to groundwater or surface water resources. For additional information about the potential for injury, see the surface water and/or biological sections of the matrix.

Commentary: Sources of metal-enriched sediments are largely believed to be from upstream areas such as California Gulch and other tributary streams where historical mining has occurred. There is a limited amount of temporal data available for this reach; however, the sediment data appear to be spatially well distributed. Due to the fluvial dynamics of this system as well as the increased flows discharged by Lake Creek, retention of fine sediments is expected to be low. The quantity of fine-grained sediments in this reach was observed to be small. Collecting additional sediment quality data in a system that is routinely flushed would not provide any further insights on overall sediment quality.

Recresentativeness of Data: The spatial distribution of sample locations in Reach 6 shows that there are multiple points that fall throughout the reach.

Data Gaps: None.

Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes.

Related Text: Sections 6.5, 6.5.1 and 6.5.2

The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Instream Sediment 1992 to 2000 (Period 3) Reach 7 - Chalk Creek to South Fork Arkansas River (21.2 RM) Regulatory Concentrations and duration of substances sufficient to have caused injury as defined in paragraphs (c), (d), Thresholds (e), or (0 of this section to groundwater, air, geologic, or biological resources when exposed to surface water, For Injury suspended sediments, or bed, bank, or shoreline sediments... [43 CFR 1 l.62(b)(l)(v)]

Summary Data (mg/k^)

Analyte River D . . . „. A/r Station (dry weight) Reach Penod Av§ Min Max Count Cadmium Ark R7 Period 3 1.43 0.69 3.04 4 4 Copper ArkR7 Period 3 20.29 8.74 32 4 4 Lead Ark R7 Period 3 89.38 38.5 127 4 4 Zinc ArkR7 Periods 469.75 206 653 4 4

Related Sediment concentrations of cadmium and copper in Reach 7 are not elevated over those found in Reach 0. Benchmark Sediment concentrations of lead are less than 1 mg/kg higher in Reach 7 sediments compared to Reach 0 Comparisons sediments whereas zinc concentrations are 1.4 times higher in Reach 7 sediments compared to Reach 0.

Statement of Injury: No definitive criteria are available for sediments in the regulations. Given the small sediment load and the large dilution flows of Lake Creek and other tributaries it is not expected that metals in sediment are causing injury to groundwater or surface water resources. For additional information about the potential for injury, see the surface water and/or biological sections of the matrix.

Commentary: Concentrations of cadmium and copper in sediments from Reach 7 are not elevated over those observed in Reach 0 while concentrations of lead show a negligible increase. Zinc in sediments of Reach 7 is elevated, but not substantially. Overall, Reach 7 sediment metals concentrations are considerably lower than those observed upstream in Reach 6.

Representativeness of Data: Onlv a small amount of sediment data is available for this reach both temporally and spatially. However, the spatial distribution of sample locations in Reach 7 shows multiple points that fall throughout the reach. There are a couple of large breaks (approximately 5 miles in length) between data points in the middle to lower middle sections of the reach. As with upstream reaches, sediment data availability is low, but the initial data are viewed to be representative.

Data Gaps: None.

Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes.

Related Text: Sections 6.5, 6.5.1 and 6.5.2

10 The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Instream Sediment 1992 to 2000 (Period 3) Reach 8 - South Fork Arkansas River to Canon City (58.1 RM) Regulatory Concentrations and duration of substances sufficient to have caused injury as defined in paragraphs (c), (d), Thresholds (e), or (0 of this section to groundwater, air, geologic, or biological resources when exposed to surface water, For Injury suspended sediments, or bed, bank, or shoreline sediments... [43 CFR 1 1.62(b)(l)(v)j

Summary Data (mg/kg)

Analyte River „ . . . x,. x* Station (dry weight) Reach Penod Av§ Mm Max Count Cadmium ArkR8 Periods 1.76 0.342 4.52 15 17 Copper ArkRS Periods 22.78 7.57 40.5 15 17 Lead ArkRS Period 3 47.22 7.54 130 15 17 Zinc ArkRS Period 3 459.53 88 840 15 17

Related Mean sediment concentrations of cadmium, copper, and lead in Reach 8 are not elevated over those found in Benchmark Reach 0. The mean zinc concentration in sediments in Reach 8 is 1.3 times greater than the mean value for Comparisons zinc observed in Reach 0.

Statement of Injury: No definitive criteria are available for sediments in the regulations. For additional information about the potential for injury, see the surface water and/or biological sections of the matrix.

Commentary: Concentrations of cadmium, copper, and lead in sediments from Reach 8 are lower than concentrations of metals in sediments from Reach 0 while zinc is only slightly elevated. Compared to Reach 7, there are substantially more sediment quality data in Reach 8 than in Reach 7, yet on average sediment metals concentrations in Reach 8 are lower than those observed in Reach 7. The geomorphological assessment suggests that a 5-mile stretch of river upstream of Salida in Reach 8 has morphological characteristics for sediment retention.

Representativeness of Data: The spatial distribution of sample locations in Reach 8 shows there are many sample points in the upper section of the reach, but there is a large break between sample points starting above Texas Creek and ending around Currant Creek. Other than this break the points are well distributed. As with upstream reaches, sediment data availability is low, but it is assumed that these data are representative.

Data Gaps: None.

Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes.

Related Text: Sections 6.5. 6.5.1 and 6.5.2

11 The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Instream Sediment 1992 to 2000 (Period 3) Reach 9 - Canon City to Pueblo Reservoir (29 RM) Regulatory Concentrations and duration of substances sufficient to have caused injury as defined in paragraphs (c), (d), Thresholds (e), or (f) of this section to groundwater, air, geologic, or biological resources when exposed to surface water, For Injury suspended sediments, or bed, bank, or shoreline sediments... [43 CFR 11.62 (b)(l)(v)]

Summary Data (mg/kg)

Analyte River Station Period Avg Min Max n (dry weight) Reach Count Cadmium ArkR9 Period 3 1.14 0.415 2 3 3 Copper ArkR9 Period 3 21.78 8.35 34 3 3 Lead ArkR9 Period 3 31.93 12.8 53 3 3 Zinc ArkR9 Period 3 288.13 94.4 560 3 3

Related Sediment metals concentrations in Reach 9 are not elevated over those found in Reach 0. Moreover, Benchmark concentrations of metals in Reach 9, except for copper, are considerably lower than mean metal Comparisons concentrations in Reach 0.

Statement of Injury: No definitive criteria are available for sediments in the regulations; however, concentrations are lower than those found in Reach 0.

Commentary: Concentrations of metals in sediments from Reach 9 are considerably lower than concentrations of metals in sediments from Reach 0; however, only a small amount of sediment data are available for this reach both temporally and spatially. Below Canon City, the canyons and high gradient stream system gives way to a broader floodplain that extends to Pueblo Reservoir. Despite this lower gradient and higher potential for sediment deposition downstream of Canon City, all sediment metals concentrations evaluated are less than Reach 0 as well as the immediately upgradient reaches.

Representativeness of Data: The three sample locations in Reach 9 are distributed throughout the reach. There is an approximate 10-mile stretch from above Beaver Creek to just above Turkey Creek where data are not available. As with upstream reaches, sediment data availability is low, but it is assumed that these data are representative.

Data Gaps: None.

Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes.

Related Text: Sections 6.5, 6.5.1 and 6.5.2

12 The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Instream Sediment 1992 to 2000 (Period 3) Reach 10 - Pueblo Reservoir (inlet to a point 1.5 miles below the outlet; 8.1 RM total) Regulatory Concentrations and duration of substances sufficient to have caused injury as defined in paragraphs (c), (d), Thresholds (e), or (f) of this section to groundwater, air, geologic, or biological resources when exposed to surface water, For Injury suspended sediments, or bed, bank, or shoreline sediments... [43 CFR 1 1.62 (b)(l)(v)]

Summary Data (mg/kg) Analyte River „ . , . ,,. ,, Station (dry weight) Reach Penod Av& Min Max Count n Cadmium Ark RIO Period 3 2.00 2211 Copper Ark RIO Period 3 31.00 31 31 1 1 Lead Ark RIO Period 3 37.00 37 37 1 1 Zinc Ark RIO Period 3 180.00 180 180 1 1

Related Sediment metals concentrations in Reach 10, except for copper, are not elevated over those found in Reach 0. Benchmark Moreover, concentrations of cadmium, lead, and zinc in Reach 10 are considerably lower than mean metal Comparisons concentrations in Reach 0. Copper is 1.3 times higher in Reach 10 sediments compared to Reach 0 sediments.

Statement of Injury: I*Jo definitive criteria are available for sediments in the regulations. However, sediment metal concentrations are not elevated when compared to Reach 0. For additional information about the potential for injury, se2 the surface water and/or biological sections of the matrix.

Commentary: Pueblo Ileservoir is a sediment sink. Studies conducted prior to 1992 indicate somewhat elevated concentrations of metals in the delta of the reservoir relative to pre-reservoir sediments. However, continued sediment de livery to the reservoir reflects improvements in water quality.

Representativeness of Data: This reach includes the reservoir and its tail waters to about 1.5 miles downstream. Sediment data were only found for the reservoir during Period 3. One sample point is not representative. Upstream sediment data suggest that Pueblo Reservoir sediments are continually being covered by new, clean ;r sediments.

Data Gaps: Although current sediment data are limited, given the relatively low concentrations in the reservoir and in Reaches 7-9 sediment quality is not a focus. Therefore lack of sediment sample results is not identified as a data gap».

Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes.

Related Text: Sections 6.9. 6.9.1 and 6.9.2

13 The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

2. Ground water Resources: A. Groundwater

14 Working Draft

Groundwater 1992 to 2000 Reaches 5-10 - Two-Bit Gulch to a Point 1.5 Miles below the Outlet of Pueblo Reservoir (148.1 RM) High Flow I Low Flow Regulatory Exceedence of the maximum contaminant levels. Exceedence of the maximum contaminant levels. Thresholds [43CFR 11.62(c)] [43CFR 11.62(c)] For Injury Summary Data - Mean (min, max) mg/L Summary Data - Mean (min. max) mg/L

No groundwater data available during Period 2 or 3. No groundwater data available during Period 2 or 3

Regulatory Thresholds for Injury (mg/L) Regulatory Thresholds for Injury (mg/L) Analyte MCL Analyte MCL Cadmium 0.005 Cadmium 0.005 Copper 1.0* Copper 1.0* Lead 0.05 Lead 0.05 Zinc 5.0 Zinc 5.0

Exceedence Data (# exceeding Regulatory Exceedence Data (# exceeding Regulatory Thresholds) Thresholds) No groundwater data available for Periods 2 or 3 to No groundwater data available for Periods 2 or 3 to compare to Regulatory thresholds compare to Regulatory thresholds

Related Benchmark Comparisons Statement of Injury: No injury.

Commentary: The finding of no injury is in large part based upon a review of data for the 11-mile reach. Data for the 11-mile reach indicate that water quality in the valley fill system is not measurably influenced by sources within the 11-mile reach or upstream (e.g., California Gulch). Although metals are contributed to the groundwater system from those sources, a combination of attenuation and dilution result in a rapid reduction in metals concentration. Domestic wells within the 11-mile reach are not in exceedence of the relevant criteria. Given the increasing downstream dilution, no injury is expected below the 11-mile reach. There are several public and municipal wells located in the basin in the downstream area. Information reported from EPA's Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) indicates that of the wells monitored by the State in Chaffe and Fremont county, none were found to exceed MCLs during Period 3.

Representativeness of Data: Data provide adequate spatial coverage to confirm water quality is meeting the relevant criteria.

Data Gaps: None

Is current information sufficient for restoration planning?

Related Text: Sections 6.6, 6.6.1, 6.6.2 6.9, 6.9.1 and 6.9.2

There is no MCL for copper, but copper has a drinking water supply standard of 1.0 mg/L in Colorado. Zinc value is a secondary standard to address staining.

15 The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

3. Geologic Resources: A. Floodplain Soils (including floodplain mine- waste deposits)

16 Working Draft

Floodplain Soils Reach 5 - Two Bit Gulch to Lake Creek (2.2 RM) Regulatory 1. Concentrations of metals in soils sufficient to cause a phytotoxic response... [43 CFR 11.62(e)(10)] Thresholds 2. Soil pH... [43 CFR 11.62(e)(2)] For Injury Summary Data: No data are available for floodplain soils in Reach 5. Some small mine-waste deposits exist in Reach 5; however, they have not been quantified with respect to surface area, volume, and chemical properties.

Related There are no data for plant-available metal concentrations for comparative purposes. Benchmark Comparisons Statement of Injury: Field observations indicate low vegetation cover on several small mine-waste deposits in the upper portion of Reach 5. Soil pH and/or metal concentrations may be influencing plant growth on these deposits, reflecting injury to soils at those locations. No other injury has been observed from field reconnaissance conducted in 2001.

Commentary: Vegetation growing in floodplain soils along this reach is productive, but plant growth on mine-waste deposits is poor. The potential for mine-waste deposits to influence metals concentrations in both surface and groundwater is limited by the corresponding small loading potential relative to the large volume of surface and groundwater moving through the valley.

Representativeness of Data: No data are available.

Data Gaps: The primary data gap is a lack of mapping of floodplain mine-waste deposits. Correspondingly, there are no data regarding the physical and chemical properties of soils and mine-waste deposits.

Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? No. Mapping of the deposits is necessary and physical and chemical data on mine-waste deposits would also be helpful for restoration planning.

Related Text: Sections 6.7, 6.7.1 and 6.7.2

17 The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Floodplain Soils Reach 6 - Lake Creek to Chalk Creek (29.5 RM) Regulatory 1. Concentrations of metals in soils sufficient to cause a phytotoxic response... [43 CFR 11.62(e)(10)] Thresholds 2. Soil pH... [43 CFR 11.62(e)(2)] For Injury Summary Data: Floodplain soils data exist for Reach 6. This includes total metal concentrations for lead and zinc for all sites sampled and cadmium and copper for a subset of these sites. There is some evidence of anthropogenic influence in Reach 6.

Related There are no data for plant-available metal concentrations for comparative purposes. Benchmark Comparisons Statement of Injury: The elevated concentrations of zinc in floodplain soils at the confluence of Clear Creek (Reach 6) indicated the potential for injury in this location. The source of these metals is unknown because this is not an area where mine-waste deposits were predicted to occur, based on stream morphology. Regardless of the source, total metal concentrations are potentially high enough to cause injury to soils at this location. However, this cannot be confirmed without further soil sampling and analysis.

Commentary: Other than the sample sites along Reach 6, there is no other evidence to indicate injury to floodplain soils in the remaining portions of Reach 6. Floodplain soils are not considered injured in most of Reach 6 because total metal concentrations along these reaches are similar to Reach 0 and riparian vegetation does not show signs of metal toxicity.

Representativeness of Data: BLM data from 2000 includes samples from floodplain soils in Reach 6. However, data are for total metals and no data exists for plant-available concentrations.

Data Gaps: None.

Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes.

Related Text: Sections 6.7, 6.7.1 and 6.7.2

18 The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Floodplain Soils Reaches 7-10 - Chalk Creek to Pueblo Reservoir (108.3 RM) Regulatory 3. Concentrations of metals in soils sufficient to cause a phytotoxic response... [43 CFR 11.62(e)(10)] Thresholds 4. Soil pH... [43 CFR 11.62(e)(2)] For Injury Summary Data: Floodplain soils data exist for Reaches 7-9. This includes total metal concentrations for lead and zinc for all sites sampled and cadmium and copper for a subset of these sites.

Related There are no data for plant-available metal concentrations for comparative purposes. Benchmark Comparisons Statement of Injury: There is no other evidence to indicate injury to floodplain soils in Reaches 7-9. Floodplain soils are not considered injured in these reaches because total metal concentrations along these reaches are similar to Reach 0 and riparian vegetation does not show signs of metal toxicity.

Commentary: Vegetation growing in floodplain soils along Reaches 7-9 is productive, based on field observations.

Representativeness of Data: BLM data from 2000 includes samples from floodplain soils in Reaches 7-9. However, data are for total metals and no data exists for plant-available concentrations.

Data Gaps: None.

Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes.

Related Text: Sections 6.7, 6.7.1, 6.7.2, 6.9, 6.9.1 and 6.9.2

19 The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

4. Biological Resources: A. Vegetation B. Benthic Macroinvertebrates C. Brown Trout D. Terrestrial Wildlife - Small Mammals E. Terrestrial Wildlife - Migratory Birds

20 Working Draft

Vegetation Reach 5 - Two Bit Gulch to Lake Creek (2.2 RM) Regulatory Tissue metal concentrations considered to be toxic to vegetation... [43 CFR 11.62(f)( 1 )(i)] Thresholds For Injuiy Summary Data: No data are available regarding plant tissue concentrations or physiological/morphological effects in Reach 5.

Related No data are available for vegetation cover, production, or tissue metal concentrations. Benchmark Comparisons Statement of Injury: Field observations confirm that vegetation is productive and shows no signs of injury associated with elevated metal concentrations in floodplain soils. However, plant growth is limited on several small mine-waste deposits along Reach 5, based on field observations. This indicates injury to vegetation where mine-waste deposits occur in Reach 5.

Commentary: Field observations along Reach 5 confirm that vegetation is productive in floodplain soils but not on mine-waste deposits.

Representativeness of Data: No quantitative data are available.

Data Gaps: There is no data on vegetation cover, production, or tissue metal concentrations on mine-waste deposits. Although these data would be informative, they are not essential for defining injury or for restoration planning if mapping of mine-waste deposits is available.

Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes.

Related Text: Sections 6.8, 6.8.1, 6.8.1.1 and 6.8.1.2

21 The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but raiher are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Vegetation Reaches 6-9 - Lake Creek to Pueblo Reservoir (137.8 RM) Regulatory Tissue metal concentrations considered to be toxic to vegetation... [43 CFR 11.62(0(0(0] Thresholds For Injury Summary Data: No data are available regarding plant tissue concentrations or physiological/morphological effects in Reaches 6-9.

Related No data are available for vegetation cover, production, or tissue metal concentrations. Benchmark Comparisons Statement of Injury: Field observations confirm that vegetation is productive and shows no signs of injury associated with elevated metal concentrations in floodplain soils. Vegetation type mapping conducted by Colorado Division of Wildlife also indicates vegetation cover types are consistent with floodplain setting for non-injured areas.

Commentary: Field observations along Reaches 6-9 confirm that vegetation is productive in floodplain soils. There are no identifiable deposits of flood plain mine-waste.

Representativeness of Data: Information is limited to field observations and vegetation type mapping.

Data Gaps: None.

Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes.

Related Text: Sections 6.8, 6.8.1, 6.8.1.1 and 6.8.1.2

22 The matrices provide a brief summary of ihe information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Benthic Macroinvertebrates (1989-2000) Reach 5 - Two Bit Gulch to Lake Creek (2.2 RM) Regulatory \. Metal concentrations considered to be toxic to macroinvertebrates... [43 CFR 11.62(f)(l)(0] Thresholds 2. See surface water. For Injury 3. Microcosm experiments... [43 CFR 11.62(f)(2)(iii)]

Summary Data: Based on results of microcosm experiments, metal concentrations in Reach 5 are sufficient to cause injury to benthic macroinvertebrates.

Related 1. Comparisons to benchmark: Reach 0. Benchmark a. Community structure. Comparisons 2. Results of microcosm experiments showing direct effects of metals.

Statement of Injury: There are no benthic data from Reach 5. Results of microcosm experiments conducted in 1998 showed that exposure of benthic communities to a mixture of cadmium, copper, and zinc at a concentration similar to that measured in Reach 5 had a significant effect on community composition, species richness of mayflies, and abundance of metal-sensitive species.

Commentary: Because water quality in Reach 5 is similar to that observed in Reach 3 (where injury was observed) and because metal levels in Reach 5 exceed those known to be toxic to metal-sensitive species, it is likely that benthic macroinvertebrates are injured in Reach 5. Representativeness of Data: There are no benthic data from Reach 5.

Data Gaps: The most significant data gap for benthic macroinvertebtrates in these reaches is the lack of information from Reach 5 and the upper section of Reach 6 near the confluence of Lake Creek. Analysis of benthic data from these reaches would allow for a more precise definition of injury.

Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes.

Related Text: Sections 6.8.2, 6.8.2.1 and 6.8.2.2

23 The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Benthic Macroinvertebrates (1989-2000) Reach 6 - Lake Creek to Chalk Creek (29.5 RM) Regulatory 1. Metal concentrations considered to be toxic to macroinvertebrates... [43 CFR 1.62(0(1)0)] Thresholds 2. See surface water. For Injury 3. Microcosm experiments... [43 CFR 1 l.62(f)(2)(iii)]

Summary Data: Metal concentrations in Reach 6 are unlikely to cause injury to benthic macroinvertebrates. Results of microcosm experiments show that current metal concentrations in the lower section of Reach 6 (Buena Vista) are generally below levels known to be toxic to benthic macroinvertebrates.

Related Comparisons to benchmark: Reach 0. Benchmark b. Community structure. Comparisons c. Metal levels in the caddisfly Arctopsyche grandis. d. Metal levels in periphyton. 2. Results of microcosm experiments showing direct effects of metals.

Statement of Injury: Analysis of community structure for benthic macroinvertebrates collected from the lower portion of reach 6 (Buena Vista) shows significant improvement in species richness, diversity and abundance of metal-sensitive species. In particular, abundance of Heptageniidae, a highly metal-sensitive group, has increased 2-3 times since remediation of Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel and California Gulch was initiated in 1992. Abundance of these organisms after 1996 was similar to that observed in Reach 0.

Metal concentrations in the caddisfly Arctopsyche grandis collected from Reach 6 have significantly decreased since 1994 and are similar to those values measured in Reach 0. The only exception to this pattern is an unexplained spike in zinc concentration in caddisflies in 1999. Zinc levels in periphyton measured at Reach 6 (1,031-1,273 ug/g) in 1995 and 1996 were also within the range of values observed in Reach 0 (409-4,200 |jg/g).

Results of microcosm experiments conducted in 1998 showed that exposure of benthic communities to a mixture of cadmium, copper, and zinc at concentrations similar to those in Reach 6 had no effect on community composition, species richness of mayflies, or abundance of metal-sensitive species.

Commentary: Water quality in Reach 6 is greatly improved by the dilution from lake Creek. Recent survey data indicate that there is no injury to benthic macroinvertebrates in the lower portion of Reach 6 near Buena Vista.

Representativeness of Data: The most extensive data are from a long-term analysis of water quality and benthic macroinvertebrates from a single station in Reach 6 (station AR8 in Buena Vista) (Clements, unpublished data). Metal levels in the caddisfly Arctopsyche grandis were based on data collected between 1993 and 1999. Metal concentrations in periphyton were determined in 1990 (Kiffney and Clements 1993) and between 1995-1996 (Harrrahy 2000).

Data Gaps: None

Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes.

Related Text: Sections 6.8.2, 6.8.2.1 and 6.8.2.2

24 The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Benthic Macroinvertebrates (1989-2000) Reaches 7-8 - Chalk Creek to Canon City (79.3 RM) Regulatory 1. Metal concentrations considered to be toxic to macroinvertebrates... [43 CFR Thresholds 2. See surface water. For Injury 3. Microcosm experiments... [43 CFR 11.62(f)(2)(iii)]

Summary Data: Metal concentrations in Reaches 7 and 8 are generally below levels known to cause injury to benthic macroinvertebrates.

Related 1. Comparisons to benchmark: Reach 0. Benchmark a. Community structure. Comparisons 2. Results of microcosm experiments showing direct effects of metals.

Statement of Injury: Few data are available from Reaches 7 and 8 of the Arkansas River. Results of microcosm experiments conducted in 1998 showed that exposure of benthic communities to a mixture of cadmium, copper, and zinc at concentrations similar to those measured at Reaches 7 and 8 had no effect on community composition, species richness of mayflies, or abundance of metal-sensitive species. Quantitative collections of benthic macroinvertebrates by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) showed no spatial trends that could be related to heavy metals in Reaches 7 and 8. Based on these results, there is no injury to benthic macroinvertebrates in Reaches 7 and 8.

Commentary: The dramatic recovery of benthic macroinvertebrates observed in Reach 6 (Buena Vista) following remediation of upstream metal sources suggests that there is no injury to benthic macroinvertebrates in Reaches 7 and 8.

Representativeness of Data: There are no macroinvertebrate surveys for Reaches 7 and 8 that are both spatially and temporally comprehensive. The USFWS collected the only spatially extensive data available from these reaches in 1995.

Data Gaps: None.

Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes.

Related Text: Sections 6.8.2, 6.8.2.1 and 6.8.2.2

25 The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Benthic Macroinvertebrates (1989-2000) Reaches 9-10 - Canon City to a Point 1.5 Miles below the Outlet of Pueblo Reservoir (37.1 RM) Regulatory 1. Metal concentrations considered to be toxic to macroinvertebrates... [43 CFR 11.62(f)(l)(0] Thresholds 2. See surface water. For Injury 3. Microcosm experiments... [43 CFR 11.62(f)(2)(iii)]

Summary Data: Metal concentrations in Reaches 9 and 10 are generally below levels known to cause injury to benthic macroinvertebrates.

Related 1. Comparisons to benchmark: Reach 0. Benchmark a. Community structure. Comparisons 2. Results of microcosm experiments showing direct effects of metals.

Statement of Injury: Very few data are available from Reaches 9 and 10 of the Arkansas River. Results of microcosm experiments conducted in 1998 showed that exposure of benthic communities to a mixture of cadmium, copper, and zinc at target concentrations greater than those generally observed at Reaches 9 and 10 had no effect on community composition, species richness of mayflies, or abundance of metal-sensitive species. Quantitative collections of benthic macroinvertebrates by the LTSFWS showed no spatial trends that could be related to heavy metals. Based on these results, there is no current injury to benthic macroinvertebrates in Reaches 9 and 10.

Commentary: The dramatic recovery of benthic macroinvertebrates observed in Reach 6 (Buena Vista) following remediation of upstream metal sources suggests that injury to benthic macroinvertebrates in Reaches 9 and 10 is not occurring.

Representativeness of Data: There are no macroinvertebrate surveys for Reaches 9 and 10 that are both spatially and temporally comprehensive. The USFWS collected the only spatially extensive data available from these reaches in 1995.

Data Gaps: None.

Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes.

Related Text: Sections 6.8.2, 6.8.2.1, 6.8.2.2, 6.9, 6.9.1 and 6.9.2

26 The matrices provide a brief summary or the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Brown Trout Reach 5 - Two Bit Gulch to Lake Creek (2.2 RM) Regulatory 1. Metal concentrations considered to be toxic to fish... [43 CFR 11.62(f)(l)(i)] Thresholds 2. See surface water. For Injury Summary Data: Aqueous metal concentrations in Reach 5 are sufficient to cause injury to brown trout. Maximum metal concentrations, especially during high flow conditions, exceed levels known to be toxic to brown trout based on results of laboratory toxicity tests. Surveys of brown trout show reduced abundance and biomass in Reach 5 compared to Reach 0.

Related 1. Comparisons to benchmark: Reach 0 Benchmark a. Abundance (number per acre) and biomass (pounds per acre); and Comparisons b. Length-frequency distributions. 2. Results of acute and chronic toxicity tests.

Statement of Injury: Metal concentrations in Reach 5 exceed levels known to be toxic to brown trout. The brown trout population in Reach 5 was characterized by reduced overall abundance but somewhat larger individuals compared to the reference reach.

Commentary: Brown trout data from Reach 5 relatively sparse; however, because water quality in Reach 5 was similar to that measured in Reach 3 (where injury was observed), we conclude that there is also injury to brown trout in this reach.

Metal concentrations in Reach 5 exceed levels known to be toxic to brown trout. Abundance, biomass, and length frequency distributions of brown trout from Reach 3 and Reach 5 were generally similar. The lower abundance and biomass of brown trout in Reach 5 compared to Reach 0 is consistent with metal impacts.

Representativeness of Data: All brown trout data were obtained from the Colorado Division of Wildlife. Relatively few data are available in Reach 5 prior to remediation of the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel and California Gulch, and therefore it is difficult to assess temporal variation in brown trout biomass and abundance.

Data Gaps: Few data are available on brown trout populations in Reach 5.

Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes.

Related Text: Sections 6.8.3, 6.8.3.1 and 6.8.3.2

27 The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Brown Trout Reach 6 - Lake Creek to Chalk Creek (29.5 RM) Regulatory 1. Metal concentrations considered to be toxic to fish... [43 CFR 11.62(f)(l)(i)] Thresholds 2. See surface water. For Injury Summary Data: Aqueous metal concentrations in Reach 6 are unlikely to cause injury to brown trout. Metal concentrations decrease significantly downstream from Lake Creek, and mean values approach the regulatory threshold levels in Reach 6. However, maximum metal concentrations, especially during high flow conditions, may exceed levels known to be toxic to brown trout.

Related 1. Comparisons to benchmark: Reach 0 Benchmark a. Abundance (number per acre) and biomass (pounds per acre); and Comparisons b. Length-frequency distributions. 2. Results of acute and chronic toxicity tests. Statement of Injury: The brown trout population in Reach 6 was characterized by reduced overall abundance but somewhat larger individuals compared to the reference reach.

Commentary: Because of natural and anthropogenic changes in physical characteristics of the Arkansas River, particularly flow alterations associated with discharge from Lake Creek and poor instream habitat, quantifying the importance of metals relative to other habitat features is difficult in this reach.

Representativeness of Data: All brown trout data were obtained from the Colorado Division of Wildlife. Relatively few data are available in Reach 6 prior to remediation of the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel and California Gulch, and therefore it is difficult to assess temporal variation in brown trout biomass and abundance.

Data Gaps: Uncertainty associated with the relative influence of heavy metals and flow alterations in Reach 6 immediately downstream from Lake Creek results in a data gap. Discharge from Lake Creek significantly dilutes heavy metals (a positive effect), but may also influence brown trout recruitment and growth. It is possible that flow alterations immediately downstream from Lake Creek impact fish populations; however there are no quantitative data showing direct effects of these flow modifications on brown trout. A quantitative sampling effort of brown trout upstream and downstream from Lake Creek that examines seasonal and annual variation in both flow and water quality may reduce uncertainty regarding the relative importance of these two stressors.

Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes.

Related Text: Sections 6.8.3, 6.8.3.1 and 6.8.3.2

28 The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Brown Trout Reaches 7-8 - Chalk Creek to Canon City (79.3 RM) Regulatory 1. Metal concentrations considered to be toxic to fish... [43 CFR 11.62(00X0] Thresholds 2. See surface water. For Injury Summary Data: Aqueous metal concentrations in Reach 7 and 8 occasionally exceed levels sufficient to cause injury to brown trout.

Related 1. Comparisons to benchmark: Reach 0 Benchmark a. Abundance (number per acre) and biomass (pounds per acre); and Comparisons b. Length-frequency distributions. 2. Results of acute and chronic toxicity tests.

Statement of Injury: Brown trout biomass and abundance improved significantly in Reach 8 (Wellsville) compared to Reaches 3 and 6. Although overall abundance is lower compared to Reach 0, total biomass is generally similar to or greater than at the reference reach. The significant improvement in biomass and abundance of brown trout in Reach 8 and the similarity to the reference reach suggests there is no injury to brown trout in Reach 8.

Commentary: Conditions within Reach 7 (e.g., water quality) are essentially the same as Reach 8, therefore, no injury is expected within Reach 7.

Representativeness of Data: All data were obtained from the Colorado Division of Wildlife. Relatively few data are available from Reaches 7 and 8 prior to remediation of the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel and California Gulch, and therefore it is difficult to assess temporal variation in brown trout biomass and abundance.

Data Gaps: None.

Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes.

Related Text: Sections 6.8.3, 6.8.3.1 and 6.8.3.2

29 The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Brown Trout Reaches 9-10 - Canon City to a Point 1.5 Miles below the Outlet of Pueblo Reservoir (37.1 RM) Regulatory 1. Metal concentrations considered to be toxic to fish... [43 CFR 11.62(f)(l)(i)] Thresholds 2. See surface water. For Injury Summary Data: Aqueous metal concentrations in Reach 9 and 10 do not exceed levels sufficient to cause injury to brown trout.

Related 1. Comparisons to benchmark: Reach 0 Benchmark a. Abundance (number per acre) and biomass (pounds per acre); and Comparisons b. Length-frequency distributions. 2. Results of acute and chronic toxicity tests.

Statement of Injury: Brown trout biomass and abundance improved significantly in Reach 8 at the Wellsville station. Although overall abundance is lower compared to Reach 0, total biomass is generally similar to or greater than at the reference reach. The significant improvement in biomass and abundance of brown trout in Reach 8 and the similarity to the reference reach suggests there is no injury further downstream in Reaches 9 and 10.

Commentary: Natural longitudinal changes in the physicochemical and habitat characteristics of the Arkansas River complicate comparisons with upstream reaches. Correspondingly, it should be noted that within Reach 9 the Arkansas River transitions from a brown trout fishery.

Representativeness of Data: All data were obtained from the Colorado Division of Wildlife. Relatively few data are available from Reaches 9 and 10 prior to remediation of the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel and California Gulch, and therefore it is difficult to assess temporal variation in brown trout biomass and abundance.

Data Gaps: None.

Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes.

Related Text: Sections 6.8.3, 6.8.3.1,6.8.3.2, 6.9, 6.9.1 and 6.9.2

30 The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Terrestrial Wildlife - Small Mammals Reach 5 - Two Bit Gulch to Lake Creek (2.2 RM) Regulatory 1. Histopathological lesions... [43 CFR 11.62(f)(4)(vi)(D)] Thresholds For Injury Summary Data: There are no small mammal data for Reach 5.

Related 1. Metal concentrations in organs. Benchmark Comparisons Statement of Injury: Based on declining metals concentrations in soils and vegetation from Reach 1 to 5 and because injury was not documented in areas of high exposure, small mammals are not expected to be injured in Reach 5.

Commentary: There are areas of mine-waste deposits in Reach 5, but there are fewer areas compared to other reaches and they are all small deposits. Riparian vegetation is relatively dense in Reach 5 and based on declining metals concentrations in soils and vegetation, metals exposure for small mammals is expected to be minimal.

Representativeness of Data: There are no small mammal data for Reach 5 nor are there soils or vegetation data.

Data Gaps: None.

Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes.

Related Text: Sections 6.8.4, 6.8.4.1 and 6.8.4.2

31 The matrices provide a brief summary of ihe information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Terrestrial Wildlife - Small Mammals Reaches 6-10 - Lake Creek to a Point 1.5 Miles below the Outlet of Pueblo Reservoir (145.9 RM) Regulatory 1. Histopathological lesions... [43 CFR 11.62(f)(4)(vi)(D)] Thresholds For Injury Summary Data: There are no small mammal data for Reaches 6-10.

Related 1. Metal concentrations in organs. Benchmark Comparisons Statement of Injury: Injury to small mammals is not expected to occur in Reaches 6-10.

Commentary: Within the 11-mile reach, tissue concentrations and histopathology indicate that there is no injury to small mammals. Because there are no known fluvial mine-waste deposits in Reaches 6-10 and because floodplain soils concentrations are relatively low, the potential for injury to small mammals is very low.

Representativeness of Data: Floodplain soils data indicate that metals concentrations are well below benchmark values.

Data Gaps: None.

Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? No known injury requiring restoration.

Related Text: Sections 6.8.4, 6.8.4.1, 6.8.4.2, 6.9, 6.9.1 and 6.9.2

32 The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Terrestrial Wildlife - Migratory Birds Reach 5 - Two-Bit Gulch to Lake Creek (31.7 RM) Regulatory 1. ALAD activity in assessment area is significantly less (alpha <0.05) than mean values for the control area and Thresholds ALAD suppression of at least 50 percent was measured... [43 CFR 11.62(f)(4)(v)(D)] For Injury 2. Reduced reproduction... [43 CFR 11.62(f)(4)(v)(B)] Summary Data

Average Blood Metal Concentrations Average Liver Metal Concentrations in American Dippers (mg/kg wet weight) in American Dippers (mg/kg wet weight)

Blood Cadmium Copper Lead Zinc Liver Cadmium Copper Lead Zinc Reach 5 0.04 0.29 0.22 6.29 Reach 5 0.14 10.00 0.61 25.86 Reach 0 14 0.04 0.23 0.11 13.93 Reach 0 0.84 5.39 0.19 34.31 Study Study 27 0.01 0.16 0.04 4.09 14 0.21 6.90 0.01 21.38 Reference Reference Benchmark NR NR 0.20 60.00 Benchmark 40.00 NR 2.00 60.00 NR - Not Reported NR - Not Reported

% ALAD Reduction Compared to the Study Reference Average Metal Concentrations In mixed Invertebrate Species (ppm, wet weight)

%ALAD %ALAD Reach Reduction Reduction Cadmium Copper Lead Zinc Reach n (sample size) Compared to Compared to Reach 0 Study Reference Reach 0 1.6 5.6 2.5 119.7 Reach 5 4 49 17 (n=12) Reach 5 Reach 0 10 39 0 1.3 8.5 14.3 214.2 (n=6) Benchmark 2.0 NR 2.0 50.0 NR- Not Reported Related 1. Metal concentrations in organs. Benchmark 2. Metal concentrations in blood. Comparisons Statement of Injury: ALAD suppression in American dippers was 49 percent compared to the Study Reference. This is representative of a significant exposure to lead. Blood lead exceeds the literature-based benchmark and liver lead is elevated compared to Reach 0. Invertebrates exceed the dietary benchmark for migratory birds. There is injury to migratory birds in Reach 5. Commentary: Aquatic invertebrates continue to accumulate lead which results in significant environmental exposure for dippers. Representativeness of Data: The American dipper studies were conducted to evaluate metals exposure and ALAD suppression. Depressed ALAD is consistent with the elevated lead in blood and liver. Data Gaps: These data represent potential metals exposure to migratory birds via the aquatic food chain; however, they do not represent exposure via terrestrial food chains that could result from fluvial deposits present in Reach 5. There are no data available that represent migratory birds with a terrestrial food base. Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes, the current information is sufficient for restoration planning. The current information indicates that the fluvial deposits are a source of metals and represent potential exposure pathway for terrestrial feeding migratory birds. Injury specific data for terrestrial feeding migratory birds would not influence restoration planning. Related Text: Sections 6.8.5, 6.8.5.1 and 6.8.5.2

33 The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Terrestrial Wildlife - Migratory Birds Reach 6 - Lake Creek to Chalk Creek (31.7 RM) Regulatory 1. ALAD activity in assessment area is significantly less (alpha <0.05) than mean values for the control area and Thresholds ALAD suppression of at least 50 percent was measured... [43 CFR 11.62(f)(4)(v)(D)] For Injury 2. Reduced reproduction... [43 CFR 11.62(f)(4)(v)(B)] Summary Data

Average Blood Metal Concentrations Average Liver Metal Concentrations in American Dippers (mg/kg wet weight) in American Dippers (mg/kg wet weight)

Blood n Cadmium Copper Lead Zinc Liver n Cadmium Copper Lead Zinc Reach 6 10 0.01 0.16 0.13 3.77 Reach 6 4 2.00 8.09 0.84 29.79 Reach 0 14 0.04 0.23 0.11 13.93 Reach 0 4 0.84 5.39 0.19 34.31 Study Study 27 0.01 0.16 0.04 4.09 14 0.21 6.90 0.01 21.38 Reference Reference Benchmark -- NR NR 0.20 60.00 Benchmark - 40.00 NR 2.00 60.00 NR - Not Reported NR - Not Reported % ALAD Reduction Compared to the Study Reference Average Metal Concentrations In mixed Invertebrate Species (ppm, wet weight)

%ALAD %ALAD Reach Reduction Reduction Cadmium Copper Lead Zinc Reach n (sample size) Compared to Compared to Reach 0 Study Reference Reach 0 1.6 5.6 2.5 119.7 Reach 6 9 56 28 (n=12) Reach 6 Reach 0 10 39 0 2.1 9.3 26.3 277.4 (n=ll) Benchmark 2.0 NR 2.0 50.0 INK- Not Reported Related 1. Metal concentrations in organs. Benchmark 2. Metal concentrations in blood. Comparisons Statement of Injury: ALAD in American dippers is suppressed by 56 percent compared to the Study Reference. Blood and liver lead are elevated, but do not exceed the benchmark. Lead concentrations in invertebrates exceed the dietary benchmark for migratory birds. There is injury to migratory birds in Reach 6. Commentary: American dipper data are from the Granite area and the tree swallow data are from near Buena Vista. Blood and liver lead concentrations decrease compared to Reach 5, but continue to be elevated compared to Reach 0. The tree swallow colony sampled in Reach 6 is located in the open valley floodplain-a potential sediment deposition area. However, none of the swallow data exceeded benchmark values. Representativeness of Data: Both the tree swallow data and the American dipper studies were conducted to evaluate metals exposure and ALAD suppression. The swallow and dipper data provide a good representation of metals exposure from aquatic invertebrates. Data Gaps: None. Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes, the current information is sufficient for restoration planning. Related Text: Sections 6.8.5, 6.8.5.1 and 6.8.5.2

34 The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Terrestrial Wildlife - Migratory Birds Reaches 7-8 - Chalk Creek to Canon City (79.3 RM) Regulatory 1. ALAD activity in assessment area is significantly less (alpha <0.05) than mean values for the control Thresholds area and ALAD suppression of at least 50 percent was measured... [43 CFR 11.62(f)(4)(v)(D)] For Injury 2. Reduced reproduction... [43 CFR 11.62(f)(4)(v)(B)] Summary Data

Average Blood Metal Concentrations Average Liver Metal Concentrations in American Dippers (mg/kg wet weight) in American Dippers (mg/kg wet weight)

Blood Cadmium Copper Lead Zinc Liver Cadmium Copper Lead Zinc Reach 7 0.01 0.07 0.04 2.88 Reach 7 0.03 10.00 0.04 22.18 Reach 8 30 0.01 0.13 0.05 4.00 ReachS 13 0.17 5.86 0.09 25.57 Reach 0 14 0.04 0.23 0.11 13.93 Reach 0 0.84 5.39 0.19 34.31 Study Study 27 0.01 0.16 0.04 4.09 14 0.21 6.90 0.01 21.38 Reference Reference Benchmark NR NR 0.20 60.00 Benchmark 40.00 NR 2.00 60.00 NR - Not Reported NR - Not Reported % ALAD Reduction Compared to the Average Metal Concentrations In mixed Invertebrate Study Reference Species (ppm, wet weight)

Reach %ALAD %ALAD Cadmium Copper Lead Zinc reduction reduction (sample size) Reach n compared to compared Reach 0(n= 12) 1.6 5.6 2.5 119.7 Study Reference to Reach 0 Reach 7 (n=3) 0.6 6.6 1.7 153.7 Reach 7 4 48 14 Reach 8 (n=30) 0.6 7.1 3.2 138.6 Reach 9 (n=2) 0.1 4.9 1.5 41.4 Reach 8 24 25 0 Reach 0 10 39 0

Related 1. Metal concentrations in organs. Benchmark 2. Metal concentrations in blood. Comparisons Statement of Injury: ALAD in American dippers was suppressed by 48 percent in Reach 7 and 25 percent in Reach 8 compared to the Study Reference. Blood lead concentrations in Reaches 7 & 8 were similar to Reach 0. All tissue metal concentrations were below benchmark values. All tissue metal concentrations were below benchmark values. ALAD suppression in tree swallows was 1-35 percent compared to Reach 0 and nest data from tree swallow colonies showed no reproductive impairment. There is no injury to migratory birds in Reaches 7 and 8. Commentary: Even though ALAD suppression was 48 percent in Reach 7, environmental exposure is near Reach 0 levels for lead and other metals. Tissue metal concentrations for Reaches 7 and 8 are near Reach 0 levels and do not exceed benchmarks. Representativeness of Data: Both the tree swallow and American dipper studies were conducted to evaluate metals exposure and ALAD suppression. While not all reaches had the same number of samples, there was a sufficient number of samples to evaluate injury. Along with aquatic invertebrate samples, these data are representative of exposure and injury to migratory birds dependant upon the aquatic food chain. Data Gaps: None. Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes, the current information is sufficient for restoration planning. Related Text: Sections 6.8.5, 6.8.5.1 and 6.8.5.2

35 The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Terrestrial Wildlife -Migratory Birds Reaches 9 - Canyon City to Pueblo Reservoir (29 RM) Regulatory 1. ALAD activity in assessment area is significantly less (alpha <0.05) than mean values for the control Thresholds area and ALAD suppression of at least 50 percent was measured... [43 CFR 11.62(f)(4)(v)(D)] For Injury 2. Reduced reproduction... [43 CFR 11.62(f)(4)(v)(B)] Summary Data

Average Metal Concentrations In mixed Invertebrate Species (ppm, wet weight)

Reach Cadmium Copper Lead Zinc (sample size) Reach 0 1.6 5.6 2.5 119.7 (n=12) Reach 9 0.1 4.9 1.5 41.4 (n=2)

Related 1. Metal concentrations in organs. Benchmark 2. Metal concentrations in blood. Comparisons Statement of Injury: Based on decreasing environmental exposure, injury to migratory birds is not expected in this reach. Commentary: Concentrations in aquatic invertebrates are lower than Reach 0 levels for all metals and concentrations in other media have generally decreased. Representativeness of Data: There are no migratory bird data for Reach 9, but there are data for aquatic invertebrates. These data indicate decreasing food chain exposure, which is consistent with water chemistry data. Data Gaps: None. Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes, the current information is sufficient for restoration planning. Related Text: Sections 6.8.5, 6.8.5.1 and 6.8.5.2

36 The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. Working Draft

Terrestrial Wildlife - Migratory Birds Reach 10 - Pueblo Reservoir (inlet to a point 1.5 miles below the outlet; 8.1 RM total) Regulatory 1. ALAD activity in assessment area is significantly less (alpha <0.05) than mean values for the control Thresholds area and ALAD suppression of at least 50 percent was measured... [43 CFR 11.62(f)(4)(v)(D)] For Injury 2. Reduced reproduction... [43 CFR 11.62(f)(4)(v)(B)] Summary Data:

Custer et al. (2003 In Press) collected 3 swallow samples in 1997 and 3 samples in 1998. Mueller et al. (1991) sampled adult and nestling waterfowl and shorebirds in 1991.

Related 1. Metal concentrations in organs. Benchmark 2. Metal concentrations in blood. Comparisons Statement of Injury: All bird tissues sampled were below benchmark values. There does not appear to be a significant route of exposure that would result in injury to migratory birds. Commentary: Metal concentrations in all environmental media are at or lower than Reach 0. The existing data indicate that there is little chance of food-chain exposure. Representativeness of Data: There are few bird samples, but the existing data are collected in different years and represent a variety of species. Data Gaps: None. Is current information sufficient for restoration planning? Yes. Related Text: Sections 6.9, 6.9.1 and 6.9.2

37 The matrices provide a brief summary of the information contained in the Site Characterization Report (SCR). The matrices are not intended to be used as stand alone documents but rather are to be used in conjunction with the SCR. 7.0 SMELTER-EMISSIONS AIRSHED

7.1 Purpose and Objectives of Airshed Survey

Deposition of airborne stack emissions from historic smelter operations occurred in areas surrounding the smelters within the Leadville Mining District. Smelter emissions consisted of gasses and particles. The residue of gaseous emissions has dissipated over time; however, particulate deposition is still evident. Particulate smelter emissions contain metals derived primarily from ore. Predominant metals that would have been associated with historic smelter emissions in the Leadville area include arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc. Delineation of the area of deposition of smelter-stack emissions (or the smelter "Airshed" as defined by the Work Plan) is of interest in evaluating the potential for specific smelter-related impacts to the natural resources of the UARB,

The objectives of the airshed delineation are to identify the information available to characterize the smelter-emissions depositional zone and to determine if additional data are needed to define the boundaries of the smelter airshed. To meet these objectives, surficial soil metals concentrations from existing data sources were mapped using a GIS. The GIS mapping results were further considered with regard for the potential for injury to natural resources from historic smelter deposition. Because of the overlap of smelter deposition with areas of mining disturbance it is important to consider the characteristics that distinguish smelter-emission deposition from other mining-related impacts to soils and/or vegetation.

7.2 Approach

The majority of the smelting activities in and around Leadville occurred during the late 1800s and very early 1900s. Smelters in the UARB have not operated for many years. Metals delivered to soil via airborne emissions may have since been influenced by water and/or wind erosion or by dissolution in and transport by infiltrating water. For these reasons, the entire area of smelter-emissions deposition may no longer be readily apparent. Investigations at other historical smelter sites (e.g., Black and Veatch 1988; Wixson et al. 1988; Dames and Moore 1991; Bechtel 1992) have shown that areas of smelter deposition may be identified from the relative concentrations of metals found in undisturbed, or minimally disturbed, surficial soils. Those studies have also confirmed that the total metals content of undisturbed soils decreases with increasing distance from smelter-emission sources, as expected for an air emissions source. Metals concentrations at the outer extent of the deposition area, where relatively small amounts of particulate emissions were deposited, may be indistinguishable from their background concentrations

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_current1.doc 7-1 in soil. Therefore, delineation of the airshed must focus on the areas where soil conditions due to smelter- emissions deposition are readily distinguishable from natural variability.

Relatively insoluble metals with limited mobility in the soil environment (e.g., lead), serve as the best indicators of historical smelter emissions because their distributions in soil are the least likely to change over time. Lead contamination of soil is expected to be persistent due to lead's low solubility and mobility in soil. For this reason, the lead concentration in undisturbed soil often serves as a useful indicator of past deposition of emissions from smelters. The other metals found in Leadville district ores, such as arsenic, cadmium, copper, and zinc, may also be useful for identifying soil impacted by smelter emissions. Data describing the concentrations of these metals in soil are included in the project database.

As described in prior report sections, there are a number of other sources of lead to the soils in Leadville in addition to smelter emissions. These sources include the natural (or background) sources of lead to soils; mining-related sources such as ore and waste rock piles, mine-waste and slag; and other sources not related to mining activities such as historic automobile emissions and deteriorated lead-based paint. In order to delineate an area of smelter-emissions deposition using lead concentrations in soil, it is important to be able to distinguish smelter-emmissions from other sources of lead.

Several types of information may be used to assess the relative importance of smelter emissions compared to other source emissions in contributing to the current levels of soil contamination and delineating the smelter airshed in the UARB, including:

• Locations and operating histories of smelters;

• Long-term meteorological data describing predominant wind directions and wind speeds;

• Metals concentrations, especially lead, in shallow undisturbed soils; and

• Characterization of the solid-phase (i.e., mineral) associations of metals, especially lead, related to smelter emissions as opposed to metals from other sources.

The following section identifies the data that are currently available to provide the information listed above.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 7-2 7.3 Existing Sources of Relevant Data

A review of existing reports and data lead to several sources of information that are relevant to delineation of the smelter airshed. The data discovered and compiled through this effort originate primarily, although not exclusively, from investigations of the California Gulch Superfund/NPL Site (the Site). A summary of the information found in existing sources is provided below.

7.3.1 Historical Smelter Information

The Site includes a number of former smelters where lead-silver and lead-zinc ores were processed. A report prepared by Jacobs Engineering for the USEPA (Jacobs 1991) contains a brief history of each of 17 smelters identified within the Site, including information describing the smelter facilities, smelting methods, and dates of operation. This information, summarized in the Jacobs report, was used to develop sampling plans for remedial investigations within the Site (Table 7-1).

Smelters previously operating in the vicinity of Leadville processed primarily lead-sliver and lead-zinc ores from the Leadville Mining District. Smelting operations in this area started in 1875, and by 1879 there were 15 smelters in operation in the immediate vicinity of Leadville. However, most of the smelting operations were relatively short-lived, and by 1900 there were only three operating smelters remaining. The last smelter to cease operation was the Arkansas Valley (AV) Smelter, which operated nearly continuously from 1879 to 1961.

Several smelters were located along California Gulch west of the City of Leadville (Grant/Union, Leadville, Western Zinc, La Plata, American, AV, California, Lizzie, and Malta Smelters, listed from east to west). Among these, the AV Smelter, the longest operating smelter in the area, was located on the north side of California Gulch at Stringtown. Smelters were also located along Evans Gulch (Ohio and Missouri, Cummings and Finn, Gage-Hagaman, and Raymond, Sherman and MacKay Smelters), within the City of Leadville (Harrison Reduction Works) and east of Leadville (Adelaide and Little Chief Smelters). The locations of these smelters are shown on Figure 7-1 (Walsh 1993a, adapted from Jacobs 1991).

When operating, smelters generated slag, flue dust, fugitive emissions, and stack emissions. Dust chambers were typically used to retain dust before furnace gases were vented through a stack. Dust retention was later improved through the use of bag houses. By approximately the mid 1890s, bag houses, which reduced the amount of dust in stack emissions, were used by most of the Leadville-area

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 7-3 smelters. Stack emissions also contained metallic and sulfur vapors. In addition, the smelter stacks were "blown" when furnaces needed repair or cleaning or were shut down. When the stacks were blown the emissions would have also contained the smelting residue coating the furnace walls and stack.

7.3.2 Remedial Investigation of California Gulch Soils

A soil investigation study was performed to obtain the data necessary to conduct feasibility studies and baseline risk assessments for the NPL site (CDM 1994). These data were used to determine the concentrations of the elements of potential concern (identified by USEPA as arsenic, cadmium, lead, mercury, and zinc) and their distribution in soil, as well as to identify the source(s) of the elements of potential concern.

A total of 3,589 soil samples were collected from 719 locations during 1991 and 1992. At most locations, samples were collected from five depth intervals (0 to 1 inch, 1 to 2 inches, 2 to 6 inches, 6 to 12 inches, and 12 to 18 inches). Soil sample locations were dictated by a grid pattern that extended over the entire site and some adjacent areas. At each sampling location, the soil was classified according to location, surface cover, and soil type (native, fill, or mine-waste). Native soils were also described as undisturbed or disturbed.

All samples were dried and sieved prior to analysis for eleven elements (silver, arsenic, barium, calcium, cadmium, copper, iron, manganese, nickel, lead, zinc) by x-ray fluorescence spectrometry (XRF). Selected samples were also submitted to CLP laboratories for analysis of the same elements plus potassium, magnesium, aluminum, and mercury. For each sample, two size fractions (less than 2 mm and less than 250 um in diameter) were analyzed. Data analyses were performed using the results from XRF analyses. A metals speciation study was conducted independent of the soil investigation using a subset of the samples collected for the soil investigation study. The results from the speciation are presented elsewhere (see below).

The distributions of metals in soils were presented on two sets of contour maps using data from (1) all soils, and (2) undisturbed native soils. Kriging analysis was used to generate the iso-concentration maps presented in the report.

The lead iso-concentration contour map for "all soils" (Figure 7-2, from CDM 1994) shows elevated concentrations in several areas of the site, including: east of the City of Leadville, where mine- waste piles are present; northeast of Leadville near the historic Evans Gulch smelter area; lower

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 1A California Gulch around Stringtown and the AV Smelter site; extending north and south from California Gulch; and near Colorado Mountain College at Georgia Gulch. An iso-concentration contour map for lead in relatively undisturbed native soils only (Figure 7-3, from COM 1994) shows more limited areas of elevated lead concentrations. Evans Gulch and lower California Gulch — are revealed as the dominant areas of elevated lead concentrations in the top 1 inch of undisturbed native soil likely associated with former smelting activities.

7.3.3 Smelter Remedial Investigation

The focus of the Smelter Remedial Investigation (RI) (Walsh 1993a) was to collect data to identify and evaluate the impacts of historical smelting operations on human health and the environment within the boundaries of the California Gulch NPL Site. The Smelter RI was performed concurrently with the Soil Investigation (COM 1994) discussed above, and data from both studies were used to support this investigation.

The purpose of the Smelter RI was to describe the geographic distribution of soil metals (primarily arsenic, cadmium, lead, and zinc) originating from the smelter facilities. The Smelter RI consisted of several tasks including: literature and document review; site reconnaissance of smelter sites to identify potentially contaminated areas (e.g., historic bag houses and dust chambers); air-dispersion modeling to establish probable wind depositional patterns and the potential extent of airborne emissions; soil sampling and laboratory testing and analysis; and data evaluation and summary.

Air-dispersion modeling was performed to evaluate historic depositional patterns and identify potential locations for sampling associated with maximum deposition of airborne emissions from the 17 historical smelter operations identified by Jacobs. The Industrial Source Complex Short Term (ISCST) model was used to estimate the contributions of four metals (arsenic, cadmium, lead, and zinc) in historic smelter emissions to their concentrations in soil across the site. This model requires meteorological data and information to describe stack emissions from the various historical smelters.

The meteorological data used to define the model input parameters were collected for a one-year period in 1990 and 1991 at two locations, the Yak Tunnel and Colorado Mountain College. These data indicate that wind directions and wind speeds vary seasonally and that the annual prevailing wind directions, in order of greatest duration, are expected to be from: (1) northwest to northeast 35 percent of the time, (2) east northeast to east southeast 31 percent of the time, and (3) south to west southwest less than 20 percent of the time.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl .doc 7-5 The information available to describe past smelter operations and stack emission characteristics was extremely limited. The types, durations and rates of historic emissions from stacks associated with the 17 smelters identified in the Leadville area were variable over time and among the different smelters. Input parameters used in the ISCST model were generally based on assumptions about operations rather than documented practices.

Given these inputs, the resultant model predicted metals concentrations across a rectangular grid of emission receptor points that extended 15.5 kilometers (km) north to south and 18.5 km east to west across the study area. These results are presented on metals distribution maps showing the cumulative total metals (sum of arsenic, cadmium, lead and zinc) contribution to soil from all smelter emissions combined. These results were then used to select the locations and extent of soil sampling used to support the Smelter RI. Given the uncertainty in the model inputs and resulting output, the model results were not used to delineate the airshed area without field confirmation through soil sampling and analysis.

Soil samples (3,589) were collected from 719 locations during the soil investigation study (Camp Dresser & McKee (COM) 1994), and Walsh analyzed an additional 276 samples that they collected from 80 new locations. The area where soil sampling was performed lies roughly within the boundaries of the California Gulch NPL Site except to the south of Smeltertown in California Gulch and also immediately south of the East Fork Arkansas River where additional soil samples were collected outside the NPL site boundaries. The additional soil samples were analyzed for arsenic, cadmium, lead, and zinc by XRF. The same sample depths and sample preparation and analysis methods were used by CDM and Walsh, and the results from these two studies are considered comparable. During soil sampling, each sample location was evaluated by a soil scientist, and the soil was described as either disturbed or undisturbed based on whether or not mine-waste, fill material, or human artifacts were present.

The largely undisturbed area to the south of California Gulch and downwind of the former AV, California, La Plata, and American smelters was presumed to be an area impacted exclusively by smelter emissions and was used as the control area. The smelter-emissions control area is bounded by Georgia Gulch to the east, California Gulch to the north, Highway 24 to the west, and the southern boundary of the study area. Most of this area lacks any evidence of historic mining activities, yet metals concentrations in soils are high relative to other undisturbed areas. The smelter-emissions control area is predominantly forested but also includes bare ground immediately south of the former AV Smelter.

Metals ratios in soils from the smelter-emissions control area were used to characterize a signature associated with soils that contain smelter-emissions fallout. The data from the less than 2-mm

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl .doc 7-6 size fraction and 0- to 1-inch depth interval were used to characterize the smelter-emissions signature. The control-area approach is based on the assumption that the chemical and physical changes that have taken place at the control site are representative of chemical and physical changes that have occurred in other areas where smelter emissions have been the primary source of metals to soils. Given this assumption, the signatures of the smelter-emissions control area reflect both the effects of smelter- emission fallout and the chemical and physical changes that have occurred since the cessation of smelting in this area.

Linear-regression methods were used to describe co-variation of lead concentrations with the concentrations of other metals in soils from the smelter-emissions control area. The linear relationships identified were then used as the basis for comparison to metals concentrations in soils from other parts of the study area. For control sites, regression analysis was used to identify metal pairs having significantly correlated (99 percent confidence) concentrations. The metal signature was then described for significantly correlated combinations, plus or minus one standard deviation of the regression equation. A total of nine metals correlations were found to be significant in 0- to 1-inch depth soils from the smelter- emissions control area.

Using the metals signature from control-area soils at the 0- to 1-inch depth, the metals contents of 0- to 1-inch deep soils from the other sites were tested for positive or negative agreement with the smelter-emissions signature. For example, the results of comparison of the control lead:zinc ratios to the same ratio in undisturbed soils across the study are shown on Figure 7-4 (Walsh 1993a). In cases where at least seven of nine of the metals ratios were shown to have metals contents consistent with the control- area signature, the soil from that location was considered to share the smelter-emissions signature, as shown on Figure 7-5 (Walsh 1993a). As shown on Figure 7-4, there are a number of locations where the lead:zinc ratio in undisturbed surface soil does not match the smelter-emissions control-area signature, even though the location clearly lies within the expected boundaries of the smelter airshed. These examples likely result from the difficulties in predicting a smelter signature that would apply to emissions from numerous smelter operations that operated differently and at different periods of time within the same area. For this reason, the accuracy of the smelter-signature approach developed by Walsh for this study remains unknown.

Results obtained from the smelter-signature comparison method were used to delineate an area impacted by smelter emissions as shown on Figure 7-6 (Walsh 1993a). The shaded area on Figure 7-6 represents the distribution of sampled sites that have a metals signature resembling the smelter-emissions control area, including both undisturbed and disturbed sites. The undisturbed locations resembling the control area are also shown individually. The shaded area was delineated using a 750-foot buffer zone

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl .doc 7-7 around each sample site that resembled the control area. The width of the buffer zone is appropriate to the sampling grid dimensions of 1,000 ft2 in unpopulated areas and 500 ft2 in populated areas.

Based on these results, the areas exhibiting smelter-emission signatures include:

• Areas south of U.S. Highway 24 and between upper California Gulch and the Arkansas River;

• The west and northwest portions of the study areas; and

• Portions of Evans Gulch that correspond to the former smelter sites in the gulch and a small area near the Little Chief Smelter site.

Areas determined to be impacted primarily by sources of metals other than smelter emissions (e.g., mine-waste, mine-waste slag) include:

• Much of the City of Leadville, which contains various types of fill;

• The eastern portion of the study area, which contains alluvial mine-waste and mine-waste rock;

• California and Malta Gulches, which contain alluvial mine-waste and/or mine-waste rock;

• Hecla mine-waste area;

• Lake Fork Trailer Park area, which consists of fill material; and

• Channels and low terrace deposits along the Arkansas River at California Gulch, which are impacted by fluvial mine-waste.

This empirical approach was described as having several benefits over a modeling approach in delineating the deposition airshed, as follows:

• Model input parameters were estimates and subject to error; and

• Observed metals concentrations relative to a control site are good indicators of smelter- emission deposition because the metals contents of soils are not expected to have changed significantly following deposition, except possibly in areas subject to erosion (steep slopes, stream channels, etc.).

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl .doc 7-8 7.3.4 Characterization of Pre-Mining Soil Conditions

In support of the smelter investigations, Walsh also performed a study to describe pre-mining soil geochemistry within the Leadville Mining District (Walsh 1994). The data used for this study were primarily from other soils investigations of the California Gulch Site, including the Smelter RI (Walsh 1993 a) and Soils Investigation (COM 1994), but they also included metals data for soils collected from undisturbed sites within the mineralized areas around the Site. Statistical methods (cumulative probability plots) were used to differentiate between the "pre-mining" concentrations of metals, or background concentrations, and their concentrations in soils disturbed by mining activities. Detailed soil and surficial geology maps were also produced as part of this study. Information from the detailed soil and surficial geology maps was used to identify and define seven soil-geologic units, which are consequently tied to both the geomorphology and geochemistry of the soil parent materials.

The soil-geologic-unit map shows the locations of these seven general units. Areas of native, undisturbed soils are shown as well as soils containing construction fill, mine-waste, waste rock and slag, mechanically altered soils, eroded soils, and areas covered by buildings and parking lots. The native, undisturbed soils have all soil horizons present and no evidence of man-made disturbance.

Pre-mining (or background) metals concentrations are presented for soils by "landscape position" and by soil-geologic unit. The landscape position refers to either upland or alluvial soils. The findings (Table 7-2) show that metals contents in alluvial soils are generally higher than those in upland soils, primarily due to natural weathering and transport processes that concentrate heavier minerals, such as common metallic-ore minerals, in depositional environments. In upland areas, background metals concentrations were generally found in soil below the A horizon, suggesting that the downward transport of metals is not a very active process in upland landscape positions. The metals concentrations of alluvial soil horizons are more variable than the upland horizons, perhaps due to greater mobility of metals in the alluvial soils. The pre-mining metals contents of soils from upland areas are within the low end of the ranges of metals contents reported by Schacklette and Boemgen (1984) for soils of the western United States. The arsenic and lead contents of pre-mining alluvial soils, however, appear greater than those reported for western U.S. soils.

Walsh (1994) also identified background metals concentration ranges for each of the soil- geologic units, but concluded that the ranges given for upland and alluvial landscape positions may better represent pre-mining metal ranges over the entire site. Interestingly, the mean arsenic, cadmium, copper,

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 7-9 and lead concentrations of the top 1 inch of undisturbed soils are generally higher than in the top 1 inch of disturbed soils for a number of the soil-geologic units described. Walsh explained that the elevated metals contents in the top 1 inch of undisturbed soils relative to disturbed soils may be due to:

• The relative immobility of metals in arid climates with soils of near neutral pH, such as Leadville;

• The higher organic matter content of surficial soils, which leads to greater sorption of positively charged metal cations such as copper and lead; and

• Surficial soil contamination by non-disruptive processes, such as air deposition of metals.

7.3.5 Lead Speciation Studies

Several studies were performed to describe the solid-phase associations of metals present in soils and other environmental media from the California Gulch NPL Site. The information provided by these studies is useful for distinguishing soils where elevated metals contents have resulted from smelter- emissions deposition rather than from other mining, or non-mining, related sources.

Selected soil samples from the studies described above were included in a site-wide metals speciation investigation. The final metals speciation report was prepared jointly by CDM, University of Colorado and the R.J. Lee Group (CDM et al. 1994; Drexler and Weston 1995) and includes raw data from a total of 320 samples of soil, mine-waste (waste piles and mine-waste), environmental sample types (residential soils and interior dust), and. fluvial deposits/stream sediments. Approximately 15 of the soil samples included in this study are from locations within the area delineated by Walsh (1993 a) as impacted by smelter emissions. Maps included in this report show that the lead mass in surficial soils from these areas is primarily associated with iron and manganese oxides, phosphate, and organic carbon phases, with minor amounts of lead in silicate and "slag" phases.

Walsh also performed a lead speciation study (Walsh 1993b), to support the selection of the hillside south of the AV Smelter site as a control area for smelter emissions and to provide additional characterization data for identification of soils containing metals derived from smelter emissions. Soils from the hillside south of the AV Smelter site have lead levels ranging from several hundred mg/Kg to almost 9,000 mg/Kg in surface samples. Other metals are also enriched compared to their concentrations observed in the other parts of the study area (Walsh 1993a). The AV hillside soils lie downwind from the smelter site and are likely to have been impacted primarily by airfall products from the AV Smelter.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 7-10 These soils have a low pH (4.5 to 6) due to the low buffering capacity of the soils and the past deposition of S02 gases from smelter emissions. The undisturbed soil surface on this hillside has a dark, sooty coating that resembles desert varnish. This coating is thin but high in lead-carbon-oxygen compounds. The majority of the lead-bearing particles observed in these soils consist of various carbonaceous and siliceous fly-ash particles, some of which can be up to several millimeters in diameter. Walsh described an ash particle with a siliceous, low-iron, glassy matrix (in contrast to the high-iron matrix of slag) containing numerous small particles of lead oxide and sulfate.

In the samples considered representative of soils containing stack fallout, Walsh observed a small proportion of lead in organic and high-silica materials (carbonaceous and siliceous ash), a larger proportion of lead in relatively soluble forms, such as lead oxide (PbO) and lead sulfate (PbSO4), and/or readily exchangeable surface sorption sites and the highest proportion either chemically sorbed to soil minerals, such as iron and manganese oxides, and contained in oxide and phosphate phases, or bound with more resistant mineral phases, such as sulfides and silicates. The presence of carbonaceous and siliceous ash particles, even in small amounts, appears indicative of the presence of smelter-emissions fallout.

7.3.6 Baseline Risk Assessments

The Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment (Weston 1996) and the Ecological Risk Assessment for the Terrestrial Ecosystem (Weston and Terra 1997) rely on soils data collected by Walsh (1993a and 1994) and CDM (1994) in the studies described above as well as data from other sources for residential environmental media, mine-wastes, and plant and animal tissue. The lead dataset used to perform the risk assessments is described in Consolidated Findings of Soil-Lead Investigations at the California Gulch NPL Site (Weston 1994). Human health risks were evaluated using data describing the metals concentration from the top 6 inches of soil (as a depth-weighted average) from residential areas. Ecological risks were evaluated primarily using data describing the metals contents (arsenic, cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc) in the top 2 inches of soil from nonresidential areas.

The ecological risk assessment also utilized data for waste rock, mine-waste piles, slag, fluvial mine-waste, and sediment from nonresidential areas and biological data (small mammals and vegetation) collected by Asarco and Resurrection (Stoller 1996). The metals concentration data for co-located surficial soil and vegetation samples are included in the project database. Data collected for Resurrection from the upper California Gulch area show little correlation between total metals contents and surface soils and plant ecosystem diversity or plant metals content. In addition, AB-DTPA extractable metals (a

J:\OI0004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentI.doc 7-11 potential measure of bioavailable metals) contents are not correlated with the total metals contents in soils or co-located plant metals contents (Stoller 1996). Stoller (1996) reported that the only areas in upper California Gulch showing evidence of phytotoxic stress are areas adjacent to mine-wastes. Evidence of phytotoxic stress is absent from other areas remote from mine-waste.

7.3.7 Other Investigations

In addition to the studies performed to support investigations of the California Gulch Superfund Site, there are several other studies that provide data that are useful to delineate the smelter airshed. Those data are described below.

7.3.7.1 BLM Soils Investigation

During the summer of 2000, the BLM collected soil samples from the upper 1 inch of soil at approximately 70 locations within the UARB. Thirteen of those were upland locations within Iowa Gulch, approximately 1.5 miles south of California Gulch. These samples were referred to as the "airshed" samples. Soils were also collected from a variety of 2- to 6-inch depth intervals to a maximum depth of 26 inches at locations predominantly within riparian areas along the Arkansas River from California Gulch downstream to Pueblo. All of the soil samples were analyzed for iron, lead, manganese, and zinc. The locations, sample depths, and soil lead concentrations for samples collected in the vicinity of former smelters within California Gulch are shown on Figures 7-7 and 7-8 along with data from the other sources described in this report.

The lead concentrations in the Iowa Gulch samples are generally lower than in soil collected approximately one mile north and within the California Gulch drainage. The southernmost soil samples from California Gulch have lead contents ranging from 713 to 2,223 mg/Kg. The lead concentrations in the Iowa Gulch soils range from 252 to 924 mg/Kg. All of the Iowa Gulch soils have lead concentrations greater than Walsh's characterization of background concentrations in upland soils (150 mg/Kg, Table 7- 2).

Samples collected north of Leadville, along the East Fork of the Arkansas River and upstream of Evans Gulch, have lead concentrations within the range for background soils. West of the Arkansas River, near the confluence with California Gulch, lead concentrations range from 20 to 1,824 mg/Kg but only exceed the background concentration in alluvial soils (870 mg/Kg, Table 7-2) at one location.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl .doc 7-12 These data demonstrate a trend of decreasing lead concentrations in undisturbed surface soil with increasing distance from the historic smelter operations in the Leadville area.

7.3.7.2 Levy Study

In the summer of 1988, Levy and others (Levy et al. 1992) sampled surface soils (upper 1 inch) at one location in Tennessee Park. The sample was analyzed for a suite of metals, including lead. The total lead concentration at this location was 275 mg/Kg, which further supports the conclusion of decreasing lead concentrations in undisturbed surface soils with increasing distance form the historic smelter operations in the Leadville area.

7.3.7.3 National Uranium Resource Evaluation Program Data

The U.S. Geological Survey's National Uranium Resource Evaluation (NURE) program provides geochemical data for sediment and water samples collected from across the United States. More than 1,700 sediment samples were collected from the Leadville Quadrangle (2 degree sheet) and sediments from approximately 30 locations within the UARB were analyzed for metals, including arsenic and lead. The NURE sampling locations extend beyond the area where soil samples have been collected in support of the various investigations described above. However, because the metals contents were measured in sediment samples, these data are not directly comparable to the metals data for upland soils. For this reason, the NURE data were not used to assist in airshed delineation and are not included in the GIS used to prepare the map figures in this section.

7.3.7.4 U.S.G.S. Investigation of Fluvial Tailings

The U.S. Geological Survey, in cooperation with USEPA and the Bureau of Reclamation, studied the effects of fluvial tailings deposits on soils, surface water and groundwater along a 3-mile reach of the Upper Arkansas River (Walton-Day et al. 2000). The study area is located approximately 6 to 9 miles downstream of the confluence of California Gulch with the Arkansas River. This work included collection and analysis of 13 soil samples. Eleven of the soil samples were collected from the floodplain in areas expected to have elevated metals concentrations due to fluvial deposition of visible tailings

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 7-13 deposits. The remaining two samples were collected from above the floodplain in areas apparently unaffected by fluvial tailings deposits; these two samples are referred to as background samples.

The samples were analyzed for 13 metals/metalloids, including arsenic and lead. The arsenic concentrations in both background samples were 10 mg/Kg. Lead concentrations in these samples were 180and200mg/Kg.

7.3.7.5 USGS Remote Sensing Studies

Remotely sensed multi-spectral reflectance data were collected by the U.S. Geological Survey (Swayze et al. 1996) and processed to characterize and identify localized sources of acid mine drainage and contamination from waste rock piles within the California Gulch NPL Site. The interpretive map developed from the Airborne Visible/Infrared Imaging Spectrometer (AVIRIS) reflectance data shows an area of "smelter effluent ground coating" on the hillside south of the AV smelter site, the same area as used in the Smelter RJ (Walsh 1993 a) as the control area for smelter impacted soils. This area was spectrally mapped as an area where amorphous iron-hydroxide is present at the surface. Field investigation of the area showed rocks coated with a grayish coating of material described as condensed, arsenic-rich "effluent" that reportedly originated from the nearby AV Smelter stacks. Although multi- spectral reflectance data were useful for identifying probable smelter-related mineral phases in soils from a largely unvegetated area, their usefulness in more heavily vegetated areas has not yet been demonstrated.

7.3.8 Summary of Findings to Delineate Smelter Airshed

Based on results from the previous studies described above, the following understanding is provided:

• The smelter airshed may be delineated using data describing the metals content in undisturbed surface soils in the areas surrounding former smelter operations. The lead distribution map provided by CDM (1994) shows the areas where lead concentrations in the upper 1-inch of undisturbed soil are relatively high. The areas highlighted based on this map are: (1) an area south of the former Malta, Lizzie, California, AV, and American smelter sites that extends south outside the California Gulch site boundaries, and (2) a smaller area to the northeast of the former Elgin, Raymond, Sherman and McKay, Gage-

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_current 1 .doc 7-14 Hagaman, Cummings and Finn and Ohio and Missouri Smelter sites north of the City of Leadville.

Similar areas were identified by Walsh (1993a) in the Smelter RI based on comparisons of the relative abundances of metals to their relative abundances in soils from a smelter- emissions control area. The control area for soils within the smelter airshed is located due south of the former AV Smelter site and is believed to have received smelter- emissions fallout from several smelters over an extended period, but it has not been subject to other mining-related disturbances. The area identified by Walsh (1993a) as impacted by smelter emissions is based on empirical data describing the metals content and metals ratios in the top 1-inch of soil. These areas are delineated on Figure 7-6 (from the Smelter RI) and include the same areas south of the AV Smelter site and northeast of Leadville as described above, as well as broader areas to the north and south of the former Malta, Lizzie, California, AV, American, La Plata, Grant Union, Western Zinc, and Leadville smelter sites. The smelter airshed shown by Walsh extends south of the NPL site boundary.

An air-dispersion model was also developed for the Smelter RI using limited meteorological data and uncertain smelter-operations information. The resultant predicted, or modeled, metals contents in soil were not consistent with observed metals contents in soil. The lack of correlation between predicted and observed results is likely due to uncertainty in the input parameters used for the model and the complexity of modeling emissions from multiple smelters across this site each with different operating histories.

Data collected by the BLM demonstrate a trend of decreasing lead concentration in undisturbed surface soil with increasing distance south, north, and west of the former smelter locations. Lead concentrations approach their background ranges at the locations sampled by BLM to the south in Iowa Gulch and north and west of California Gulch.

7.4 Description of Airshed Based on Existing Data

All of the studies described above provide data relevant to delineation of the smelter airshed, and the best approach for defining the extent of the airshed utilizes the combined data from these various sources.

The following data compilation and analysis steps were performed to assemble the best available dataset for use in delineating the smelter airshed:

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_current 1 .doc 7-15 1. All available data describing metals concentrations in soil samples (less than 2-mm size fraction) collected from the 0- to 1-inch or 0- to 2-inch depth intervals of undisturbed native soils were compiled in an electronic database along with any available information describing sample locations and soil characteristics (e.g., upland vs. alluvial soils). Based on the findings of previous studies (CDM 1991; Walsh 1993a; and Walsh 1994), these are the sample types that are considered most appropriate for delineating an area of smelter deposition. In addition, metals concentrations data for soil samples collected from other surface depth intervals (e.g., 0 to 6 inches from Keammerer data set) were also included in the electronic database. Sample depth information was retained for each metals concentration result included in the database to distinguish true surface soils from the uppermost 2 inches of soil, from deeper soil sections.

2. The samples collected from undisturbed native soils were identified using GIS methods to select the sample locations within areas delineated on Walsh's (1994) detailed soil map as undisturbed, native soil types. For samples collected outside the extent of Walsh's soil map (and with no information provided to describe the soil type or soil disturbance), the sampling locations were assumed to be undisturbed native soil.

3. Maps showing the lead and arsenic concentrations at each of the locations within undisturbed, native-soil types were generated (Figures 7-7 and 7-9). These maps also identify locations where lead or arsenic concentrations exceed their background concentration in upland soil (Pb>150 mg/Kg, As>30 mg/Kg) and in alluvial soil (Pb>870 mg/Kg and As>120 mg/Kg). Note that for the locations within a 500-year floodplain, the comparison to the upland background is conservative because the background lead and arsenic concentrations determined by Walsh for alluvial soils are actually much higher.

4. The area where lead and/or arsenic concentrations in the 0- to 2-inch depth interval exceed upland background concentrations was delineated using a 750-foot buffer zone around each sampling location where surface soil exceeded the background value, and these areas were shown together in map view (Figure 7-11). This mapping approach is consistent with that used by Walsh in the Smelter RI. The area of overlap was highlighted.

The maps produced from these steps are included as Figures 7-7 through 7-11. The area that includes soils containing higher than background concentrations of lead and arsenic is shown along with areas defined as higher than background based on lead or arsenic alone. The area identified from lead concentrations is nearly the same as the area identified using arsenic concentrations. As shown on Figure 7-7 and 7-9, the background concentrations of lead and arsenic are exceeded at the majority of locations where undisturbed native soils have been sampled and analyzed. The combined area where undisturbed soil lead or arsenic concentrations exceed their respective background concentrations is the area likely to lie within the smelter airshed.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 7-16 The area identified as likely to be within the smelter airshed (Figure 7-11) is also shown over a perspective view of the region, including the Leadville Mining District, on Figure 7-12. The view is from the west side of the UARB looking east towards the Tenmile Range. This view is helpful when considering the effects of prevailing wind directions and topography on the shape and extent of the smelter-emission airshed. Prevailing wind directions are from the north-northwest and from the east- northeast. As a result, a relatively large amount of smelter emissions would have been transported south- southeast and west-southwest from the former smelter locations than in the other directions; the effects on soil from the resultant airshed would also be most evident in these directions. This effect is borne out immediately south of the AV Smelter where the hillside along the south side of California Gulch has higher metals concentrations in soil and sparser vegetation than the neighboring hillsides. In addition, because the smelters were located primarily in relatively low topographic positions along California Gulch, the surrounding valley topography would be expected to trap smelter emissions during calm or low-wind conditions. As a result, the California Gulch valley would have received a relatively larger amount of smelter-emission deposition than higher, outlying topographic positions. The areas with the highest metals concentrations shown on Figures 7-11 and 7-12 are consistent with the shape of a smelter airshed expected to develop within the meteorologic and topographic conditions described here.

Although Figures 7-11 and 7-12 delineate a general area considered to lie within the smelter airshed, they do not delineate the airshed boundaries. Defining an absolute boundary for an airshed associated with a point source or multiple point sources would be misleading as air emissions travel considerable distances at gradually lower and lower atmospheric concentrations that eventually approach zero at some distance from the source. Because a condition of zero smelter-emissions deposition cannot be accurately defined, or measured in soils, it is not possible to make an absolute delineation of the airshed boundaries. Instead, a general pattern of decreasing metals concentrations, approaching the background conditions, with distance from the source may be used as a more practical indicator of the measurable extent of the airshed.

Figures 7-13 and 7-14 show the areas where lead and/or arsenic concentrations in soil are greater than their background concentrations in upland soils as well as the locations where lead and/or arsenic concentrations in soil are within the background range. Figure 7-13 is based on comparisons to the upland background range, whereas Figure 7-14 is based on comparisons to the alluvial background. Given the difficulty in distinguishing the outer edges of the airshed from true background conditions, results shown on Figure 7-14 provide a clearer picture of the metals concentration gradient with distance from the former smelters. Based on either of these representations of the data, it is clear that the incidence of metals concentrations greater than background is highest in close proximity to the smelters and that incidence declines with distance in all directions (north, south, east, and west). The existing data

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 7-17 best characterize the extent of the airshed, as defined by estimated background conditions, to the north and west of California Gulch. South of California Gulch, existing data show that soil metal concentrations approach their background ranges in the vicinity of Iowa Gulch. Directly east of Leadville, there are some locations where soil metals concentrations are within their background range, but there is no consistent trend with distance west from the former smelter locations. The lack of a recognizable trend toward lower metals concentrations may be due to the effects of large-scale mining disturbances and the presence of the ore-grade mineral deposits within the upper portions of Evans Gulch, Stray Horse Gulch, and California Gulch on soil metals contents. These additional factors make airshed delineation east of Leadville particularly difficult.

7.5 Summary

In general, the available data allow for identification of the smelter airshed. For the purposes of evaluating natural resource injury, the airshed boundaries may be defined by the areas where soil metals concentrations, specifically lead and arsenic, are distinct from expected background concentrations in undisturbed, upland soils. This is a conservative approach because the metals present in soil may originate from numerous sources other than historical smelter-emissions deposition and some of the soil samples used in this process are from alluvial soils, which have higher background metals concentrations.

The area where the airshed has been identified with highest confidence is the area shown on Figures 7-11 and 7-12 as the highlighted area of overlap for locations with both lead and arsenic concentrations in soil above their expected background concentrations at upland locations. This includes most of the NPL site as well as areas south and west of the NPL-site boundaries. Although there is no absolute delineation of the airshed boundary on these figures, Figures 7-13 and 7-14 show areas where the soil metals concentrations do not exceed their background concentrations. If these areas lie within the airshed, they are likely to be at its periphery where the soil conditions are not readily distinguishable from those outside the airshed. These locations may be used from Figures 7-13 and 7-14 to identify the approximate outer extent of the airshed.

7.6 Potential for Natural Resource Injury within Airshed

A specific concern was raised by USFWS regarding the potential for injury to Penland alpine fen mustard (Eutrema penlandii), a rare species found in the Mosquito Range in central Colorado. Its preferred habitat is characterized by wet, organically rich soils at elevations above 12,000 feet. There are

;.-\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl .doc 7-18 no reported populations of this species within the airshed and no evidence to indicate that previous smelter emissions would have impacted any populations of these species.

The existing total metals data for surficial soils provide an estimate of the extent of historic metals deposition from smelter emissions. In order to fully evaluate the potential for injury to other resources within the airshed boundaries, additional data may be appropriate to describe the plant availability of metals in surface soils and the possible phytotoxic effects of soils within the airshed. Total metals concentrations could be used as a conservative guide in identifying locations for plant-available sampling and evaluating the current extent of smelter deposition that may represent potentially phytotoxic conditions. Review of existing total metals data indicate that the currently defined Airshed reasonably bounds the area of potential phytotoxic concern. Therefore, any sampling for the purpose of evaluating phytotoxicity would be limited to the area defined in Figures 7-11,7-13, and 7-14.

Figures 7-13 and 7-14 are used to define the potential for injury to natural resources within the airshed boundaries. These figures show the airshed soil concentration gradients for lead using background concentrations of >150 mg/Kg (Figure 7-13) and >870 mg/Kg (Figure 7-14). The boundaries of the airshed are defined by the areas where lead concentrations are distinct from expected background concentrations in undisturbed, upland soils (150 mg/Kg) and undisturbed alluvial soils (870 mg/Kg). This is a conservative approach for delineating the airshed boundary because metals may originate from numerous sources other than depositions from historical smelter emissions. It is clear that the occurrence of metals concentrations greater than background is highest in close proximity to the former smelter locations and these concentrations decline with distance from the smelters in all directions. There are only two exceptions to this general trend that can be found northeast of Crystal Lakes (1 sample site) and west of the Arkansas River and north of the Lake Fork drainage (1 sample site). Each exception is one location among a larger group of sample sites (1 site out of 13 and 1 site out of 30) from the BLM (2000) data set. It is highly unlikely that the lead concentrations reported for these sites are from smelter emissions because the lead concentrations in soils surrounding each site are at or below background.

Figures 7-13 and 7-14 establish the boundaries that represent the areas of smelter deposition and therefore establish the boundaries of potential injury. These boundaries are highly correlated with existing conditions in the field. For example, the area with the highest soils concentrations of lead are found south of California Gulch. This area is most likely devoid of vegetation because of elevated concentrations of arsenic and zinc. It is important to note that the area of injury associated with smelter emissions is contained within the NPL site.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentt .doc 7-19 TABLES Table 7-1

Smelter Production Summaries and Locations '

Operating Facility Yr. Yr. Length of Size of Map Smelter Site Location (Other historic name/geographic location) Start End Operation Production Location Malta Smelter Malta Smelter 1875 1880 5 yrs. Very Small 1 Lizzie Smelter Lizzie Smelter 1876 1879 3 yrs Small 2 California Smelter California Smelter 1879 1880 Small 3 (Chicago Reduction Work/Survey Nos. 930, 931, 932) iyr Western Zinc Western Zinc Mining and Reduction Co. 1914 1926 12 yrs Large 4 AV Smelting Co. 1879 1960 81 yrs Very Large 5 AV Smelter Billing-Eilers (Utah) Smelter 1879 1882 3 yrs Medium 5 (ASARCO/Kansas City/Survey No. 389) American Smelter American Smelting Company 1879 1893 15 yrs Large 6 La Plata (Berdell and Witherells) Smelter 1878 10 yrs Large 7 La Plata Smelter 1887 Bi Metallic Smelter 1892 1900 8 yrs Large 7 Grants Smelter 1878 1882 4 yrs Large 8 Grant/Union Smelter Union Smelting Company (Holden) 1892 1896 5 yrs Large 8 Leadville Smelter Leadville Smelting Company 1877 1880 3 yrs Very Small 9 Harrison Reduction Works Harrison Reduction Works 1877 1893 16 yrs Very Large 10 (St. Louis Smelter/Thomas Starr Placer claim/Survey No. 225) Adelaide Smelter Adelaide Smelter 1879 1879 iyr Very Small 11 Little Chief Smelter Little Chief Smelter 1879 1880 2 yrs Small 12 Ohio and Missouri Smelter Ohio and Missouri Smelter 1879 1880 2 yrs Medium 13 (E. Warner Claim/Survey No. 522) Cummings and Finn Smelter Cummings and Finn Smelter 1879 1885 6 yrs Large 14 (Fryer Hill Smelting CoTMandela Claim) Gage-Hagaman Smelter Gage-Hagaman Smelter 1879 1880 2 yrs Small 15 (Smithy Mine Claim/Survey No. 382) Raymond, Sherman, and Raymond, Sherman, and McKay Smelter 1879 1879 Iyr Very Small 16 McKay Smelter (Raymond Claim/Survey No. 458) Elgin Smelter (Elgin Mining and Smelting) 1879 1900 24 yrs Large 17 Elgin Smelter Boston Gold-Copper Smelting Co. 1900 1901 iyr Large 17 Republic Smelting and Reduction Co. (Manville) 1902 1903 iyr Large 17 Note: ' From Jacobs (1991) KEY: Size Total Production Very Small 2,000 tons or less Small 2,000 to 10,000 tons Medium 10,000 to 100,000 tons Large 100,000 to 1,000,000 tons Very Large 1,000,000 tons or more Table 7-2

Estimated Background Metals Concentrations for Soils in Upland and Alluvial Landscape Positions '

Arsenic Cadmium Copper Lead Zinc Landscape Position (mg/Kg) (mg/Kg) (mg/Kg) (mg/Kg) (mg/Kg) Upland 0.3-30 0.01-4 0.4 - 40 8- 150 16-100 Alluvial 0.7-120 0.5-8 8-190 80 - 870 37 - 660 'Data from Walsh (1994) FIGURES 22-OCT-201:- --MELT.AML EXPLANATION

Former Smelter Locations

Approximate Location of Former Smelter

1 Malta Smelter 2 Lizzie Smelter 3 California Smelter 4 Western Zinc 5 Arkansas Valley Smelter 6 American Smelter 7 La Plata Smelter 8 Grant/Union Smelter 9 Leadville Smelter 10 Harrison Reduction Works 11 Adelaide Smelter 12 Little Chief Smelter 13 Ohio and Missouri Smelter 14 Cummings and Finn Smelter 15 Gage-Hagaman Smelter 16 Raymond, Sherman, and McKay Smelter 17 Elgin Smelter

?->"

SCALE IN FEET

3000 3000 UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN SITE CHARACTERIZATION SUMMARY

FIGURE 7-1

HISTORIC SMELTER LOCATIONS FROM WALSH, 1993

PROJECT 010004.3 DATE: OCT 22, 2002 REV: 1 BY: MCP | CHK: KJT MFC, Inc. it iny scientists and engineers 22-OCT-2ii2GPA:';-'H.RCPR.'2 91O GRA'FB IS07-2.GRA ' AM: 'SO FI37 2-3 AMi

1760000,

000 4000 6000

FEET

UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN EXPLANATION SITE CHARACTERIZATION SUMMARY

Sample Location FIGURE 7-2 Isoconcentration Line (mg/kg) ' LEAD ISOCONCENTRATION MAP, ALL SOILS, 0 TO 1 INCH DEPTH FROM COM, 1994

Original Figure from COM, 1994 Final Soils Investigation Data Report PROJECT 010004.3 DATE: OCT 22, 2QQ2 California Gulch CERCLA Site REV:1 BY: ALB | CHK: KJT Leadville, Colorado MFG, Inc. consulting scientists and engineers IS07-3.GRA'A'l:C->ARCPRJ2 OICi&A'.'.i'B ISC_F:G'2-3-

1760000, 520000

o 2000 4000 6000

TEET

UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN EXPLANATION SITE CHARACTERIZATION SUMMARY

Sample Location FIGURE 7-3 Isoconcentration Line LEAD ISOCONCENTRATION MAP, (mg/kg) NATIVE UNDISTURBED SOILS, 0 TO 1 INCH DEPTH FROM COM, 1994 Original Figure from COM, 1994 Final Soils Investigation Data Report PROJECT 010004.3 DATE: OCT 22, 2002 California Gulch CERCLA Site REV:1 BY: ALB ] CHK: KJT Leadville, Colorado MFG, Inc. consulting scientists and engineers Color Map(s)

The following pages contain color that does not appear in the scanned images.

To view the actual images, please contact the Superfund Records Center at (303) 312-6473. 22-OCT-2002 GL _

• '

SCALE IN FEET

EXPLANATION UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN SITE CHARACTERIZATION SUMMARY Sites where metals ratio FIGURE 7-4 is within-t-/- 1 S.D. that of control sites LEAD:ZINC AT Sites where metals ratio VISIBLY UNDISTURBED SITES is outside If /- 1 S.D. that of control sites FROM WALSH, 1993

PROJECT 010004.3 DATE: OCT22, 2002 SOURCE: Walsh and Associates, Inc., 1993a. Smelter Remedial Investigation Report. REV: 1 BY: MCP | CHK: KJT California Gulch Site, Leadville, Colo1 Prepared for ASARCO, Incorporated, MFG, Inc. Leadville, Colorado. May 3, 1993. tltingscienti :neers 22-OCT-2002G[ ___^__ -"

3000 EXPLANATION UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN SITE CHARACTERIZATION SUMMARY

Approximate Location FIGURE 7-5 of Former Smelter (refer to figure 7-1) RESULTS OF COMPARISON Sites where metals ratios are TO CONTROL SITES within + - 1 S.D. that of control sites seven or more times out of nine comparisons PROJECT 010004.3 DATE: OCT 22, 2002 SOURCE: Walsh and Associates, Inc., Sites where metals ratios are 1993a. Smelter Remedial Investigation Report, REV:1 BY: MCP | CHK: KJT California Gulch Site, Leadville, Colorado. within + /- 1 S.D. that of control 4 it for ASARCO, Incorporated, sites three or less times out of MFC, Inc. May 3, 1993. nine comparisons consi. 22-OCT-2002GRA:N:\ARCF!

3000 UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN SITE CHARACTERIZATION SUMMARY Areal extent of sites where metals ratios are within FIGURE 7-6 + /- 1 S.D. that of control sites in seven or more times EXTENT OF SITES out of nine comparisons IMPACTED BY SMELTER EMISSIONS ONLY Undisturbed sites PROJECT 010004.3 DATE: OCT 22. 2002 SOURCE: Walsh and Associate* 1993a, Smelter Remedial Investigation Report, REV: 1 BY: MCP |CHK:KJT California Gulch Site, Leadville, Colorado Prepared for ASARCO, incorporated, MFC, Inc. Leadville, Colorado, May 3. 1993. consulting scienti'-: EXPLANATION Hydrology

River or Stream

. 500-Year Floodplain Airshed Sampling Locations 4 COM-Walsh Soil Sampling Location (LNRD- 061) Sampling Location and Concentration (Alluvial samples concentration in italics) • Lead Concentration < 150 mg/Kg -» •• Lead Concentration . j . . . > = 150 mg/Kg and ... . . < 870 mg/Kg • • Lead Concentration ... • ...... > = 870 mg/Kg . Other Sampling Locations • . v *• • knra • BLM Soil Sampling Location (LNRD- 057) Lead Concentration . . . . in . < 150 mg/Kg * » » .- Lead Concentration • * » » * * • > = 150 mg/Kg and v • r*r * * < 870 mg/Kg o Lead Concentration > = 870 mg/Kg

Keammerer Soil Sampling Location (LNRD- 016) NOTE: Keammerer samples are 0-6" depth Lead Concentration < 150 mg/Kg Lead Concentration > = 150 mg/Kg and ; - .• < 870 mg/Kg » BLM Soil Sampling Location (1997) . . i » Lead Concentration 0 < 150 mg/Kg . . ..i Lead Concentration > = 150 mg/Kg and < 870 mg/Kg .- p Other Features ^ . Approximate Location of Former Smelter • . . .. . Disturbed or Non- Native . » » . . Soil Areas (Walsh, 1994) . , Lowland Zone - Based on presence of riparian species (CDOW Vegetation Mapping, 2001)

»•..'. . •. j.--*- -f •• *. . For sample depth intervals, ...... » . refer to Figure?- 8 • 1 . . . • . . V" •'" . .

^ -

. ^ . SCALE IN I-FHT . » »

UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN SITE CHARACTERIZATION SUMMARY FIGURE7-7 LEAD CONCENTRATION (mg\Kg) UNDISTURBED NATIVE SOIL

PROJECT 010004.3 DATE: OCT 22, 2002 REV: 1 BY: MCP I CHK: KJT MFC, Inc. ting scientists an 22-OCT-2002GR.- . .,VALPBDEP-01.G: '.'L'.SOILWALPB DEP.AML EXPLANATION Hydrology

River or Stream

500- Year Floodplain

Airshed Sampling Locations CDM/Walsh Soil Sampling Depth (LNRD- 061)

• 0"-1" Soil Depth

• 0"-2" Soil Depth • • • I . . . • • • • • . Other Sampling Locations • • • ^* • • • BLM Soil Sampling Depth (1997)

+ No depth data av,

BLM Soil Sampling Depth (LNRD- 057)

0" - V Soil Depth

0"-3" Soil Depth

Keammerer Soil Sampling Depth (LNRD- 016)

0"-6" Soil Depth Other Features

Approximate Location of Former Smelter

• . • i ' Disturbed or Non- Native • i • • • • Soil Areas (Walsh, 1994) . . . Lowland Zone - Based on presence of riparian species (CDOW Vegetation Mapping, 2001) .

SCALE IN FEET

3300 33 (X) UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN SITE CHARACTERIZATION SUMMARY FIGURE 7-8

SOIL SAMPLE DEPTH FOR LEAD SAMPLE LOCATIONS

PROJECT 010004.3 DATE: OCT 22, 2002 REV: 1 BY: MCP ICHK: KJT MFC, Inc. consulting scienli- -meers - EXPLANATION Hydrology

River or Stream

500-Year Floodplain Airshed Sampling Locations CDIWWalsh Soil Sampling Location (LNRD- 061) Sampling Location and Concentration (Alluvial samples concentration in italics) • Arsenic Concentration < 30 mg/Kg • Arsenic Concentration > = 30 mg/Kg and < 120 mg/Kg • Arsenic Concentration . . > = 120 in Other Sampling Locations Keammerer Soil Sarflphng Location (LNRD- 016) NOTE: Keammerer samples are 0- 6" depth Arsenic Concentration < 30 mg'Kci Arsenic Concentration > = 30 mg/Kg and < 120 mg/Kg BLM Soil Sampling Location (1997) « Arsenic Concentration < 30 mg/Kg Other Features Approximate Location of Former Smelter

Disturbed or Non- Native Soil Areas (Walsh, 1994) Lowland Zone - Based on presence of riparian species (CDOW Vegetation Mapping, 2001)

For sample depth intervals, refer to Figure 7-10

,. . . » » » » .

SCALE IN H.HT

3300 0 3300 UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN SITE CHARACTERIZATION SUMMARY FIGURE 7-9 ARSENIC CONCENTRATION (mg\Kg) UNDISTURBED NATIVE SOIL

PROJECT 010004.3 DATE: OCT 22, 2002 REV: 1 BY: MCP [ CHK: KJT MFC, Inc. consulting scientists an : 22-OCT-. EXPLANATION Hydrology

River or Stream

500- Year Floodplain

Airshed Sampling Locations COM;Walsh Soil Sampling Depth (LNRD- 01

• Soil Depth

• 0"-2" Soil Depth Other Sampling Locations

BLM Soil Sampling Depth (19971

No depth data available

Keammerer Soil Sampling Depth (LNRD- 016)

0"-6" Soil Depth Other Features

Approximate Location of Former Smelter

Disturbed or Non- N Soil Areas (Walsh, 1994) Lowland Zone - Based on presence of riparian species (CDOW Vegetation Mapping, 2001)

SCALE IN FEET

0 3300 UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN SITE CHARACTERIZATION SUMMARY FIGURE 7-10

SOIL SAMPLE DEPTH FOR ARSENIC SAMPLE LOCATIONS

PROJECT 010004.3 DATE: OCT 22, 2002 4 REV:1 BY: MCP |CHK:KJT MFC, Inc. consult/up MH'ntixts amii'ngineers 22-OC' • EXPLANATION Hydrology

River or Str-

500- Year Floodplain

Airshed Delineation Airshed Delineation via Arsenic Criteria Only Airshed Delineation via Lead Criteria Only Airshed Delineation via Arsenic and Lead Criteria Other Features

Approximate Location nier Smelter

Disturbed or Non- Native Soil Areas (Walsh, 1994) Lowland Zone - Based on presence of riparian species (CDOW Vegetation Mapping, 2001)

Note: Data from 0 to 2- inch depth interval

SCALE IN FEET

3300 0 UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN SITE CHARACTERIZATION SUMMARY FIGURE7-11

AIRSHED DELINEATION

PROJECT 010004.3 DATE: OCT 22, 2002 REV: 1 BY: MCP | CHK: KJT MFC, Inc. consulting scientists andenti EXPLANATION Perspective view looking east from Arkansas River Valley North Area included within smelter airshed based on the metals • data currently available for undisturbed native soils Disturbed or Non-native Soil Approximate Location of Former Smelter

UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN SITE CHARACTERIZATION SUMMARY FIGURE 7-12 PERSPECTIVE VIEW OF SMELTER AIRSHED

ROJECT: 010004.3 DATE: OCT 02, 2002 REV: 1 BY: MCP CHK: KJT MFG, Inc. consulting scientists and engineers N:\arcprj2\010004\cov\mfgViirshedViirshcd3d3.doc 22-OCT-2Q02GP EXPLANATION Hydrology

River or Stream o 500-Year Floodplain o f o Airshed Category (TopO to 2 inches)

Lead Concent less than 150 mg/Kg ! Background)

Lead Concentration greater than or equal to 150 mg/Kg

Arsenic Concentration i less than 30 mg/Kg (Upland Background)

Arsenic Concentration greater than or equal to 30 mg/Kg

Other Samples (Other depth intervals)

BLM samples, depth unknown

Keammerer (0-6" I samples

Other Features

Approximate Location of Former Smelter

Lowland Zone - Based on presence of riparian species (CDOW Vegetation Mapping, 2001} Disturbed or Non- Native Soil Areas (Walsh, 1994) BLM 2000 Soil Sample Location „

SCALE IN FLHT

3300 UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN SITE CHARACTERIZATION SUMMARY & FIGURE7-13 AIRSHED METALS CONCENTRATION GRADIENT (UPLAND BACKGROUND)

PROJECT 010004.3 DATE: OCT 22, 2002 REV:1 BY: MCP I CHK: KJT MFC, Inc. consulting scientists arn, EXPLANATION Hydrology

River or Stream o 500-Year Floodplain o Airshed Category (TopO to 2 inches)

Lead Concentration less than 870 mg/Kg (Alluvial Background)

Lead Concentration greater o than or equal to 870 mg/Kg

tit Arsenic Concentration less than 120 mg/Kg (Alluvial Background)

Arsenic Concentration greater than or equal to 120 mg/Kg

Other Samples (Other depth intervals)

BLM samples, depth unknown

Keammerer (0-6") samples

Other Features

Approximate Location of Former Smelter

Lowland Zone - Based on presence of riparian species (CDOW Vegetation Mapping, 2001) Disturbed or Non- Native Soil Areas (Walsh, 1994) BLM 2000 Soil Sample Location

SCAl.F. IN U

3300 UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN SITE CHARACTERIZATION SUMMARY FIGURE 7-14 AIRSHED METALS CONCENTRATION GRADIENT (ALLUVIAL BACKGROUND)

PROJECT 010004.3 DATE: OCT 22, 2002 REV: 1 BY: MCP | CHK: KJT MFC, Inc. consulting sclent i , neers 8.0 REFERENCES/LITERATURE CITED

Alldredge, A.W., J.F. Lipscomb, and F.W. Wicker. 1974. Forage Intake Rates of Mule Deer Estimated with Fallout Cesium-137. J. Wildl. Manage. 38:508-816.

Amdur, M.O., J. Doull, and C.D. Klassen. 1991. Casarett and Doull's Toxicology: The Basic Science of Poisons. 4th Edition. Pergamon Press. New York, NY.

Aquatic Associates. 1993. Aquatic Sampling Program Results, California Gulch Site, Leadville, Colorado, 1991.

Archuleta, A.S., L.C. Coppock, and C. Ronish. 2000. American Dippers as Indicators of Water Quality. Draft Report, Environmental Contaminants Program, Colorado Field Office, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Bechtel Environmental, Inc (Bechtel). 1992. Remedial Investigation Draft Report for the Ruston/North Tacoma RI/FS, Volume 1 and 2. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, San Francisco, CA, November 1992.

Beyer, W.N., E.E. Connor, and S. Gerould. 1994. Estimates of Soil Ingestion by Wildlife. J. Wildl. Manage. 58:375-382.

Beyer, W.N. and G. Storm. 1995. Ecotoxicological Damage from Zinc Smelting at Palmerton, Pennsylvania. In: Handbook of Ecotoxicology. Hoffman, D.J., B.A. Rartner, G.A. Burton, Jr., and J. Cairns, Jr. (eds.). pp. 596-607. Lewis Publishers.

Beyer, W., G Heinz, and A. Redmond-Norwood (Eds.). 1996. Environmental Contaminants in Wildlife, Interpreting Tissue Concentrations. Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry Special Publication Series. CRC Press Inc. Boca Raton, Florida.

Binns, N.A. and F.M. Eiserman. 1979. Quantification of Fluvial Trout Habitat in Wyoming. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society.

Black and Veatch. 1988. Final Field Investigation Report Ruston/Vashon Island Area. State of Washington Department of Ecology, Olympia, WA, September 1988.

Blinn, D.W., J.P. Shannon, L.W. Stevens, and J.P. Carder. 1995. Consequences of Fluctuating Discharge for Lotic Communities. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 14(2): 233-248.

Callendar, E., W.H. Ficklin, B.A. Kimball, and P.R. Edelmann. 1988. Heavy-Metal Geochemistry of Sediments in the Pueblo Reservoir, Colorado. In: U.S. Geological Survey, Toxic Substances Hydrology Program- Proceedings of the Technical Meeting, Phoenix, Arizona, September 26-30, 1988.

CDM. 1991. Final Work Plan Soils Investigation, California Gulch Study Area, Leadville, Colorado. Prepared for Resurrection Mining Company, September 1991.

CDM. 1994. Final Soils Investigation Data Report, California Gulch CERCLA Site, Leadville, Colorado, July 1994.

CDM; J. Drexler; Roy F. Weston, Inc. and R.J. Lee Group. 1994. Draft Metal Speciation Data Report, Leadville, CO. Prepared for Resurrection Mining Company, USEPA and ASARCO, July 1994.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 8-1 Cereghino, R. and P. Lavandier. 1988. Influence of Hypolimnetic Hydrospeaking on the Distribution and Population Dynamics of Ephemeroptera in a Mountain Stream. Freshwater Biology 40: 385-399.

Chadwick, J.W. 1999. Information Collected During 1994 Field Season on the Arkansas River and it's Tributaries. Chadwick Ecological Consultants, Inc.

Chadwick Ecological Consultants, Inc. 1998. Aquatic Biological Assessment Data for the Upper Arkansas River Basin, near Leadville, Colorado. Appendices A-D. September 1998.

. 1999. 1998 Aquatic Biological Assessment Data for the Upper Arkansas River Basin, near Leadville, Colorado. September 1999.

Church, D.C. 1988. The Ruminant Animal-Digestive Physiology and Nutrition. Prentice Hall, New Jersey.

Church, S.E. 1993. Geochemical and Lead-Isotope Data from Stream and Lake Sediments, and Cores from the Upper Arkansas River Drainage: Effects of Mining at Leadville Colorado on Heavy- Metal Concentrations in the Arkansas River, Colorado, 1990-1993.

Church, S.E., S.A. Wilson, R.B. Vaughn and D.L. Fey. 1994. Geochemical and Lead Isotopic Studies of River and Lake Sediments, Upper Arkansas River Drainage Basin, Twin Lakes to Pueblo Reservoir, Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey, Administrative Report, 40 p.

Church S.E., D.L. Fey, D.M. Unruh. 2000. Geochemical and Lead-Isotopic Studies of River Sediment from Major Tributaries, Upper Arkansas River Watershed, Colorado. U.S.G.S. Open File Report 00-337.

Clark, Melanie L. and Michael E. Lewis. 1997. Metal Speciation in the Upper Arkansas River, Colorado, 1990-1993: U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Investigation Report 96-4282.

Clements, W.H. 1994. Benthic Invertebrate Community Responses to Heavy Metals in the Upper Arkansas River Basin, Colorado. Journal of North American Benthological Society, 1993,13 (1) 50-66.

Clements, W. and P. Kiffney. 1994. Integrated Field and Laboratory Approach for Assessing Impacts of Heavy Metals at the Arkansas River, Colorado. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 13:397-404.

Clements, W.H. and D.E. Rees. 1997. Effects of Heavy Metals on Prey Abundance, Feeding Habits, and Metal Uptake of Brown Trout hi the Arkansas River, Colorado. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 126: 774-785.

Clements, W.H., D.M. Carlisle, L.A. Courtney, and E.A. Harrahy. 2002. Integrating Observational and Experimental Approaches to Demonstrate Causation hi Stream Biomonitoring Studies. Environ. Toxiocol. Chem. 21:1138-1146.

Colby, W.F. 1988. Heavy Metal Analysis: Baseline Study for Edith Seppi. Colorado Mountain College, Leadville, Colorado.

Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE). 1990. Cleer Creek Phase II Remedial Investigation-Final. Colorado Department of Health, Hazardous Materials & Waste Management Division in Cooperation with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Prepared by: Camp Dresser & McKee Inc., Denver, Colorado.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_current 1 .doc 8-2 -. 1999. Results of the Lincoln Park Superfund Site Ecological Risk Assessment in Community Health News for Colorado Newsletter.

-. 2001. 1984-2001 Groundwater Data Provided to MFG, Inc. in Electronic Format on 8/24/2001. (Metals.dbf and Colo_src.dbf).

-. 2002. Classifications and Numeric Standards for Arkansas River Basin. Effective 4/24/02. CDPHE, 86 pp.

Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW). 1988. Colorado Division of Wildlife, Natural Diversity Information Source, Denver, CO. 1988 to 1998 1:24000 Scale-Electronic Riparian Vegetation Quadrangles.

. 1993. Unpublished Data: Episodic Water Quality Sampling Event Associated with Thunderstorm Runoff at California Gulch, near Leadville.

. 1998. Fisheries Inventories: Upper Arkansas River Basin. Prepared by Greg Policky. State of Colorado Department of Natural Resources, Division of Wildlife. Salida, CO.

. 1999. Listing of Colorado Division of Wildlife Holdings, including Easements, along the Arkansas River from Leadville to Pueblo. Letter via Colorado Attorney General's Office.

Converse, Y.K., C.P. Hawkins, and R.A. Valdez. 1998. Habitat Relationships of Subadult Humpback Chub in the Colorado River through Grand Canyon: Spatial Variability and Implications of Flow Regulation. Regulated Rivers: Research and Management 14: 267-284.

Cooke, J.A. and M.S. Johnson. 1996. Cadmium in Small Mammals. Environmental Contaminants in Wildlife: Interpreting Tissue Concentrations. Beyer, W.N., G.H. Heinz, and A.W. Redmon- Norwood.

Crouch, T.M., D. Cain, P.O. Abbott, R.D. Penley and R.T. Hurr. 1984. Water-Resources Appraisal of the Upper Arkansas River Basin from Leadville to Pueblo, Colorado. U.S. Geological Survey, Water-Resource Investigations Report 82-4114.

Custer, C.M., C.T. Custer, A.S. Archuleta, L.C. Coppock, C.D. Swartz, and J.W. Bickham. In Press. A Mining Impacted Stream: Exposure and Effects of Lead and Other Trace Elements on Tree Swallows (Tachycineta bicolor) Nesting in the Upper Arkansas River Basin, Colorado. Pages 781-806. In: Hoffman, D.J., B.A. Rattner, G.A. Burton Jr., J. Cairns Jr., 2003. Handbook of Ecotoxicology. 2nd Edition, CRC Press, Inc, Boca Raton, Florida.

Dames and Moore, Inc. 1991. RI/FS for Bunker Hill Superfund Site: Draft Remedial Investigation Report, June 1991.

Dash, R.G., and R.F. Oritz. 1996. Water Quality Data for the Arkansas River Basin, Southeastern Colorado, 1990-1993: U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report 95-464.

Davies, Patrick H, and Stephen Brinkman. 1990. Aquatic Data Analysis-Federal Aid Project F-33. Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fish Research Section and; Federal Aid in Fish & Wildlife Restoration, Job Progress Report.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 8-3 . 1994. Investigation of Acute and Long-Term Toxicity of Metals to Brown Trout. Colorado Division of Wildlife. Arkansas River Research Study, 1994 Annual Progress Report, Period October 1, 1993 to September 30,1994. Job 1.

. 1999. Water Pollution Studies. Federal Aid Project #F-243R-6. Colorado Division of Wildlife, Fish Research Station, Fort Collins, CO.

Davies, P.H., W.H. Clements, and J.D. Stednick. 1994. Arkansas River Research Study, 1994 Annual Progress Report, Period May 1, 1993 to September 30, 1993. U. S. Bureau of Reclamation.

Davies, P.; M. Mclntyre; and J. Stednick. 1997. Arkansas River Research Study - 1995 Annual Progress Report.

Davies, P.H., S.F. Brinkman, M.W. Mclntyre, and W.H. Clements. 2000. Arkansas River Research Study: 1999 Annual Progress Report; Period October 1, 1994 to September 30, 1995. Colorado Division of Wildlife. Prepared for U.S. Bureau of Reclamation.

Davis, G. and W. Mertz. 1987. Copper. In Walter Mertz (ed.) Trace Elements in Human and Animal Nutrition, 5th Edition, Volume 2. Academic Press. Orlando, Florida.

Dominick S. DeWitt and Michael P. O'Neill. 1998. Effects of Flow Augmentation on Stream Channel Morphology and Riparian Vegetation: Upper Arkansas River Basin, Colorado. Wetlands. Vol. 18. No. 4. December 1998. pp. 591-607. The Society of Wetland Scientists.

Drexler, J.W and Roy F. Weston, Inc. 1995. Draft Final Findings of Metal Speciation Investigations at the California Gulch NPL Site. Prepared for U.S. EPA, Region Vffl, Denver, CO, October 1995.

Eisler, R. 2000. Handbook of Chemical Risk Assessment: Health Hazards to Humans, Plants, and Animals. Lewis Publishers, pp 1903.

Enserink, E.L., J.L. Maas-Diepeveen, and C.J. Van Leeuwan. 1991. Combined Effects of Metals: An Ecotoxicological Evaluation. Water Research 25:679-687.

Evans G.W., P.F. Majors, and W.E. Cornatzer. 1970. Mechanisms for Cadmium and Zinc Antagonism of Copper Metabolism. Biochemistry. Biophysics. Res. Commun. 40:1142-1148.

Farrington, William. 1985. Affadavit from Bill Farrington of Buena Vista, Colorado. Dated February 22,1985.

Fisher, K.T. 1999. Revegetation of Fluvial Tailing Deposits on the Arkansas River Near Leadville, Colorado. M. S. Thesis. Colorado State University. Fort Collins, CO.

Fitzgerald, J.P., C.A. Meaney, and D.M. Armstrong. 1994. Mammals of Colorado. Denver Museum of Natural History, University Press of Colorado 467 pp.

Fletcher, L.A. 1975. Soil Survey of Chafee-Lake Area, Colorado: Soil Conservation Services, 78 p.

Franson, J.C. 1996. Cadmium in Small Mammals. In: Environmental Contaminants in Wildlife: Interpreting Tissue Concentrations. Beyeer, W.N., G.H. Heinz, and A.W. Redmond-Norwood (eds.). SETAC Special Publication Series. Lewis Publishers.

J:\Ol0004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 8-4 Frugis, M. 1995. Bioavailability of Metal Mixtures in Natural and Synthetic Sediments. Masters Thesis, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.

Harrahy, E.A. 2000. Ecotoxicological and Genetic Effects of a Mixture of Heavy Metals on Selected Aquatic Macroinvertebrates. A Ph.D. Dissertation Submitted to Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.

Hambidge, M.K., C.E. Casey, and N.F. Kiebs. 1986. Zinc. In Walter Mertz (ed.) Trace Elements in Human and Animal Nutrition. 5th Edition, Volume 2. Academic Press. Orlando, Florida.

Herrmann, S.J. and K.I. Mahan. 1977. Effects of Impoundment on Water and Sediment in the Arkansas River at Pueblo Reservoir. U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, Lower Missouri Region, Fryingpan- Arkansas Project, Colorado.

Hoffman, D.J., B.A. Rattner, G.A. Burton Jr., and J. Cairns Jr. 1995. Handbook of Ecotoxicology. CRC Press Inc., Boca Raton, Florida. 1995.

Horwitt, M.K. and C.R. Cowgill. 1931. The Effects of Ingested Lead on the Organism: II. Studies on the Dog. J. Pharmacol. Exper. Therapy. 66:289-301.

Horowitz, A.J., F.A. Rinella, P. Lamothe, T.L. Miller, T.K.. Edwards, R.L. Roche, and D.A. Rickert. 1990. Variations in Suspended Sediment and Associated Trace Element Concentrations in Selected Riverine Cross Sections. Environmental Science & Technology, Volume 24, Number 9, pages 1313-1320.

InterFluve, Inc and FLO Engineering, Inc (InterFluve). 1999. Fluvial Geomorphology Assessment of Upper Arkansas River: Final Report. Unpublished Report Prepared for URS Operating Services, 110 p. plus appendices.

Jacobs Engineering Group, Inc (Jacobs). 1991. Historical Mineral Processing Operations of the Leadville Mining District, California Gulch Superfund Site, Leadville, Colorado. Prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region VIII, May 1991.

Jordan, D.S. 1889. Report of Explorations in Colorado and Utah During the Summer of 1889, with an Account of the Fishes Found in Each of the River. United States Fish Commission, Vol. DC, Washington Government Printing Office, 1891.

Kabata-Pendias, A. 2001. Trace Elements in Soils and Plants. Third Edition. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida.

Keammerer, W. 1987. Unpublished Soils and Vegetation Data. Leadville, CO.

Kiffney, P.M. and W.H. Clements. 1993. Bioaccumulation of Heavy Metals by Benthic Invertebrates at the Arkansas River, Colorado. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, Vol. 12, pp. 1507- 1517, 1993.

Kimball, B.A., K.E. Bencala, D.M. McKnight. 1989. Research on Metals in Acid Mine Drainage in the Leadville Colorado Area. U.S. Geological Survey Toxic Substances Hydrology Program - Proceedings of the Technical Meeting, Phoenix, Arizona, September 26.

Kimball, B.A., E. Callender, and E.V. Axtmann. 1995. Effects of Colloids on Metal Transport in a River Receiving Acid Mine Drainage, Upper Arkansas River, Colorado, U.S.A. Applied Geochemistry 10: 285-306.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 8-5 Klima, K., and B. Scherer. 2000. Draft: Baseline Ecosystem Setting Characterization of the Leadville Area. Natural Resource Management Department, Colorado Mountain College. Leadville, CO.

Krieger, D. 2000. Personal Communication with Andrew Archuleta. Doug Krieger Fishery Biologist, Colorado Division of Wildlife, Colorado Springs, CO

Lancia, R.A., J.D. Nichols, and K.H. Pollock. 1994. Estimating the Number of Animals in Wildlife Populations. Pages 215-253. In: T.A. Bookhout, ed. Research and Management Techniques for Wildlife and Habitats. Fifth ed. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, Md.

Levy, D. B., K.A. Barbarick, E.G. Siemer, and L.E. Sommers. 1992. Distribution and Partitioning of Trace Metals in Contaminated Soils near Leadville, Colorado. J. Envir. Quality 21:185-195.

Lewis, M.E. and P. Edelmann. 1994. Physical, Chemical, and Biological Characteristics of Pueblo Reservoir, Colorado, 1985-1989. U.S. Geological Survey, Water-Resources Investigations Report 94-4097.

Ma, W. 1996. Lead in Mammals. Environmental Contaminants in Wildlife: Interpreting Tissue Concentrations. Beyer, W.N., G.H. Heinz, and A.W. Redmon-Norwood (eds).

Ma, W. and S. Talmage. 2001. Insectivora. In: Ecotoxicology of Wild Mammals. Shore, R.F. and B.A. Rattner (eds.). pp. 123-158. John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Marr, J.C.A., H.L. Bergman, M. Parker, J. Lipton, D. Cacela, W. Erickson, and G.R. Phillips. 1995. Relative Sensitivity of Brown and Rainbow Trout to Pulsed Exposures of an Acutely Lethal Mixture of Metals Typical of the Clark. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 52: 2005-2015.

Mayack, L.A., P.B. Bush, O.J. Fletcher, R.K. Page and T.T. Fendley. 1981. Tissue Residues of Dietary Cadmium in Wood Ducks. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 10: 637- 645.

McCulley, Frick, & Oilman, Inc. 1990. Arkansas River Sediment and Water Quality Assessment -Final Report. For Rocky Mountain Consultants.

McRnight, D.M., Ranville, J.F., and Hamish, R.A., 1991, Particulate and Colloidal Organic Material and Associated Trace Metals in Pueblo Reservoir, Colorado, in Mallard, G.E., and Aronson, D.A., eds., U.S. Geological Survey Toxic Substances Hydrology Program-Proceedings of the Technical Meeting, Monterey, California, March 11-15, 1991: U.S. Geological Survey Water- Resources Investigations Report 91-4034, p. 428-433.

Medley, C.N., and W.H. Clements. 1998. Responses of Diatom Communities to Heavy Metals in Streams: The Influence of Longitudinal Variation. Ecol. Appl. 8:631-644.

Melancon, M.J. 1995. Bioindicators Used in Aquatic and Terrestrial Monitoring. In: Handbook of Ecotoxicology. Hoffman, D.J., B.A. Rattner, G.A. Burton, Jr., and J. Cairns, Jr. (eds.). pp. 220- 240. Lewis Publishers.

Mueller, D.K., L.R. DeWeese, AJ. Garner, and T.B. Spruill. 1991. Reconnaissance Investigation of Water Quality, Bottom Sediment, and Biota Associated with Irrigation Drainage in the Middle Arkansas River. U.S. Geologic Survey, Water-Resources Investigations Report 91-4060.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 8-6 Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 1997. NRCS Report, NRCS, Alamosa, CO.

Nehring, R.B. 1986. Stream Fisheries Investigations, Federal Aid Project F-51-R, Job 1. Fish Flow Investigations, Job 3. Special Regulations Evaluation. Colorado Division of Wildlife, Ft. Collins, Colorado, Federal Aid in Fish and Wildlife Restoration Job Progress Report F-51-R.

Nehring, R.B. and G. Policky. 2002. Evaluation of 16 Years of Trout Population Biometrics in the Upper Arkansas River. Colorado Division of Wildlife.

Nelson, S.M. and R.A. Roline. 1996. Distribution of Aquatic Macroinvertebrates in Relation to Stream Flow Characteristics in the Arkansas River. U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, Technical Service Center, Denver, CO. Technical Memorandum 8220-96-19.

Nelson, S.M. and R.A. Roline. 1999. Relationships Between Metals and Hyporheic Invertebrate Community Structure in a River Recovering from Metals Contamination. Hydrobiologia 397:211-226(1999).

Norrdin, R.W. 1987. Correspondence between R. Norrdin, College of Veterinary Medicine, Colorado State University and D. Schweitzer, Colorado State University Diagnostic Lab, Grand Junction, Colorado. Letters from January 8 and 13, 1987.

Ortiz, R.F., M.E. Lewis, and M.J. Radell. 1998. Water-Quality Assessment of the Arkansas River Basin, Southeastern Colorado, 1990-93. U.S. Geological Survey, Water-Resources Investigations Report 97-4111.

Overton, C.K., S.P. Wollrab, B.C. Roberts and M.A. Radko. 1997. R1/R4 (Nothern/Intermountain Regions) Fish and Fish Habitat Standard Inventory Procedures Handbook. USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, INT-GTR-346.

PRC Environmental Management, Inc. 1992. Investigation of the Potential for a Relationship Between Osteochondrosis in the Horse and Heavy Metal Exposure. Report No. 012-C08096.

Pain, D.J. 1995. Lead in the Environment. In: Handbook of Ecotoxicology. Hoffman, D.J., B.A. Rattner, G.A. Burton, Jr. and J. Caims, Jr. (eds.). pp. 356-391. Lewis publishers.

Pain, D.J. 1996. Lead in Waterfowl. In: Environmental Contaminants in Wildlife, Interpreting Tissue Concentrations. Beyer, W., G. Heinz, and A. Redmond-Norwood (eds.). pp. 251-264, CRC Press Inc. Boca Raton, Florida.

Paschke, M. W., E. F. Redente, and D. B. Levy. 2000. Zinc Toxicity Thresholds for Important Reclamation Grass Species of the Western United States. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry 19:2751-2756.

Paschke, M.W. and E.F. Redente. 2002. Copper Toxicity Thresholds for Important Reclamation Grass Species of the Western United States. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (In Press).

Pickering, F.R. 1995. Food Chain Transfer and the Relative Importance of Aqueous & Dietary Exposures to Metals in Rainbow Trout. A Master of Science Thesis Submitted to Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.

Policky, G. 1998. Fisheries Inventories, Upper Arkansas River Basin. State of Colorado, Department of Natural Resources, CDOW, Salida, CO.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl .doc 8-7 Policky et al. 2000. -(Policky, CDOW Fishery Biologist, Salida Colorado). Personal Communication with A. Archuleta.

Rabeni, C.G., and M.A. Smale. 1995. Effects of Siltation on Stream Fishes and the Potential Mitigating Role of Buffering Riparian Zone. Hydrobiologia 303: 211-219.

Redente, E. F. and D. A. Baker. 1996. Direct Revegetation of Mine Tailing: A Case Study in Colorado, pp. 183-191. In F. F. Munshower and S. E. Fisher (eds.) Planning, Rehabilitation, and Treatment of Disturbed Lands. Reclamation Research Unit Publication No. 9603. Montana State University, Bozeman, Montana.

Robertson, R.J., BJ. Stutchbury and R.R. Cohen. 1992. The Birds of North America, No. 11, 26 pp.

RooneyJ.R. 1975. The Equine Practitioner. Osteochondrosis in the Horse. Modem Vet. Practice. 56:113-116.

Ruse, L. P., and S.J. Hermann. 2000a. Plecoptera and Trichoptera Species Distribution Related to Environmental Characteristics of the Metal-Polluted Arkansas River, Colorado. Western North American Naturalist 60(1): 57-65.

Ruse, L.P., S.J. Herrmann, and I.E. Sublette. 2000b. Chironomidae (Dipter) Species Distribution Related to Environmental Characteristics of the Metal-Polluted Arkansas River, Color. Western North American Naturalist 60(1): 34-56.

Sample, B.E., D.M. Opresko, and G.W. Suter H. 1996. Toxicological Benchmarks for Wildlife. 1996 Revision. Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy by Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc. ES/ER/TM-86/R3.

Scheidegger, K.J. and M.B. Bain. 1995. Larval Distribution and Mircrohabitat Use in Free-Flowing and Regulated Rivers. Copeia 1: 12-135.

Shacklette, H.T. and J.G. Boemgen. 1984. Element Concentrations in Soil and Other Surficial Materials of the Continuous United States. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1270.

Shore, R.F. and B. A. Rattner (Editors). 2001. Ecotoxicology of Wild Mammals. John Wiley and Sons, West Sussex, England.

Smith, B. 1992. Retired Veterinarian, Leadville, Colorado. Personal Communication with Mary McKinley, PRC Environmental Management, Inc. August 18 and October 27.

Smith, S.M. 1994. Geochemical Maps of Copper, Lead, and Zinc, Upper Arkansas River Drainage Basin, Colorado. U. S. Geological Survey, Open-File Report 94-408.

Smith, R. and L.M. Hill, eds. 1999. Arkansas River Water Needs Assessment Report. USDI Bureau of Land Management, USDI Bureau of Reclamation, USD A Forest Service, and Colorado Department of Natural Resources.

Sommers, L.E., K.A. Barbarick, and D.B. Levy. 1991. Behavior of Trace Metals in Mountain Meadow Soils. Proceedings of the Third Intermountain Meadow Symposium. Steamboat Springs, CO. Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.

J:\010004YTask 3 - SCR\SCR_currentI.doc 8-8 Sotou, S., K. Yamamoto, H. Sendota, and M. Sugiyama. 1980. Toxicity, Fertility, Teratogenicity, and Dominant Lethal Tests in Rats Administered Cadmium Subchronically. I. Fertility, Teratogenicity, and Dominant Lethal Tests. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Safety. 4:51-56.

Spehar, R.L., and J.T Fiandt. 1986. Acute and Chronic Effects of Water Quality Criteria-Based Metal Mixtures to Three Aquatic Species. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry. 5:917-931.

S.M. Stoller Corporation (Stoller). 1996. Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessment, Operable Unit No. 4, California Gulch Superfund Site. Prepared for Resurrection Mining Company, December 19,1996.

Strom, S.M. 2000. The Utility of Metal Biomarkers in Assessing the Toxicity of Metals in the American Dipper (Cinclus mexicanus). Unpublished Thesis, Colorado State University, Ft. Collins, CO.

Studzinski. 1997. A Summary of Environmental Studies Done in the Upper Arkansas River Basin as they Pertain to Streambank Erosion in the Area. University College, University of Denver, Denver, CO (Unpublished Data).

Swayze, G.A., R.N. Clark, R.M. Pearson, and K.E. Livo, 1996. Mapping Acid Generating Minerals at the California Gulch Superfund Site in Leadville, Colorado using Imaging Spectroscopy. Prepared by U.S. Geological Survey Spectroscopy Laboratory, Denver, CO and U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Denver, CO, Summaries of the 6th Annual JPL Airborne Earth Science Workshop, March 4-8, 1996.

Swyers, J.A. 1990. Metal Contamination of a High Altitude Mountain Valley Meadow Due to Heavy Metal Mining of a World Class Ore Body. Colorado Mountain College. Leadville, CO.

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1986. Quality Criteria for Water (The Gold Book). Report #440/5-86-001.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1988. Clear Creek Reservoir Reclamation and Arkansas River Fish Kill: A Review and Evaluation of the Use of Rotenone.

. 1993. Assessment of the Trout Population in the Upper Arkansas River Basin of Central Colorado. U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Eastern Colorado Projects Office, Loveland, CO

. 1995. Unpublished Invertebrate Data Collected by Environmental Contaminants Program, Colorado Field Office.

URS Operating Services, Inc. 1997. Sampling Activities Report Upper Arkansas River Fluvial Tailings Lake County, Colorado. TDD No. 9609-0005. Prepared for USEPA START. Contract No. 68- W5-0031.

. 1998. Sampling Activites Report Fall 1997 & June 1998. Upper Arkansas River Fluvial Tailings Lake County, Colorado. TDD No. 9702-0025. Prepared for USEPA START. Contract No. 68-W5-0031.

Walsh and Associates, Inc (Walsh). 1993a. Smelter Remedial Investigation Report, California Gulch Site, Leadville, Colorado. Prepared for ASARCO, Incorporated, Leadville, Colorado, May 3, 1993.

. 1993b. Lead Speciation Study, Leadville, Colorado. Prepared for ASARCO, Incorporated, Denver, Colorado, October 1993.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 8-9 . 1994. Pre-Mining Soils Geochemistry Report, California Gulch Study Area, Leadville, Colorado. Prepared for ASARCO, Incorporated, Leadville, Colorado, March 21, 1994.

Walton-Day, K., R.W. Healy, F.B. Maestas, and A. Ranalli. 2000. Effects of Remediation on Geochemistry and Hydrology of the Unsaturated Zone of Fluvial Tailings Deposits in the Floodplain of the Upper Arkansas River, Colorado. In: Proceedings from the Fifth International Conference on Acid Rock Drainage, Denver, CO, May 21-24, 2000: Littleton, Colorado, Society for Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration, pp 1443-1450.

Walton-Day, K., F.J. Rossi, L.J. Gerner, J.B. Evans, T.J. Yager, J.F. Ranville and K.S. Smith. 2000. Effects of Fluvial Tailings Deposits on Soils and Surface- and Ground-Water Quality, and Implications for Remediation - Upper Arkansas River, Colorado, 1992-1996. U.S. Geological Survey Water Resources Investigations Report 99-4273, 100 p.

Water Quality Control Division. 1998. Status of Water Quality in Colorado. Colorado Department of Public Health and the Environment. December.

Wetherbee, Gregory A., Briant A. Kimball, Wendy S. Maura. 1991. Selected Hydrologic Data for the Upper Arkansas River Basin, Colorado 1986-1989.

Roy F. Weston, Inc. (Weston). 1994. Consolidated Findings of Soil Investigations from the California Gulch NPL Site. Draft Report, Prepared for U.S. EPA Region Vm.

. 1996. Baseline Human Health Risk Assessment for the California Gulch NPL Site. Prepared for U.S. EPA, Region Vm, Denver, CO, May 1996

Roy F. Weston, Inc. and Terra Technologies (Weston and Terra). 1997. Ecological Risk Assessment for the Terrestrial Ecosystem, California Gulch NPL Site, Leadville, Colorado. Prepared for U.S. EPA, Region Vm, Denver, CO, January 1997.

Wheeler, T.J., D.L. Anderson, S. Engle, A.M. Hogan, L.S. Larren, L.A. Neve, and R.R. Romano. 1995. Soil Survey of Fremont County Area, Colorado: Natural Resources Conservation Service, 338 p.

Willingham, Tom, and Allen Medine. Unpublished. Water Resource Management Strategies for Restoring & Maintaining Aquatic Life Uses. Second International Joint EPA-Peoples Republic of China Symposium on Fish Toxicology, Physiology and Water Quality Management. May 1992.

Winters, D.S. 1988. Seasonal Relationships Between the Benthos, Invertebrate Drift and Brown Trout Predation. Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, M. S. Thesis.

Wixson, B.G., B.E. Davies, and T.E. Clevenger. 1988. Environmental Impacts of Lead in Soil Associated with Primary Lead Smelters in Missouri. Presented at 1988 SEM Annual Meeting and Exhibit, Phoenix, Arizona.

Woodling, J. 1990. Use Attainability Study, California Gulch, Colorado. Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report.

Woodward Clyde. 1993. Terrestrial Ecosystem Evaluation-Sampling and Analysis Plan-Final. Prepared for ASARCO, Inc.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl .doc 8-10 Zhang, Y., B. Malmquist, and G. Englund. 1998. Ecological Processes Affecting Community Structure of Blackfly Larvae in Regulated and Unregulated Rivers: A Regional Study. Journal of Applied Ecology 35: 673-686.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\SCR_currentl.doc 8-11 APPENDIX A Bibliography Uppe^lVrkansas Library All RecorcM^eport

: ;:; ; rit1e : 1 Doc No.. - .'•' V <' '-':v-; >v'-V " '•.;•.• %..•••:--" '. ;>• .,.• '- '_• •'•'•, • : "'••. Author' - ~ - T • . • '-~- ,Date' " •';.;-;. ''..-- Reference;-. '''''*;*''-\ •:.;••,. ::-•?-:- D00387 Improvements to the Upper Arkansas Abart, E.M., N.L. Nelson, 1996 U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, metals, Leadville mine River Attributable to Operation of S.M. Nelson, R.A. Roline, and Technical Service Center, drainage tunnel , arkansas the Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel J. Yahnke Denver, CO. Technical Report river, water, aquatic Treatment Plant R-96-06

D00388 Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel Abart, E.M., R.J. Eisenhauer, 1995 CJ. S. Bureau of Reclamation, metals, Leadville mine Effluent Effects on the Arkansas S. Hunt, H.T. Jong, F.B. Technical Service Center^ drainage tunnel, arkansas River, 1965-92 Leitz, S.M. Nelson, and R.A. Denver, CO. Technical Report river, water, aquatic Roline R-95-10 \ D00001 Description of Water-Systems Abbott, P. 0. 1985 U. S. Geological Survey, \ Hydrology, Water Projects, Operations in the Arkansas River Water -Resources Arkansas River Basin, Basin, Colorado Investigations Report 85-4092 Colorado

D00501 Sediment Quality and Aquatic Life Adams, W.J., R.A. Kimerle, 1992 ES& T Series opinion paper sediment, aquatic, Assessment and J.W. Barnett Jr. toxicology, metals,

D00002 Trace Elements in the Terrestrial Adriano, D. 1986 Spring-Verlag, Inc., New Terrestrial Environment, Environment (Cover only) York, pp.533 metals

D00547 Placer Mining and Water Quality Alaska Department of 1979 Alaska Dept . of Environmental placer mining, water (excerpts from document) Environmental Conservation Conservation, Alaska Water quality, metals, mining, Quality Planning Program Alaska

D00612 Trace metals in Soil, Vegetation, Alberici, T.M. , W.E. Sopper, 1989 Journal of Environmental Metals, mammals, mines, and Voles from Mine Land Treated G.L. Storm, and R.H. Yahner Quality. 18: 115-119 terrestrial, voles, with Sewage Sludge vegetation, sewage sludge

D00003 Effects of Acidification on Metal Albers, P.H. and M.B. 1993 Environmental Toxicology and Aquatic Biota, Heavy Accumulation by Aquatic Plants and Camardese Chemistry 12:969-976 Metals, Bioaccumulation, Invertebrates. 2. Wetlands, Ponds Vegetation, Invertebrates and Small Lakes

D00004 Heavy Metals in Soils (Cover only) Alloway, B. , Ed. 1990 Blackie, Glasgow and London, Soils, metals, terrestrial Halstead Press, John Wiley and Sons , Inc . , New York

D00005 Survival and Growth of Tanytarsus Anderson, R.L., C.T. 1980 Archives of Environmental Invertebrates, copper, dissimilis (Chironomidae) Exposed Walbridge, J.T. Fiandt Contamination and Toxicology cadmium, zinc, lead, metals to Copper, Cadmium, Zinc, and Lead 9:329

D00006 Fisheries Inventories, Upper Anderson, R.M. 1992 State of Colorado, Department Fish, Inventory, Upper Arkansas and South Platte Basins of Natural Resources, Arkansas River Basin, South Division of Wildlife Platte Basin

D00375 Impact Analysis of a Flow Anderson, R.M., and D.A. 1994 Colorado Division of Wildlife fish, trout, Arkansas Augmentation Program on the Brown Krieger Special Report No. 70 River, fishery, aquatic Trout Fishery of the Arkansas River, Colorado.

Pagel -. • !-ji. .;; - . • v.-.'if : ; ,—" Tl*l *^""~ v^".3?.jj 1**'~(.c'~.'^l '• , •- •;•-<,*';•$• : : ; ; Doc N6.V •>'. : • t-.- --i-'-Vi .?.'.• --Title-.-c- .;~-vii, .•/-;,?•-•;<:. 1;.-v.'.; i'.'Vi-K- ' f"\s£?j ^"AiftHori'viV? •';U?';;^ .^> ? jJafe; j'Vv;-]' » - ' :£'.'.> ??ferepce -r V* ~v '.t£: ••':^•:f^. . ': ':-^Key.mitasW^VK^; .-. ':; • -.,•-. .^.--.'.ir. --•..-..••- .*.., -••'.•.: £^r.:WL-i;.>iV.rv' ' .~.- -.- i * -" ._: L ,'.• ...„>• -. - - -:•. ./.•-,; '. ,-v:, -yrfe- -,•,-- :'..} •£..>•„•- D00596 Cadmium in small mammals from Andrews, S.M., M.S. Johnson 1984 Environmental Pollution cadmium, mammals, mines,, grassland established on and J.A. Cooke (Series A) 33:153-162 terrestrial, metals metalliferous mine waste. D00007 Acid-Volatile Sulfide as a Factor Ankley, G.T., G.L. Phipps, 1991 Environmental Toxicology and Sediments, Metals, Mediating Cadmium and Nickel E.N. Leonard, D.A. Benoit and Chemistry 10:1299-1307 Bioavailability, Cadmium, Bioavailability in Contaminated V.R. Mattson Nickel, Contaminants, Sediments toxicity D00597 Heavy metals in tissues of small Anthony, R.G. and R. Kozlowski 1982 Journal of Environmental heavy metals, mammals, mammals inhabiting waste-water- Quality 11(1) :20-22 terrestrial irrigated habitats D00592 Aquatic Sampling Program Results, Aquatics Associates for Res- 1993 Res -ASARCO Joint Venture Aquatic, California Gulch, California Gulch Site, Leadville, ASARCO Joint Venture project file Arkansas River, Colorado, 1991 invertebrates, fish D00325 Phase I Field Study Summary, ASARCO, Inc./CH2M HILL 1985 ASARCO, Inc./CH2M HILL, California Gulch, Arkansas California Gulch RI, Leadville, Leadville, CO River, Leadville, RI, Yak Colorado, Final Technical Report Tunnel, Metals, Wells, Contaminants D00012 Aquatic Ecosystem Characterization ASARCO, Inc. /Woodward-Clyde 1994 ASARCO, Inc., Golden, Colorado Ecosystem Evaluations, Report California Gulch Site, Aquatic, California Gulch, Leadville, Colorado Leadville, Colorado, Upper Arkansas River

D00010 Background Soils Geochemistry Work ASARCO, Inc. /Woodward-Clyde 1992 ASARCO, Inc., Leadville, Work Plan, Soils, Plan California Gulch Study Area Colorado Geochemistry, California Leadville, Colorado Gulch, Leadville, Colorado, Upper Arkansas River

D00014 California Gulch Site Leadville, ASARCO , Inc . /Woodward- Clyde 1992 Res -ASARCO Joint Venture, Work Plan, Surface Water Colorado Surface Water Background Leadville, Colorado Background, California Work Plan - Addendum Gulch, Leadville, Colorado, Upper Arkansas River, aquatic D00015 Hydrogeologic Remedial ASARCO , Inc . /Woodward- Clyde 1993 ASARCO, Inc., Golden, Colorado RI/FS, Hydrogeologic, Investigation Report, California California Gulch, Gulch Site, Leadville, Colorado. Leadville, Colorado, Upper Volume I and Volume I I -DRAFT Arkansas River

D00013 Mine Waste Piles Remedial ASARCO, Inc. /Woodward-Clyde 1994 ASARCO, Inc. RI/FS, Waste Piles, Investigation Report, California California Gulch, Gulch Site, Leadville, Colorado Leadville, Colorado, Upper Arkansas River D00009 Surface Water Remedial ASARCO, Inc. /Woodward -Clyde 1993 ASARCO, Inc., Golden, Colorado RI/FS, Surface water, Investigation Report California California Gulch, Gulch Site, Leadville, Colorado- Leadville, Colorado, Upper DRAFT Vol . 1 Arkansas River D00018 Surface Water, Bed Material and ASARCO, Inc. /Woodward-Clyde 1991 Res -ASARCO Joint Venture, Work Plan, Surface Water, Aquatic Ecosystem Data Collection Leadville, Colorado Bed Material, Aquatic Program Work Plan California Gulch Ecosystem Evaluation, Site, Leadville, Colorado-DRAFT California Gulch, FINAL Leadville, Colorado, Upper Arkansas River

Page 2 I : : Doc No. .^r^S -ntie, !--^:-~ ;.^:;- S;'.^':^-' '."I-."' "J^thofc^-:-'.' >.'•.•:.;-:•;• '.Date . •'-^: .-,..,V References^ V'-^v •.:.- -'; :- ••' :: ;tey.Words ^;:- v -^vj D00361 T^^^^ps Disposal Area Remedial ASARCO, Inc. /Woodward-Clyde 1 ASARCO, Inc., Denver, Colorado RI, Tailings, Calif ornia^^^l Inl^Beigation Report, California 4 Gulch, Leadville, Metals ^^B Gulch Site, Leadville, Colorado, ^V Appendixes Final , Volume II, Appendixes

D00360 Tailings Disposal Area Remedial ASARCO, Inc . /Woodward-Clyde 1994 ASARCO, Inc., Denver, Colorado RI , Tailings, California Investigation Report, California Gulch, Leadville, Metals, Gulch Site, Leadville, Colorado, Final, Volume I, Text

D00362 Terrestrial Ecosystem Evaluation ASARCO, Inc . /Woodward-Clyde 1993a ASARCO, Inc., Golden, Colorado Ecosystem Evaluations, Report California Gulch Site, Terrestrial, California Leadville, Colorado - Draft, Copy 2 Gulch, Leadville, Colorado, Upper Arkansas River

D00017 Terrestrial Ecosystem Evaluation ASARCO , Inc . /Woodward- Clyde 1991 ASARCO, Inc., Leadville, Work Plan, Ecosystem Work Plan for the California Gulch Colorado Evaluation, Terrestrial, Site, Leadville, Colorado California Gulch, Leadville, Colorado, Upper Arkansas River D00016 Terrestrial Ecosystem Evaluation- ASARCO, Inc . /Woodward-Clyde 1993 ASARCO, Inc. Ecosystem Evaluations, Sampling and Analysis Plan - Final Terrestrial, Plan, California Gulch, Leadville, Colorado, Upper Arkansas River D00020 Wetlands Map for California Gulch ASARCO, Inc . /Woodward-Clyde 1992 ASARCO, Inc., Leadville, Wetland/Riparian, RI/FS Study Area Colorado California Gulch, Leadville, Colorado, Upper Arkansas River, Map D00369 Work Area Management Plan for ASARCO , Inc . /Woodward- Clyde 1994 ASARCO, Inc. /Woodward -Clyde Work Area Management Plan, ASARCO Incorporated at the California Gulch, California Gulch NPL Site Leadville, Metals, Lead, Leadville, Colorado - Appendix B Remedial Action, Superfund

D00023 Smelter Remedial Investigation ASARCO, Inc/Walsh & 1993 ASARCO, Inc., Golden, RI/FS, Smelter, California Report California Gulch Site, Associates, Inc. Colorado, Walsh Project No. Gulch, Leadville, Colorado, Leadville, Colorado, Volume I & II 3214-060, April 28, 1993 Upper Arkansas River Final D00022 Smelter Remedial Investigation ASARCO, Inc/Walsh & 1993 ASARCO, Inc., Golden, RI/FS, Smelter, California Report California Gulch Site, Associates, Inc. Colorado, Walsh Project No. Gulch, Leadville, Colorado, Leadville, Colorado, Volume II, 3214-060, April 28, 1993 Upper Arkansas River Final D00021 Smelter Remedial Investigation ASARCO, Inc/Walsh & 1993 ASARCO, Inc., Golden, RI/FS, Smelter, California Report California Gulch Site, Associates, Inc. Colorado, Walsh Project No/ Gulch, Leadville, Colorado, Leadville, Colorado, Volume III, 3214-060, April 28, 1993 Upper Arkansas River Final D00024 Soil Inventory and Map, California ASARCO, Inc/Walsh & 1992 ASARCO, Inc., Golden, Colorado Soils, Inventory, Metals, Gulch Study Area Associates, Inc. Upper Arkansas River, Leadville, Colorado, California Gulch, Map D00572 Seasonal Variability of Metals August, E.E., D.M. McKnight, 2000 Draft Manuscript upper arkansas, lake fork, Transport through a Wetland D.C. Hrncir, and K.S. Garhart metals, aquatic, wetlands, Impacted by Mine Drainage in the water, dinero tunnel Rocky Mountains --DRAFT

Page 3 i Doc No;-.; .5^f:V^J~-^ Title? ££A -•&*:*?•?.a W*?^»^X-tertMtir^rZ^r!;y< :.:*:•:••~Date,: •^.'•--r : v •-?:'-^"SV-;AiRiBference-.'s.':-F'-.''-' '.':- ^, ,-V- ; :,. v>.5 j ;•; i:;!vH."';:?:-.::JT<-,:; >¥ .:--.-. -^f:..-X--isi,"i.'i£vt;.? - •,-,•*-•/ ;'«:•;•; i«.?s~. .SyT* r :.s£.*> ---••-.• w. V "^.'.•i- ;i;.> ;:.":. ', !•'.'?•':•'•.:.*':?',..•'•':&•'?.••'••v^^^Key- ;y^^s :^;^^?f D00200 The Biogeochemistry of Wetlands in Balistrieri, L.S., L.P. 1995 Colorado Geological Survey; mining, wetlands, acid mine the San Luis Valley, Colorado: The Gough, R.C. Severson, A. Special Publication 38; drainage, metals, San Luis Effects of Acid Drainage from Archuleta Proceedings: Summitville Valley, aquatic Natural and Mine Sources Forum ' 95

D00406 Data for water Levels, Water Banta, E.R. 1997 U.S. Geological Survey, Open Lincoln Park, water, Quality, Lithology, and Surface- File Report 97-361, 16pp. arkansas river, water Hater Discharge in the Vicinity of Includes data diskette quality, uranium milling Lincoln Park, Colorado, 1961-1996

D00025 The Effects of pH and Redox Bates, M.H. 1983 Oklahoma State University, Sediments, Upper Arkansas Potential on the Release of Heavy Oklahoma Water Resources River, pH, heavy metals, Metals from Arkansas River Research Institute, redox, aquatic Sediments Stillwater, Oklahoma, Technical Completion Report - A-095-OKLA D00345 Cadmium and Mercury in Sediment Beauvais, S.L., J.G. Wiener, 1995 Archives of Environmental Cadmium, Mercury, Sediment, and Burrowing Mayfly Nymphs and G.J. Atchison Contamination and Toxicology Burrowing, Mayfly, Nymphs, (Hexagenia) in the Upper 28:178-183 Hexagenia, Mississippi Mississippi River, USA River, Minnesota, Iowa, invertebrate D00587 Review of "Upper Arkansas River Behnke, Dr. R. 1991 CDOW Report, SE Region, March Upper Arkansas River, Fisheries and Water Management 1, 1991 fisheries, assessment, CDOW Assessment" D00497 Effects of Metals on a Montane Beltman, D., W.H. Clements, 1995 presented at the Annual aquatic, invertebrates, Aquatic System Evaluated Using an J. Lipton, and D. Cacela fleeting of Society of community, metals, Integrated Assessment Approach Environmental Toxicology and sediment, water, periphyton Chemistry D00028 Population Density and Tissue Bengtsson, G., S. Nordstrom 1983 Environmental Pollution Invertebrates, metals, Metal Concentrations of Lumbricids and S . Rundgren (Series A) 30:87-108 copper, lead, zinc, in Forest Soils Near a Brass Mill earthworms

D00030 Tolerance to Trace Elements in Berry, W. L. and 0. R. Hunt 1978 0. S. Energy Research and Vegetation, Plants, Metals, Plants Development Administration, Contaminants, terrestrial UCLA- 12 1105 D00545 Modeling Frequency of Occurrence Besser, J.M. and K.J. Leib 2000 USGS Open File Report zinc, copper, animas river, of Toxic Concentrations of Zinc water, toxicity tests, and Copper in the Upper Animas metals River D00057 Bioavailability and Toxicity of Besser, J.M., and C.F. Rabeni 1987 Environmental Toxicology and heavy metals, toxicity, Metals Leached from Lead-Mine Chemistry, 6:879-890 bioaccumulation, aquatic Tailings to Aquatic Invertebrates invertebrates, mine tailings

D00032 Survey and Evaluation of Beyer, W. N. and C. Stafford 1993 Environmental Monitoring and Invertebrates, Terrestrial, Contaminants in Earthworms and in Assessment 24:151-165 Earthworms, Contaminants, Soils Derived from Dredged soils, PCBs, metals Material at Confined Disposal Facilities in the Great Lakes Region D00033 Metal Contamination in Wildlife Beyer, W., O. Pattee, I. 1985 Environmental Pollution Terrestrial Environment, Living Near Two Zinc Smelters Sileo, D. Hoffman and B. (Series A) 38:63-86 metals, zinc Mulhern

Page 4 J r : Doc No. :: jii:,:-:-; J- -v-;;^;Tltle^:^'.--^:-. '.v /:• . •••:^vvft~V7v Author ;•;"••. •'•"••••—- -'-•• ':••' y-W^ ''V Reference" &•!-:•>•. ';-"'. •'-••.*.'""".". :•'.?*. Keywords;^'-;'/---' •'"'"•] D00034 •i^^^Metal Concentrations in Beyer, W., R. Chaney and B. 1 ^a^Journal of Environmental Invertebrates, soil, heai^^H Ea^^forms from Soil Amended with Mulhern " 2 Quality 2:381-382 metals, terrestrial ^^H Sewage Sludge ^V D00031 Evaluating Soil Contamination Beyer, W.N. 1990 U. S. Fish and Wildlife Soils, terrestrial, metals, Service, Biological Report 90 sediment, invertebrates (2) D00162 Estimates of Soil Ingestion by Beyer, W.N. , E.E. Connor, S.1994 Journal of Wildlife contaminants, diet, Wildlife Gerould Management 58 (2) :375-382 nutrients, risk assessment, scat, sediments, soil ingestion D00083 Relation of Waterfowl Poisoning to Beyer, W.N., D.J. Audet, G.H200. 0 Ecotoxicology, 9(31:217-218 waterfowl, sediment, Sediment Lead Concentrations in Heinz, D.J. Hoffman, D. Day toxicity, mining, ALAD, the Coeur d'Alene River Basin lead, metals

D00112 Lead Poisoning in Six Captive Beyer, W.N., J.W. Spann, L. 1988 Archives of Environmental lead, birds, metals, ALAD Avian Species Sileo, J.C. Franson Contamination and Toxicology 17:121-130 D00548 The Role of Sediment Ingestion in Beyer, W.N., L.J. Blus, C.J. 1996 Ecotoxicolgy 6:181-186 wood ducks, waterfowl, Exposing Wood Ducks to Lead Henny, and D. Audet metals, lead, soil ingestion, idaho, exposure

D00035 Biotic Factors That Effect Beyers, D.W. 1990 Colorado State University, Fish, Metals, Effects, Bioaccumulation of Metals in Fish Department of Fishery and Bioaccumulation, aquatic Wildlife Biology, Fort Collins, Colorado D00036 Effects of Copper and Zinc on Beyers, D.W. and M.S. Farmer 1994 Colorado State University, Fish, Metals, Effects, Olfaction of Colorado Squawfish as Department of Fishery and Olfaction, aquatic Estimated by Behavioral Assay Wildlife Biology, Larval Fish (Draft Final Report) Laboratory, Fort Collins, Colorado D00207 Water Pollution Studies Federal Bingham, D.A. 1967 Colorado Game, Fish and Parks water, pollution, ore Aid in Fish Restoration Project F- Department Report processing. Summit County, 33-R-2 Arkansas River, mines, fish

D00488 Water Pollution Studies, Job Bingham, D.A. 1966 Colorado Division of Wildlife arkansas river, fish, Completion Report, Federal Aid Report metals, aquatic, climax, Project F-33-R-1 California gulch D00624 Quantification of Fluvial Trout Binns, N.A. and P.M. Eiserman 1979 Transactions of the American trout, Wyoming, habitat Habitat in Wyoming (Andrew has) Fisheries Society 108(31:215- 228 000037 Aquatic Toxicity of Trace Elements Birge, W. 1978 In J.H. Thorp and J.W. Aquatic Environment, pH, of Coal and Flyash. Proceedings Gibbons (eds.) Energy and aquatic, coal, fly ash, DOE Symposium, University of Environmental Stress in metals Georgia, Athens. Aquatic Systems. DOE Sym. Series; 4 8 D00038 Sensitivity of Vertebrate Embryos Birge, W.J. and J.J. Just 1973 University of Kentucky, Water Toxicology, Vertebrate to Heavy Metals as a Criterion of Resources Institute, Embryos, Heavy Metals, Water Quality Lexington, Kentucky Water Quality, aquatic

D00039 The Induction of Tolerance to Birge, W.J., W.H. Benson, 1983 University of Kentucky, Water Fish, Heavy Metals, Heavy Metals in Natural and J.A, Black Resources Research Institute Effects, Tolerance, Laboratory Populations of Fish aquatic, bioaccumulation, water quality

Pages Doe No. < .S^S^-i'S .^™3K2-$$&y&^ S . Date,- '?-Jr-£. ?-%•' ^.^Refereric# A'^T^f;-^,^^ ; •:-•••.'. -o •:••»•.£-• "_. •*'i.'J.-r'"'j.a—"">;.".i's:.-i ;<* u^---*?- •*- - : •_-]•; '^^^m^^ism D00478 Gold Mining Effects on Stream £Bjerklie^ :^^^H^^.f, D.M. and J.D.^ ;fg 1985 Hater Resources Bulletin placer mining, water Hydrology and Water Quality, LaPerriere 21(2) : 235-243 quality, hydrology, Circle Quadrangle, Alaska aquatic, sediments, alaska, stream D00337 EPA's Proposed Metal Sediment Bleiler, J.A. 1996 Environmental Solutions EPA, Metals, Sediment, Criteria: Good News for Industry September 1996 Industry, Bioavailability, Equilibrium Partitioning

D00040 Lead Toxicosis in Tundra Swans Blus, L., C. Henny, D. 1991 Archives of Environmental Birds, mining, lead, Near a Mining and Smelting Complex Hoffman, and R. Grove Contaminants and Toxicology metals, smelter in Northern Idaho 21:549-555

D00618 Concentrations of Metals in Mink Blus, L.J., C.J. Henny, and 1987 Environmental Pollution 44 : mammals, metals, mining, and Other Mammals from Washington B.M. Mulhern 307-318 terrestrial and Idaho D00029 Accumulation in and Effects of Blus, L.J., C.J. Henny, D.J. 1995 Environmental Pollution birds, lead, cadmium, Lead and Cadmium on Waterfowl and Hoffman, R.A. Grove 89(3) :311-318 metals, ALAD Passerines in Northern Idaho

D00042 Lead in the Environment (Cover Boggess, W. and R. Wison, eds . 1977 National Science Foundation Heavy Metals, lead Only) Report NSF:/RA-770214. 272 pp.

D00483 Assessing the Potential Toxicity Bonnet, C., M. Babut, J.F. 2000 Environmental Toxicology and sediments, toxicity, of Resuspended Sediment Ferard, L. Martel, J. Garric Chemistry 19(51:1290-1296 metals, aquatic, resuspension, risk assessment, invertebrates, pore water D00528 Ecological Complexity of Wetlands Bornette, G., C. Amoros, H. 1998 Biological Conservation 85:35- wetlands, river, riparian, within a River Landscape Piegay, J. Tachet, and T. Hein 45 geomorphology, vegetation, habitat, floodplain

D00625 Stream Habitat Analysis Using the Bovee, K.D., B.L. Lamb, J.M. 1998 USGS, Biological Resources IFIM, stream, habitat, Instream Flow Incremental Barholow, c.B. Stalnaker, J. Division Information and flow, water quality, aquatic Methodology (Andrew has) Taylor, J. Henriksen Technology Report USGS/BRD- 1998-0004 D00525 Avian Use of Native and Exotic Brown, C.R. 1990 Unpublished Thesis, Colorado avian, riparian, habitat, Riparian Habitats on the Snake State University, Ft. birds River, Idaho (Abstract & portions Collins, CO of thesis in library)

D00417 High Altitude Tailing Reclamation Brown, L.F. and M.J. Trlica 1995 Proceedings High Altitude tailings, reclamation, Projects Vegetation metals, revegetation

D00088 RTDF I INERT - Progress Report Brown, S. 2000 U.S. EPA Joplin, MO, in situ treatment, soil, terrestrial, biosolids D00096 Effect of Biosolids Processing on Brown, S., and R. Chaney 1997 In Biosolids Management biosolids, terrestrial, the Bioavailability of Pb in urban Innovative Treatment lead, metlas, soil Soils Technologies and Processes, Water Environment Research Foundation, Workshop #104 Proceedings

Page 6 ut 1 ; : Doc No. •- ;.,-':, ;*:--,^:yritiev .^.^y-^fef - :-• .::.-•.'• j -vijieference" _^.^ Y-.:\*. •-•:- > •- : v V Keywords;; JlV.> .--V^j ^^^^k-* •• - — . .--.-.-• /*-•:. r. . •- ' . <" •I'-i^stliK^f ••?-., * ^?'j. :- ': v-S"-'^- ££-:u . ' •-• --i:. -.•-.•- ~v -V • 'i; --•-.-- -"-- • *j^^H D00072 Bt^^HHill Ecological Restoration Brown, S., C. Henry, H. I University of Washington and Bunker Hill, metals, ^^B Pr^^m Status Report- Draft Compton " ^•jsT US EPA ERT vegetation, terrestrial, ^^H biosolids D00513 USFS Abandoned Mine Land Inventory Brown, S.D., A.J. Flurkey, 1996 Colorado Geological Survey arkansas river, tailings, Project: Final Summary Report for R.H. Wood II, and J. P. Cann 11-mile reach, metals, the San Isabel National Forest IV soils, water, CIS maps Leadville Ranger District

D00071 Using Municipal Biosolids in Brown, S.L., C.L. Henry, H. 2000 National Meeting of the biosolids, mines, Combination with Other Residuals Compton, P. DeVolder American Society for Surface vegetation, metals to Restore a Vegetative Cover on Mining and Reclamation, High Metal Mine Tailings Tampa , FL

D00503 Using Municipal Biosolids in Brown, S.L., C.L. Henry, H. 2000 Unpublished report arkansas river, biosolids, Combination with Other Residuals Compton, R.L. Chaney, and P. vegetation, metals, soils, to Restore Metal -Contaminated DeVolder amendments, fluvial, 11- Mining Areas mile reach, tailings

D00043 Aspects of Heavy Metals Toxicity Brown, V. M. 1976 in Toxicity to Biota of Metal Aquatic Biota, Heavy in Fresh Water Forms in Natural Water: Metals, Water Quality, Proceedings of a workshop toxicity, fish held in Duluth, MN, ed. By R.W. Andrew, P.V. Hodson, D.E. Konasewich D00044 Chemical Characterization of Brumbaugh , W . G . , C . G . 1994 Environmental Toxicology and Sediments, Metals, Pore Sediments and Pore Water from the Ingersoll, N. E. Kemble, T. Chemistry, 13 (12) : 1971-1983 Water, Upper Clark Fork Upper Clark Fork River and W. May, J. L. Zahcek River, Milltown Reservoir, Milltown Reservoir, Montana Montana , AVS

D00045 Effects of Lead Shot Ingestion on Buerger, T., R. Mirarchi and 1986 Journal of Wildlife Birds, lead Captive Mourning Dove M. Lisano Management 50:1-8 Survivability and Reproduction

D00046 Comparative Toxicity of Inorganic Buhl, Kevin J. and Steven J. 1990 Ecotoxicology and Fish, Metals, Toxicity, Contaminants Released by Placer Hamilton Environmental Safety 20:325- placer mining, aquatic Mining to Early Life Stages of 342 Salmonids D00047 Water Uptake in Woody Riparian Busch, David E., Neil L. 1992 Ecological Application wetland/Riparian, Water Phraetophytes of the Southwestern Ingraham and Stanley D. Smith 3(4) :450-459 uptake, aquatic, terrestrial United States: A Stable Isotope Study D00343 Wildlife Studies on the Hanford Cadwell, L.L. 1995 U.S. Dept. of Energy, Pacific Wildlife, Hanford, Monitor, Site: 1994 Highlights Report Northwest Laboratory, Washington, Threatened, Contract DE-A06-76RLO Endangered

D00589 Heavy Metal Contamination and Its Calabrese, E. J. 1999 University of Massachusetts metals, toxicity, Relationship to Osteochondrosis in School of Public Health terrestrial, mammals Horses - Draft

Page 7 : ; ; •Dob NOi/ ; .-; v^rr'- KkV::V-;"[?Fitfe'*^^V^,.f:^.^--.f,1 'ivJj'f^-C^-V^AUtK^;,,/.;-^;^^!!:-/'^:^ ilJate. -•', '•: i= -:' ;' Jriv- -^Reference: S'- v-'.^-V.-i" "•' • :• -..;•.. •-. -•. -. •;<'.;& inpff -'*;'.!'::',. -:,-_•,' ?,•?;.•:•;.• v»«.- .•• .,V'. ,:•>..•--:: (.';-*.'.''-V.- :>.•:.•::....'--.-- ...--.• . .--•••.'-:•• •• W ''^&^W°!^^*?*?i& D00536 Transition Metal Geochemistry of Callender, E., B.A. Kimball, 1991 in Mallard, G.E. and Aronson, upper arkansas, metals, the Upper Arkansas River, Colorado and E.V. Aztmann D.E. (eds.) USGS Toxic water, aquatic, sediment, Substances Hydrology Program; water quality proceedings of the technical meeting, Monterey CA, March 11-15, 1991, WRI 91-4034, p. 392-397 D00048 Heavy-Metal Geochemistry of Callender, E., W.H. Ficklin, 1988 U. S. Geological Survey, Pueblo Reservoir, Metals, Sediments in the Pueblo Reservoir, B.A. Kimball, P.R. Edelmann Hater Resources Arkansas River, Colorado, Colorado. In: U. S. Geological Investigations Report 88-4220 Sediments, Contaminants, Survey, Toxic Substances Hydrology Geochemistry Program- -Proceedings of the Technical Meeting, Phoenix, Arizona, September 26-30, 1988

D00049 Effects of Arsenate on Growth and Camardese, M., D. Hoffman, L. 1980 Environmental Toxicology and Birds, ducks, arsenic, Physiology in Mallard Ducklings LeCaptain and G. Pendleton Chemistry 9:783-795 physiology, metals

D00050 Acidification and Toxicity of Campbell, P. G. C. and P. M. 1985 Canadian Journal of Fish and Aquatic Biota, Water Metals to Aquatic Biota Stokes Aquatic Science, 42:2034-2049 Quality, Acidification, metals, toxicity D00397 Use of Benthic Invertebrate Canfield, T.J., N.E. Kemble, 1994 Environmental Toxicology and aquatic, fish, clark fork Community Structure and the W.G. Brumbaugh, F.J. Dwyer, Chemistry 13 (12) : 1999-2012 river, metals uptake, Sediment Quality Triad to Evaluate C.G. Ingersoll, and J.F. invertebrates Metal -Contaminated Sediment in the Fairchild Upper Clark Fork River, Montana

D00346 Solutions to Erosion Along the Capouch, J., J. Diekmann, N. 1994 Colorado School of Mines Erosion, Upper Arkansas Upper Arkansas River Pawley, T. Schenk, R. Zakaria River, Lake County, Soil, Water Quality, Streambank

D00541 Sensitivity and Variability of Carlisle, D.M., and W.H. 1999 Environmental Toxicology and invertebrates, metals, Metrics used in Biological Clements Chemistry 18 (2) :285-291 water, aquatic, Assessments of Running Waters biomonitoring

D00271 Aquatic Biological Data - 1995- Chadwick Ecological 2000 Chadwick Ecological aquatic, arkansas river, 1998 - Electronic Format Consultants, Inc. Consutants, Inc. Littleton, data, CO D00411 Migration and Geochemical Chafin, D.T. and E.R. Banta 1999 U.S. Geological Survey, Water- water quality, arkansas Evolution of Ground Water Affected Resources Investigations river, uranium milling, by Uranium-Mill Effluent near Report 98-4228 ground water, lincoln park Canon City, Colorado D00617 Correlation of Cadmium- Induced Chmielnicka, J., T. Halatek, 1989 Ecotoxicology and metals, copper, zinc, Nephropathy and the Metabolism of and U. Jedlinska Environmental Safety 18: 268- mammals, cadmium Endogenous Copper and Zinc in Rats 276

D00095 The Ruminant Animal: Digestive Church, D.C. editor 1993 Prentice Hall, Englewood physiology, metals Physiology and Nutrition Cliffs, New Jersey

PageS Doc No. •-.• ^^^---^--^Tltle-;/^ '.-:•- -l-'-i:.- >,.:-1 ; V Author v^v'-: v—; •>• ••^"..':'~~. • ..',• ' Reference '>.;;<••.'•>; '••;•?•/-;•.• ~•:f ". , -^:<: Keywords- -^.: is^l • .^•fey :.•••:--•"-»•;•,- •:••-••*•.• -. • ..-^ • • :—".r ••-.• '.-">:•: •'•*'. ": ":-l-— •'- .-.' -.'•-'-. --V*.-T',-; •• • •' ""'^*_" .r' "-.^-:^:' ?::..;. r--. •'•-.-.- .-,--.--.-.jM D00053 Ge^^^^ical and Lead-Isotope Data Church, S. E. I U. S. Geological Survey, Open- Metals, Contamination, j^^H fra^^Rream and Lake Sediments, ^•3 File Report 93-534 Upper Arkansas River Basi^^B and Cores from the Upper Arkansas Leadville, Colorado, River drainage: Effects of Mining Sediments, Lead at Leadville Colorado on Heavy- Metal Concentrations in the Arkansas River D00054 Geochemical and Lead-isotopic Church, S. E. , S. A. Wilson, 1994 U. S. Geological Survey, Metals, Contamination, Studies of River and Lake R. B. Vaughn and D. L. Fey Administrative Report Upper Arkansas River Basin, Sediments, Upper Arkansas River Lead, Sediments, Drainage Basin, Twin Lakes to Geochemistry, Colorado Pueblo Reservoir, Colorado - Preliminary Report D00336 Source, Transport, and Church, S.E., B.A. Kimball, 1997 U.S. Geological Survey Open- Metals, Animas River, Partitioning of Metals between D.L. Fey, D.A. Ferderer, T.J. File Report 97-151, Denver, CO Colorado, Colloids, Water, Water, Colloids, and Bed Sediments yager, and R.B. Vaughn Sediments, aquatic of the Animas River, Colorado

D00538 Geochemical and lead-isotopic Church, S.E., D.L. Fey, and 2000 USGS Open File Report 00-337 upper arkansas, metals, studies of river sediment from D.M. Unruh sediment, water, aquatic, major tributaries, upper Arkansas water quality, tributaries, River watershed, Colorado other source areas

D00455 Determination of Pre-Mining Church, S.E., D.L. Fey, E.M.2000 U.S. Geological Survey, Open pre-mining, watershed, Geochemical Conditions and Brouwers, C.W. Holmes, and R. File Report 99-0038 baseline, background, Paleoecology in the Animas River Blair (Preliminary Draft) Colorado, historic mining, Watershed, Colorado sediments, metals, geochemical, fluvial, geomorphology, animas river D00055 Lead Concentrations: Bats vs. Clark, D., Jr. 1979 Environmental Science and Mammals, lead, metals Terrestrial Small Mammals Technology 13:338-341 Collected Near a Major Highway

D00026 The Variability of Metal Clark, M.L. 1996 Master's Thesis, Colorado Arkansas River, Metals, Concentrations and Metal State University aquatic, copper, iron, Speiciation in the Arkansas River, lead, cadmium, zinc Colorado D00423 Metal Speciation in the Upper Clark, M.L. and M.E. Lewis 1997 U.S. Geological Survey, Water- water quality, metals, Arkansas River, Colorado, 1990-93 Resources Investigation arkansas river Report 96-4282 D00159 Lead Poisoning in Small Animals Clarke, E.G.C. 1973 Journal Small Animal Practice lead, metals, mammals, lead 14:183-193 poisoning D00056 Integrated Field and Laboratory Clements, W. and P. Kiffney 1994 Environmental Toxicology and Fish, heavy metals, Approach for Assessing Impacts of Chemistry 13:397-404 aquatic, Arkansas River, Heavy Metals at the Arkansas invertebrates, toxicity, River, Colorado bioaccumulation D00058 Benthic Invertebrate Community Clements, W. H. 1994 Journal of North American Invertebrates, Aquatic, Responses to Heavy Metals in the Benthological Society, 1993, Metals, mining, Upper Arkansas River Basin, 13 (1) 50-66 biomonitoring Colorado D00059 Fate and Effects of Heavy Metals Clements, W. H. 1991 Colorado State University, Invertebrates, Aquatic, on the Arkansas River Colorado Water Resources heavy metals, California Research Institute, Gulch, Leadville Completion Report No. 163, Fort Collins, Colorado

Page 9 : 1 "•'^-'^yf-'^K^^^^f^^i^^-y^i^.f^- '.vJDate:-; t ;!-,? 'i^^T^'&Reference/.:^*^;;,.'* ;^.::-^vY

D00211 Bioaccumulation of Heavy Metals by Clements, W.H. 1992 Colorado Water Resources Res. heavy metals, trout, fish, Brown Trout (Salmo Trutta) in the Institute, CSU, Ft. Collins, arkansas river, California Arkansas River: Importance of CO, Grant No. 14-08-0001-2008 gulch, bioaccumulation, Food Chain Transfer

D00540 Metal Tolerance and Predator-Prey Clements, W.H. 1999 Ecological Applications invertebrates, metals, Interactions in Benthic 9(3) :1073-1084 water, aquatic, community Macroinvertebrate Stream Communities D00555 The Influence of Elevation on Clements, W.H. and P.M. 1995 Canadian Journal of Fisheries aquatic, invertebrates, Benthic Community Responses to Kiffney and Aquatic Sciences metals, elevation, Heavy Metals in Rocky Mountain 52(9) :1966-1977 community structure, Streams Colorado, upper arkansas, rocky mountain streams D00393 Effects of Heavy Metals on Prey Clements, W.H., and D.E. Rees 1997 Transactions of the American aquatic, fish, arkansas Abundance, Feeding Habits, and Fisheries Society 126: 774- river, metals uptake Metal Uptake of Brown Trout in the 785 Arkansas River, Colorado

D00539 Heavy Metals Structure Benthic Clements, W.H., D.M. 2000 Ecological Applications invertebrates, metals, Communities in Colorado Mountain Carlisle, J.M. Lazorchak, and 10(2) :626-638 water quality, aquatic, Streams P . C . Johnson biomonitoring D00019 Integrating observational and Clements, W.H., D.M, 2000 Department of Fishery and streams, water, metals, experimental approaches to Carlisle, L.A. Courtney, E.A. Wildlife Biology, Colorado aquatic quantify stressor-response Harrahy State University relationships in metal -polluted streams D00553 Structural Alterations in Aquatic Clements, W.H., D.S, Cherry, 1988 Environmental Toxicology and metals, aquatic, Insect Communities Exposed to and J. Cairns Jr. Chemistry 7:715-722 invertebrates, copper, Copper in Laboratory Streams community structure

D00236 Structural and Functional Clements, W.H., P.M. Kiffney,1993 U.S.G.S., Annual Technical Benthos , Heavy Responses of Benthic Communities and C.N. Medley Report, 14-08-0001-G2099, 1993 Metals, Stream, Arkansas to Heavy Metals: Variation Along River , Colorado Longitudinal Stream Gradients

D00060 Sensitivity of Brook Trout to Low Cleveland, L., E.E. Little, 1991 Aquatic Toxicology 19 (1991) Fish, Trout, pH, calcium, pH, low calcium and elevated C.G. Ingersoll, R.H. 303-318 aluminum, metals aluminum concentrations During Wiedmeyer and J.B. Hunn Laboratory Pulse Exposures

D00576 Accumulation of Heavy Metals by Cobb, G.P., K. Sands, M. 2000 Environmental Toxicology and Plant, Metal, Uptake, Human Vegetables Grown in Mine Wastes Waters, B.G. Wixson, E. Chemistry 19 (3) : 600-607 health, vegetation Dorward-King D00061 Technical Manual for the Design Cohen, R.R.H. and M.W. Staub 1992 U. S. Bureau of Reclamation Metals, Acid Mine Drainage, and Operation of a Passive Mine and Colorado School of Mines, Treatment, Big Five Tunnel, Drainage Treatment System Department of Environmental Idaho Springs, Colorado, _ Science and Engineering Control _ jjfc

Page 10 : ; Doc No. " '.•^••J-vV. '^.litie :.;;•:;':;. V : -: - ,',;.- . - -} ,• .i--h Author ---.'.' :-\--.' : _"'^'2S*_ ,-'-"•-. •••"•• Reference"'';.',";' -..-•:'; ; 'V ."'•••. ;.-.-; KeyVVords^ ;£:vKV^l D00363 Cl^^^Breek Phase II Remedial Colorado Department of Health 1 Colorado Department of Clear Creek, RI, Metals, ^H Inv^^Kgation - Final Health, Hazardous Materials Central City, NPL, FS, ^H *"and Waste Management Division Mining, Tunnel in Cooperation with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Prepared by: Camp Dresser & McKee Inc., Denver, Colorado D00364 Clear Creek Phase II Remedial Colorado Department of Health 1990 Colorado Department of Clear Creek, RI, Metals, Investigation - Final, Volume 2, Health, Hazardous Materials Central City, NPL, FS, Appendices and Haste Management Division Mining, Tunnel, Appendices in Cooperation with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Prepared by: Camp Dresser & McKee Inc., Denver, Colorado D00064 Colorado Nonpoint Assessment Colorado Department of Health 1989 Colorado Department of Water Quality Report (Cover Only) Health, Colorado Water Quality Control Division, Denver, Colorado D00330 Guidance on Data Requirements and Colorado Department of Health 1992 Colorado Department of Water Quality, Data Data Interpretation Methods Used Health, Water Quality Control Requirements, Stream in Stream Standards and Division Standards, Classification Classification Proceedings Proceedings

D00065 Leadville Heavy Metal Exposure Colorado Department of Health 1986 State of Colorado, Colorado Soils, Metals, Lead, Risk Assessment Brief Description Department of Health Assessment, Human Health, Leadville, Colorado

D00062 The Basic Standards and Colorado Department of Health 1993 Colorado Department of Water Quality Standards, Methodologies for Surface Water Health, Water Quality Control Surface Water, aquatic 3.1.0 (5 CCR 1002-8) Commission D00322 Classifications and Numeric Colorado Department of Health 2002 Colorado Department of Water Quality Standards, Standards for Arkansas River Basin and Environment Water Quality Health, Water Quality Control Arkansas River Basin Regulation No. 32 Control Commission Commission

D00066 Yak Tunnel/California Gulch Colorado Department of Law 1986 Colorado Department of Law Yak Tunnel, California Endangertnent Assessment Gulch, Leadville, metals

D00067 Leadville/Stringtown Soils Colorado Department of 1986 Colorado Department of Law Soils, Metals, Investigation Law/Engineering-Science, Inc. Contaminants, Leadville, Colorado, Stringtown, terrestrial D00570 Results of the Lincoln Park Colorado Department of Public 1999 Colorado Department of Public lincoln park, downstream, Superfund Site Ecological Risk Health and Environment Health and Environment risk assessment, superfund, Assessment Community Health News for arkansas river Colorado Newsletter, July 1999

D00070 Episodic Metal Contamination of Colorado Division of Wildlife 1992 Colorado Division of Water Quality, California the Arkansas River by Nonpoint Wildlife, January, 1992 Gulch, Arkansas River, Pollution from California Gulch trout, fish, aquatic

Page 11 r; :£ :DdcNo. ..y --A;-:?:^ ^Hi;f v^Title^;^ »-M3?m5 V ~s-iW&*.&?.!?1 Aut^:!fe~i]|sKV •*;•:* v'.'-r i/'i.- ^n^-'Referehce>-i-^j! ;' ^--''?-' '>ii - - .•.- --.*%\.r.'; .•>-,.- *-v\ f--:,,v •-.-;: i-i-. -.wi: >. --V'ltni^.to"-:-.'.!*;'; - .<-•'•'.•* ^•'••'•.•.•'•x-"~iT~. •»*•;-^Pafe'• l •"••*> V; '•••>:•-.•• .••«-.•-•/•.•••.. -,-r:-.-u :.•;•' '.'V-:^^^^KeyV^is-^v^ft^S •••••: i D00068 Impact Analysis of a Flow Colorado Division of Wildlife 1992 State of Colorado, Department Fish, Flow Augmentation, Augmentation Program on the Brown of Natural Resources, Denver, Trout, Arkansas River, Trout Fishery of the Arkansas Colorado, March 13, 1992 aquatic River, Colorado D00444 Listing of Colorado Division of Colorado Division of Wildlife 1999 letter via Colorado Attorney land ownership, wildlife Holdings, including General's Office terrestrial, CDOW, realty, easements, along the Arkansas arkansas river, property, River from Leadville to Pueblo maps

D00069 Upper Arkansas River Fisheries and Colorado Division of Wildlife 1991 Colorado Division of Wildlife Fish, Water Management, Water Management Assessment Southeast Region Upper Arkansas River, aquatic D00201 Water Pollution Studies Colorado Game, Fish, and 1969 Job Progress Report, Federal Water, Arkansas River, Parks Division Aid Project F-33-R-4 Climax, Zinc, metal

D00273 Draft Biosolids Study Colorado Mountain College 1999 Colorado Mountain College biosolids, invertebrates, mine waste D00074 Wetland Resources of Arkansas Colorado Natural Areas 1995 Colorado Natural Areas Wetland/Riparian, Arkansas Headwaters State Park, October 1995 Program, Colorado Department Program, Colorado Department River, Vegetation, Colorado of Natural Resources, of Natural Resources, Division of Parks and Outdoor Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation Recreation, Inventory, Delineation and Protection of Wetlands on Colorado State Parks, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Grant SCD998116011

D00073 Wetland Resources of Lake Pueblo Colorado Natural Areas 1995 Colorado Natural Areas Wetland/Riparian, Pueblo State Park, August, 1995 Program, Colorado Department Program, Colorado Department Reservoir, vegetation, of Natural Resources, of Natural Resources, Colorado Division of Parks and Outdoor Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation Recreation, Inventory, Delineation and Protection of Wetlands on Colorado State Parks, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Grant #CD998116011

D00351 Two Colorado Rivers Among Nation's Colorado Rivers Alliance 1996 Confluence 2 (3) Colorado, Rivers, Polluted, Worst Polluted Cache la Poudre, Arkansas River D00598 Cadmium in small mammals Cooke, J.A. and M.S. Johnson 1996 Environmental Contaminants in cadmium, mammals, toxicity, Wildlife: Interpreting Tissue terrestrial, metals Concentrations. Beyer, W.N., G.H. Heinz, and A.W. Redmon- Norwood (eds.). SETAC Special Publication Series. Lewis Publishers

D00599 Lead, zinc, cadmium and fluoride Cooke, J.A. and S.M. Andrews 1990 Water, Air, and Soil metals, mammals, grassland, in small mammals from contaminated Pollution 51:43-54 terrestrial grassland established on fluorspar tailings

Page 12 : v ! Doc No. .^! ^.y.^::^ r . Title -"- < '- •?: . :•'.'..-'•.1 .•.- v .•-.•'.-••• ;: -'.•Author'-- ...:-r ,-:. .-,".'.Jtete : .' ]'- ••'-•'• ''' .'- Reference-." V.; =.-;-/. . '-1- V ',;- :?V:.^vKey Worts . ^0-f.^ : ^Bk' •--•••••• • .•••-.--. '. '• "- - -•.•--. • ' "• •• •" •• "•- •- • -• " • • ' i ' • \ '-.'. ' ' " -.-" \ . " - • ' . . V • '•"-... D00076 C^^^^Bi, Metal -binding Proteins, Cope, W.G., J.G. Wiener, M.T.firCanadian Journal of Fish and Fish, Metals, Cadmium, ^^H ana^rowth in Bluegill (Lepomis Steingraeber, G. J. Atchison ' Aquatic Science 51:1356-1367 Effects, aquatic ^^H macrochirus) Exposed to Contaminated Sediments from the Upper Mississippi River Basin

D00077 Acute and Sub-Chronic Toxicity of Coughlan, D.J., S.P. Gloss 1986 Waste, Air, and Soil Fish, Metals, Lead, aquatic Lead to the Early Life Stages of Pollution 18: 265-275 Smallmouth Bass (Micropterus dolomieui) (cover page only)

D00078 Water-Resources Appraisal of the Crouch, T.M., D.Cain, P.O. 1984 CJ. S. Geological Survey, Hydrology, Upper Arkansas Upper Arkansas River Basin from Abbott, R.D. Penley and R.T. Water-Resource Investigations River Basin, aquatic, water Leadville to Pueblo, Colorado Hurr Report 82-4114 quality

D00420 water Resources Data, Colorado, Crowfoot, R.M., A.V. Paillet, 389-200U.S. Geological Survey, Water- water quality, upper Water Years 1989-2000 Missouri G.R. Ritz, M.E. Smith, R.D. Data Report CO-96-1 arkansas River Basin, Arkansas River Basin, Steger, and G.B. O'Neill Rio Grande Basin (on other shelf)

D00079 Effects of pH on the Toxicities of Cusimano, R.F., D.F. Brakke 1986 Canadian Journal of Fish and Fish, Metals, Trout, pH, Cadmium, Copper, and Zinc to and G.A. Chapman Aquatic Science 43:1497-1503 Effects, aquatic Steelhead Trout (Salmo gairdneri)

D00586 In Press . A Mining Impacted Custer, C.M., C.T. Custer, 2003 In: Hoffman, D.J., B.A. Upper Arkansas River, lead, Stream: Exposure and Effects of A.S. Archuleta, L.C. Coppock, Rattner, G.A. Burton Jr., J. trace elements, Mining, Lead and Other Trace Elements on C.D. Swart z, and J.W. Bickham Cairns Jr., Handbook of California Gulch, tree Tree Swallows (Tachycineta Ecotoxicology. 2nd Edition, swallows, metals, sediment Dicolor) Nesting in the Upper CRC Press, Inc, Boca Raton, Arkansas River Basin, Colorado Florida D00484 Strategies of Heavy Metal Uptake Dahmani-Muller, H., F. van 2000 Environmental Pollution 109: terrestrial, smelter, by Three Plant Species Growing Oort, B. Gelie, M. Balabane 231-238 metals, soils, Near a Metal Smelter phytoremediation, plants, vegetation D00399 The Importance of Contaminated Dallinger, R. and H. Kautzky 1985 Oecologia 67: 82-89 aquatic, fish, metals Food for the Uptake of Heavy uptake, clark fork river Metals by Rainbow Trout (Salmo gairdneri) : A Field Study

D00081 Ecotoxicology of Metals in Dallinger, R. and P.S. Rainbow 1991 Proceedings of a Session Held Invertebrates, Metals, Invertebrates at the First SETAC-Europe Criteria Conference Sheffield, United Kingdom, April 7-10, 1991

D00080 Contaminated Food and Uptake of Dallinger, R. , F. Prosi, H. 1987 Oecologia (Berlin) 73:91-98 Fish, Metals, Effects, Heavy Metals by Fish: A Review and Segner, and H. Back Foodchain, Bioaccumulation, a Proposal for Further Research aquatic

Page 13 ; 1 ;.D6c-H6.'' '•^•-•^^•^; Author^ Vy z-f'^-:?? 'tipste^ $ K^&t's.^lfan&^&Qf* '&&'^•"^feTK^Wortisl"^^- ^ ; ; ^'- •^••J:;^f^r^^^f^^^^K- .J-.i-' i-^x;XvV^''t-r,-^:-4^ £•:•. ••#.-."> ' ,•.""••.•"* ~ • • ,-•" L? ~-, "-:'• -• Av,:' >v"v*. ''•-r^'-':"*-; r."-','^J:-> D00075 The Need to Establish Heavy Metal Davies, P. 1976 In: Toxicity to Biota of metals, toxicity, fish, Standards on the Basis of Metal Forms in Natural Water, aquatic Dissolved Metals pp. 93-104, R.W. Andrew, P. Hodson, and D. Konasewich, Eds. Proc. Workshop, Duluth, Minnesota, October 7-8, 1975. Great Lakes Res . Advisory Board, International Joint Comm

D00084 Use of Dialysis Tubing in Defining Davies, P. 1976 In: Toxicity to Biota of Water Quality, dialysis, the Toxic Fractions of Heavy Metal Forms in Natural Water, metals, toxicity, aquatic Metals in Natural Waters pp. 110-117, R.W. Andrew, P. Hodson, and D. Konasewich, Eds. Proc. Workshop, Duluth, Minnesota, October 7-8, 1975. Great Lakes Res . Advisory Board, International Joint Comm

D00085 Acute and Chronic Toxicity of Lead Davies, P. H., J. P. Goettl, 1976 Water Research Vol. 10: 199- Fish, Metals, Lead, Trout, to Rainbow Trout Salmo gairdneri . Jr., J. R. Sinley, and N. F. 206 aquatic in Hard and Soft Water (cover page Smith only) D00443 Arkansas River Research Study - Davies, P.H, W.H. Clements, 1995 Report for U.S. Bureau of water quality, aquatic, 1995 Annual Progress Report, and J.D. Stednick Reclamation fish, toxicity tests, Period 1 Oct. 1993 - 30 Sept. 1994 invertebrates, metals, dinero tunnel, lake fork, sugar loaf gulch D00086 Arkansas River Research Study, Davies, P.H. 1994 U. S. Bureau of Reclamation Fish, Trout, Metals, Lead, 1994 Annual Progress Report, Toxicity, aquatic Period October 1, 1993 to September 30, 1994, Job 1: Investigation on Acute and Long- term Toxicity of Metals to Brown Trout D00243 Bioavailability and Toxicity of Davies, P.H. 2001 Unpublished report to the heavy metals, toxicity, Metals and Metal Colloids Upper Arkansas Consulting Team metal colloids, bioavailability. Upper Arkansas River D00082 Importance of Laboratory-Derived Davies, P.H. and J.D. Woodling 1980 In.- Aquatic Toxicology, STP Fish, metals, cadmium, Metal Toxicity Results in 707. J. Eaton, P. Parrish, copper, zinc, trout, Predicting In-Stream Response of and A. Hendricks, Eds. ASTM. aquatic toxicology Resident Salmonids pp. 281-299 D00087 Aquatic Data Analysis - Federal Davies, P.H. and S. Brinkman 1990 Colorado Division of Water Quality Standards, Aid Project F-33 Wildlife, Fish Research Aquatic Biota, Toxicology, Section and Federal Aid in pH, Colorado Fish and Wildlife Restoration, Job Progress ejjuiL D00329 Aquatic Life - Water Quality Davies, P.H., and Goettl, 1976 Colorado Division of Wildlife Water Quality, Aquatic Recommendations for Heavy metal Jr., J.P. for Water Quality Standards Life, Metals, Toxicants and Other Inorganic Toxicants Revision Committee and Colorado Water Quality Control Commission

Page 14 1 Doc No. •3Jf?M-«j>.'-£ ;..,>?. Author^,-.-. .•/ -:;-! — ;_"• •-•-•^at• e , .•:..• .x.; ;::v~^-Key^«6rds;>:^:i;;^,.^] v^^\ "• • -^ .• -%™*$^|fe w;;?;•«. .-*• T'rv-^-' ' •- -f- '• ..''--- " •, •. "-•*•* ; .-•-,'•' , ; "..;% .-'v.-'. •-:.'.'•.• Reference-^ Y^>' -r: D00244 Wj^^^B'ollution Studies - Federal Davies, P.M., and S. Brinkmani 4 Colorado Division of Cadmium, water, aquatic, ^^^H Ai^BKject #F-33: Cadmium ^B Wildlife, Fish Research toxicity, bioavailabilityT^B Toxicity to Rainbow Trout: Section, Job Final Report metals Bioavailability and Kinetics in Waters of High and low Complexing Capacities D00408 Arkansas River Research Study: Davies, P.H., M.W. Mclntyre, 1997 Report for U.S. Bureau of arkansas river, water 1995 Annual Progress Report, J.D. Stednick Reclamation quality, metals, Period October 1, 1994 to invertebrates, fish, September 30, 1995 toxicity, sediments, bioaccumulation, aquatic D00630 Arkansas River Research Study: Davies, P.H., S.F. Brinkman, 2000 Arkansas River Research Arkansas River, fish, 1999 Annual Progress Report; M.W. Mclntyre, and W.C. Study: 1999 Annual Progress invertebrates, benthos, Period October 1, 1996 to Clements Report trout, water, sediments, September 30, 1999 metals, toxicity, aquatic

D00622 East Fork Arkansas River Research Davies, P.H., T.G. Powell, 1999 Report for U.S. Bureau of water quality, aquatic, Study, Annual Contract Summary, E.E. Kochman, W.H. Clements, Reclamation Leadville Mine Drainage Period: October, 1997 to P. Kiffiney Tunnel, fish, Arkansas September, 1999 River, metals, toxicity

D005BO Arkansas River Basin Research Davies, P.H., T.G. Powell, 1999 Colorado Division of aquatic life, Leadville Study: 5 Year Grant Summary, E.E. Kochman, W.H. Clements, Wildlife, Fisheries Research Mine Drainage Tunnel, Yak October 1997 to September, 2002 P. Kiffiney, H. Ramsdell Tunnel, metals, California Gulch, Arkansas River, fish, toxicity D00089 Arkansas River Research Study, Davies, P.H., W.H. Clements, 1994 U. S. Bureau of Reclamation water Quality, Upper 1994 Annual Progress Report, J.D. Stednick Arkansas River, Colorado, Period May 1, 1993 to September lead, sediment, aquatic 30, 1993 D00479 Environmental Factors Influencing Deans , A . 1992 M.S. Thesis, Colorado School placer mining, the Natural Revegetation of Placer of Mines revegetation, alaska, Mine Tailings in Interior Alaska stream, aquatic, riparian, soils D00090 Sensitivity of Early-Life-Stage DeLonay, A.J., E.E. Little, 1993 Environmental Toxicology and Fish, Metals, Aluminum, pH, Golden Trout to Low pH and D. F. Woodward, W.G. Chemistry 12:1223-1232 aquatic Elevated Aluminum Brumbaugh, A.M. Farag and C.F. Rabeni D00091 Toxic Effects of Lead and Lead DeMayo, A., M.C. Taylor, K.W. 1982 CRC Critical Reviews in Metals, Lead, Toxicology, Compounds on Human Health, Aquatic Taylor, and P.V. Hodson Environmental Control 12(4): Human Health, Aquatic Life, Wildlife, Plants, and 257-305 Biota, Plants, Domestic Livestock Livestock D00092 Draft Ordered Rankings for Home DeWeese, R. and J. Wegrzyn 1992 0. S. Fish and Wildlife Birds, Mammals, Upper Ranges of Migratory Birds Service/FWE/Colorado State Arkansas River, California Potentially Inhabiting the Office, Golden, Colorado Gulch, Colorado, lead California Gulch, Leadville, Colorado Superfund Site D00093 Toxicity of Cadmium in Sediments: Di Toro, D.M., J.D. Mahony, 1990 Environmental Toxicology and Sediments, Metals, The Role of Acid Volatile Sulfide D.J. Hansen, K.J. Scott, M.B. Chemistry 9:1487-1502 Toxicology, Cadmium, Hicks, S.M. Mayr and M.S. Transport Redmond

Page 15 . Doc No/" ;?V?-^^a>^£^Hd'i£^'W7^:HK -#*•.. iibateS iii:~>>U^-;:Refererice^5&.^\^;:r 3£iv,; '"^Keywords U*^flzpt%? ^&:&m?m^^Mms !•>•;•>!••::-•?*,••'.?'«£;>*»- :-i.>_ <'•' ;'-,S .;".'-;'. .-'^ -..&&•?. ,".•': ;•:--• : "•„•-:.••'•.•;•.-.••••. :•'••••.' :••'••- v.rir -.:./.v-1-',:-. ... -. --;',-W ".t-.i-:^:--.!---.^- ;?."*••• D00094 Molybdenum and Copper Dick, A. T. 1987 In: Inorganic Nitrogen Metals, Molybdenum, Copper, Relationships in Animal Nutrition Metabolism, Animal Health Animal Nutrition Research Laboratory, Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia D00358 Hanford Site Environmental Report Dirkes, R.L., and R.W. Hanf 1995 |U.S. Department of Energy Hanford Site, Washington, for Calendar Year 1994 under Contract DE-AC06-76RLO Nuclear, Cleanup 1830, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington D00600 Ecological effects of heavy metal Dmowski, K. , M. Kozakiewicz 1995 Bulletin of the Polish metals, mammals, toxicity, pollution (Pb, Cd, Zn) on small and A. Kozakiewicz Academy of Sciences terrestrial mammal populations and communities Biological Sciences 43:1-10

D00601 Trace metal accumulation by the Dodds-Smith, M.E., M.S. 1992 Ecotoxicology and metals, mammals, toxicity, shrew Sorex araneus II. Tissue Johnson and D.J. Thompson Environmental Safety 24:118- terrestrial distribution in kidney and liver 130

D00379 Effects of Flow Augmentation on Dominick, D.S. 1997 MS Thesis, Watershed Science flow, water, arkansas Channel Morphology and Riparian Program, Utah State University river, hydrology, vegetation Vegetation in the Upper Arkansas River Basin, CO D00402 Effects of a Mine Tailings Spill Draves, J.F. and M.G. Fox 1998 Environmental Toxicology and aquatic, fish, metals, on Feeding and Metal Chemistry 17 (8) : 1626-1632 metals uptake Concentrations in Yellow Perch (Perca flavescens) D00594 Acute Toxicity of Ambient Arkansas Drottar, K.R. 1989 Res-ASARCO Joint Venture Arkansas River, Toxicity, River Water Samples to the Fathead project file fathead minnow, fish, Minnow (Pimephales promelas) and aquatic Ceriodaphnia dubia

D00097 Cadmium and Mercury in Emergent Dukerschein, J.T., J.G. 1992 Archives of Environmental Invertebrates, Aquatic, Mayflies (Hexagenia bilineata) Wiener, R.G. Rada, and M.T. Contamination and Toxicology Metals, Upper Mississippi from the Upper Mississippi River Steingraeber 23:109-116 River

D00542 Toxicity and Bioaccumulation of a E.A. Harrahy and W.H. Clements 1997 Environmental Toxicology and invertebrates, metals, Mixture of Heavy Metals in Chemistry 16 (2) : 317-327 sediment, bioaccumulation, Chironomus tentans (Diptera: aquatic Chironomidae) in Synthetic Sediment

D00413 Reconnaissance of Water Quality of Edelmann, P. 1989 U.S. Geological Survey, Water- pueblo reservoir, Pueblo Reservoir, Colorado- -May Resources Investigations downstream, water quality, through December 1985 Report 88-4118 arkansas river, metals, phytoplankton, zooplankton

D00400 Compilation of Water-Quality Data Edelmann, P., J.A. Scaplo, 1991 USGS Open-File Report 91-506 water quality, upper for Pueblo Reservoir and the Upper D.A. Colalancia, B.B. Elson (Contaminants database #4011) Arkansas River, Pueblo Arkansas River Basin, Colorado, Reservoir, aquatic 1985-87 (cover only)

Page 16 Doc No. M3$&j?eipf.k&. Author v> :-'r^-. *-•.-£$ JJatei / ;_•'.' •'.••'• " v^v-. Reference. '•••;y^' ./;;>; •..,. '.-•••.,.-•:-::-;•. Key-Worts: ••!'&;: ^\ v^p; ^••^^•m^mm$^ -'....,.• . ..•••— v'- • -'•- -f.-- •--•..•:'.-»,'.-^fc| D00098 T^^^Bleavy Metals in Groundwater Edwards, K.W. and R. Klusman • Colorado State University, Heavy Metals ^^H of^^ffortion of the Front Range ^•76~ Fort Collins, Colorado Mineral Belt - Final Completion Completion Report Series No. Report 72 ^^ D00529 Defining the Limits of Ehrenfeld, J.G. 2000 Restoration Ecology 8(l):2-9 riparian, restoration, Restoration: The Need for goals, wetlands, ecosystem Realistic Goals management, conservation

D00099 Handbook of Chemical Risk Eisler, R. 2000 Lewis Publishers pp. 1903 cadmium, copper, zinc, Assessment: Health Hazards to arsenic, lead, vegetation, Humans, Plants, and Animals invertebrates, metals

D00517 Environmental Report for the Ellis, D. B., and B. G. 1977 Nalco Environmental Sciences, Lincoln Park, Cotter Mill, Cotter Uranium Mill, Canon City, Johnson Northbrook, Illinois arkansas river, Canon City, Colorado tailings, uranium, radon, molybdenum, radioactivity, water, ground-water, soils, biota, vegetation, birds, mammals, metals

D00593 Characterization of Adult Brown ENSR 1989 Res-ASARCO Joint Venture Brown Trout, Arkansas Trout Growth and Survival in the project file River, fish, aquatic Arkansas River D00419 Focused Feasibility Study, Former ENSR 1997 Beazer East Inc. Doc. No. smeltertown, koppers, Koppers Wood Treating Site, 0845-036-640 metals, downstream, Salida, Colorado arkansas river, remediation, metals, wood treatment D00616 Letter report on the status of the ENSR Consulting and 1988 Res-ASARCO Joint Venture fish, Arkansas River, brown trout fishery in the Engineering California Gulch CERCLA Site rotenone, trout, aquatic Arkansas River in the vicinity of Central Project File accidental CDOW rotenone fish kill

D00590 An Evaluation of Metal Standards ENSR Consulting and 1989 Bradley, Campbell and Carney, Metals, Brown Trout, Upper in the Upper Arkansas River and Engineering, for: Bradley, Document number 1020-001, Res- Arkansas River, fish Their Relationship to the Survival Campbell and Carney ASARCO Cal Gulch Central and Growth of Brown Trout Project File

D00437 Final Report, College of the Canons ENTACT 1998 ENTACT college of the canons, arkansas river, downstream, metals, smelter, remediation, soils, air.

D00409 Post Removal Site Control Plan, ENTACT 1998 Post Removal Site Control Plan College of the Canons, College of the Canons, Canon City, remediation, downstream, Colorado arkansas river, mine tailings D00518 Evaluation of the Arkansas River EPA 1992 Remedial Action Plan, Section Lincoln Park, Cotter Mill, Near and Below the Cotter Uranium 30, Final Report arkansas river, Canon City, Mill Site, Canon City, Colorado water, sediment, biota, fish, birds, microinvertebrates , mammals.

Page 17 -Doc No/ £g?3£f*J± W^-Authoc'fe&^i'xi ; ;;:'Date'~ vni-'K^.-^.:'^'jRstetBhce>?.^->--'-:.\.>;:.v: ???£ •?;^^y»Woras>x^?^i^,:? 5 •^i^^mfim^^i^^^ r-Sf.1.- tts/'-Ajj v,i_ " • ;-• •.-!'-??: .C'^ :'; ' ••*: •"•--- vs'•** ::•;.>& . T" D00519 Evaluation of the Willow Lakes EPA 1993 Remedial Action Plan, Section Lincoln Park, Cotter Mill, Near the Cotter Uranium Mill Site, 26, Final Report arkansas river, Canon City, Canon City, Colorado water, sediment, algae, fish, microinvertebrates,

D00564 St . Kevin Gulch : Letter from Erickson, B. 1991 Letter from USGS to USFWS St. kevin gulch, USGS to USFWS Re: invertebrate & invertebrates, terrestrial, cowpie metal concentrations metals

D00102 Analytical Results for Sedge Erickson, B. M., p. H, 1991 U. S. Geological Survey, Wetland/Riparian, Metals, Samples Collected on the Wetland Briggs, K. R. Kennedy and T. Denver Federal Center, Plants, Vegetation, Upper Receiving Acid Mine Drainage R. Peacock Denver, Colorado, Open-File Arkansas River Basin, St. Waters from St. Kevin Gulch, Report 91-126 Kevin Gulch, Leadville, Leadville, Colorado Colorado, Acid Mine Drainage, aquatic D00103 Status Report on a Study of the Erickson, B.M. 1988 U. S. Geological Survey, Vegetation, Acid Mine Effects of Acid Mine Drainage on Hater Resources Drainage, Leadville, Vegetation Near Leadville, Investigations Report 88-4220 Colorado, St. Kevin Gulch, Colorado. In: U.S. Geological terrestrial Survey, Toxic Substances Hydrology Program- -Proceedings of the Technical Meeting, Phoenix, Arizona, September 26-30, 1988 D00104 The Interactions of Water Hardness Everall, N.C., N.A.A. 1989 Journal of Fish Biology 35:27- Fish, trout, zinc, pH, and pH with the Acute Toxicity of MacFarlane and R.W. Sedgwick 36 water hardness, metals, Zinc to the Brown Trout, Salmo aquatic trutta D00105 Physiological Changes and Tissue Farag, A.M., C.J. Boese, D. 1994 Environmental Toxicology and Fish, Metals, Trout, Metal Accumulation in Rainbow F. Woodward, and H.L. Bergman Chemistry 13(121:2021-2029 Effects, Physiology, aquatic Trout Exposed to Foodborne and Waterborne Metals D00106 The Effects of Low pH and Elevated Farag, A.M., D.F. Woodward, 1993 Environmental Toxicology and Fish, Trout, Cutthroat, pH Aluminum on Yellowstone Cutthroat E.E. Little, B. Steadman and Chemistry 12:719-731 Effects, aquatic Trout (Oncorhynchus clarki F.A. Vertucci Douvieri) D00421 Dietary Effects of Metals- Farag, A.M., D.F. Woodward, 1999 Transactions of the American fish, coeur d'alene, idaho, Contaminated Invertebrates from W. Brumbaugh, J.N. Goldstein, Fisheries Society 128: 578-592 invertebrates, trout, the Coeur d'Alene River, Idaho, on E. MacConnell, C. Hogstrand, metals, aquatic Cutthroat Trout and F.T. Barrows D00448 . The Physiological Impairment of Farag, A.M., M.A. Stansbury, 1995 Canadian Journal of Fisheries clark fork, metals, Free -rang ing Brown Trout Exposed C. Hogstrand, E. MacConnell, and Aquatic Science 52: 2038- aquatic, water quality, to Metals in the Clark Fork River, and H.L. Bergman 2050 fish, metallothionein, Montana tissue residues D00341 Fish Communities as Indicators of Fausch, K.D., J. Lyons, J.R. 1990 American Fisheries Society Fish, Communities, Environmental Degradation Karr, and P.L. Angermeier Symposium 8:123-144 Indicators, Environmental Degradation, aquatic

D00107 Geochemical Classification of Mine Ficklin, W. H., G. S. 1992 Water Rock Interaction, Geochemistry, Acid Mine Drainages and Natural Drainages in Plumlee, K. S. Smith and J. Kharaka and Maest (eds) , Drainage, metals, pH Mineralized Areas B . McHugh Balkema, Rotterdam. ISBN 90 5410 0753

Page 18 '•' •-"•:- ..^ - ;v,'-.~. 'Author-Vv--- -•'.-.. ;;•' - . •:'-:•: ^Av; ^:j Reference-. V:'~ 'v /jv:--.: Doc No. - - :^Bfc^!-v:;:^.T™M"^v:;;v> r &•'• .-•••:'-• •-•-' • •-. . •---. • ,-. ••-•--.•. -Jgtev ; ••!:• --:' '^- '-^.-KW Words; v ; ••,•• ... \-, ^\ D00108 Fr^^^Ban-Arkansas Studies. In: Finnell, L.M. J Colorado Division of Game, Aquatic Biota, Fryingpan-^BB CoSlRlo Fisheries Research Fish and Parks, Colorado Arkansas Project, Arkansal^B Review, 1972 P- Fisheries Research Review, River, Colorado, Hunter 1972, Review No. 7, Fisheries Creek Research Section D00109 Coldwater Reservoir and High Lakes Finnell, L.M. and G.L. Bennett 1975 In: Colorado Fisheries CDOW-Fish, aquatic, Studies Research Review 1972-1975. Arkansas River Colorado Division of Wildlife, Review No. 8, Fisheries Research Section D00456 Revegetation of Fluvial Tailing Fisher, K.T. 1999 M.S. Thesis, Colorado State revegetation, arkansas Deposits on the Arkansas River University river, tailings, willows, near Leadville, Colorado fluvial, soils, amendments, metals, phytotoxic

D00569 Interactive Effects of Soil Fisher, K.T., J.E. Brummer, 2000 Journal of Environmental upper arkansas, Amendments and Depth of W.C. Leininger, and D.M. Heil Quality 29 (6) : 1786-1793 terrestrial, restoration, Incorporation on Geyer Willow remediation, willows, vegetation, 11-mile reach, tailings, fluvial, riparian

D00110 Landscape Geochemistry: Retrospect Fortescue, J.A.C. 1992 Applied Geochemistry 7:1-52 Geochemistry and Prospect - 1990

D00452 Aspects of Leadville Area Mine Frank, W. 1980 report obtained from E . Seppi history, arkansas river, Drainage Affecting the Upper water quality, California Arkansas River gulch, metals D00111 Molybdenum - A Toxicological Friberg, L. , p. Boston, G. 1975 4 01, Stockholm 60, Sweden, Metals, Molybdenum, Appraisal Nordberg, M. Piscator and K.- EPA-60011-75-004, Contract Toxicology H. Robert No. 68-024210 D00113 Bioavailability of Metal Mixtures Frugie, M. 1995 Colorado State University, Sediments, Bioavailability, in Natural and Synthetic Sediments Fishery and Wildlife Biology Metals, Invertebrates, Department, Fort Collins, Arkansas River, California Colorado, Master's Thesis Gulch, Leadville, Colorado

D00169 Ingestion of Soil by hispid Cotton Garten, C.T. 1980 Journal of Mammalogy hispid cotton rats, white- Rats, White-Footed Mice, and 61(1) :136-137 footed mice, soil, Eastern Chipmunks ingestion, mammals, terrestrial D00521 Cotter Corporation Uranium Mill Geotrans, Inc., Rocky 1986 Remedial Investigation for Lincoln Park, Cotter Mill, Site Mountain Consultants, Inc., The State of Colorado arkansas river, Canon City, and ERI Logan, Inc. Department of Law Office of tailings, uranium, radon, the Attorney General molybdenum, radioactivity, water, ground-water, soils, biota, vegetation, birds, mammals

D00114 Water Quality of Impoundments on Gilley, J. E., G. W. Gee, A. 1976 North Dakota Farm Research Water Quality, soils, mining Surface-Mined Sites Bauer, W.O. Willis, and R.A. 34(2) Young D00115 Gaining Perspective on Aquatic Gillian, S. 1995 Land and Water Sept/Oct: 30-33 Restoration, Aquatic Habitat Habitat Restoration

Page 19 : . Doc No.:•_, :,;V;^- t^ttg^T$^j^fy:fe-^. £>i g]^^:tfe^:.^:A^hpr^;;^?-*if6f^ :ViDafe;i ^'^^V^^^f^ferehcie?^'-;"--^^^^ y*-f:2::^^Wott?^£¥a D00531 Letter regarding results from Gillihan, S. 1995 letter to FWS birds, upper arkansas, Breeding Bird Surveys in the Upper riparian, Arkansas Basin D00116 Colorado Trout Greene, W. 1937 Colorado Museum of Natural Fish, aquatic, trout History. Popular Series No. 2.

D00117 Status and Management of Interior Gresswell, R.E., Editor 1988 American Fisheries Society Fish, Trout, Cutthroat, Stocks of Cutthroat Trout Symposium 4 aquatic

D00118 Factors Affecting mercury Grieb, T.M., C.T. Driscoll, 1990 Environmental Toxicology and Fish, Metals, Mercury, Accumulation in Fish I the Upper S.P. Glos, C.L. Schofield, Chemistry 9:919-930 Acclimation, aquatic, Michigan Peninsula G.L. Bowie and D.B. Porcella Michigan, pH

D00119 Summary: Developing a Biotic Index Grotheer, S.A. 1995 Colorado State University, CE Aquatic Biota, Water for Colorado Stream Quality Resource Center, Summary of Quality, Bio-Monitoring, CWRRI Completion Report No. Colorado, Cache La Poudre 187, Fort Collins, Colorado River

D00349 Automated Global Positioning Gubala, C.P., C. Branch, N. 1994 The Science of the Total Global Positioning System, System Charting of Environmental Roundy, D. Landers Environment 148:83-92 Limnology, GPS Attributes: A Limnologic Study

D00120 Environmental Zinc and Cadmium Gunson, D., D. Kowalczyk, C. 1982 Journal of American Mammals, zinc, cadmium, Pollution Associated with Shoop and C. Ramberg Veterinary Medical metals, Osteochondrosis, Generalized Osteochondrosis, Association 180:295-299 osteoporosis Osteoporosis, and Nephrocalcinosis in Horses D00121 Effects of Municipal Sludge on Hall, A., D. Taylor and P. 1990 Environmental Toxicology and Mammals, sludge, heavy Locomotor Activity and Exploratory Woods Chemistry 9:31-36 metals, voles, copper, Behavior of Meadow Voles (Microtus cadmium, lead, zinc pennsylvanicus)

D00122 Zinc Hambridge, M., C. Casey and 1986 In: Trace Elements in Human Mammals, zinc, metals N. Krebs and Animal Nutrition, Ed. 5. Vol. 2 Academic Press, Inc., Orlando, Florida. 499 pp.

D00123 Safety Assessment of Selected Hamilton, S.J. and K.J. Buhl 1990 Ecotoxicology and Fish, Metals, Salmon, Inorganic Elements to Fry of Environmental Safety 20: 307- Effects, Toxicity, aquatic Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus 324 tshawytscha D00275 Wetlands Ecosystems: Natural Water Hammer, D.A. and R.K. Bastian 1989 In Constructed Wetlands for wetlands, metals, aquatic Purifiers? Waste Water Treatment: Municipal, Industrial and Agricultural, edited by D. Hammer: 5-19 D00124 The Interactions Between the Handy, R. and F. Eddy 1990 Functional Ecology 4:385-392 Fish, trout, metals, Surface of Rainbow Trout, toxicity, zinc, aquatic Oncorhynchus mykiss, and Waterborne Metal Toxicants

Page 20 : ; ;: : :> : : : Doc No.- ••'^fc^.V:.:^-^:-W™!?'^ : "';'•' ••'••J^ ' ,;•;'":V , ."y*:. ';v<.; .AllthOr ; -"il; '-rJi-.. .:.-'~ ''-' . Jjate '•' ':. ' '.' , y^ :•;, '"Jtefereijce^'^vv^ .'.../ > - -.-;;>p > .Keywords:, % ;^>>^J D00359 Su^^^B of the Hanford Site Hanf, R.W., R.E. Schrempf, f U.S. Department of Energy Hanford Site, Washington ,^^B Env?Bromental Report for Calendar and R.L. Dirkes under Contract DE-AC06-76RLO Nuclear, Cleanup ^^1 Year 1994 w 1830, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington D00125 The Erosion Control Letters: We Harding, M.V. 1995 Land and Water Streambank Erosion are What We Teach September/October : 9-10 D00127 Lead in Mule Deer Forage in Rocky Harrison, P. and M. Dyer 1984 Journal of Wildlife Mammals, lead, metals, Mountain National Park, Colorado Management, 48:510-517 terrestrial

D00128 Metal Contamination in Liver and Harrison, S. E. and J. F. 1990 Environmental Toxicology and Fish, Metals, Sediments, Muscle of Northern Pike (Esox Klaverkamp Chemistry 9:941-956 Smelters, deposition Lucius) and White Sucker (Catostomus comraersoni) and in Sediments from Lakes Near the Smelter at Flin Flon, Manitoba D00332 Dietary Exposure of Mink to Carp Heaton, S.N., S.J. Bursian, 1995 Archives of Environmental Carp, Mink, Michigan, from Saginaw Bay, Michigan. 1. J.P. Giesy, D.E. Tillitt, Contamination and Toxicology Reproduction, Survival, Effects on Reproduction and J.A. Render, P.O. Jones, D.A. 28:334-343 Diet, PCBs Survival, and the Potential Risks Verbrugge, T.J. Kubiak, R.J. to Wild Mink Populations. Aulerich

D00602 Heavy metal accumulation in small Hegstrom, L. J. and S. D. West 1989 Journal of Environmental metals, mammals, terrestrial mammals following sewage sludge Quality 18:345-349 application to forests

D00129 Altered Avoidance Behavior of Heinz, G., S. Haseltine and 1983 Environmental Toxicology and Birds, cadmium, metals Young Black Ducks Fed Cadmium L. Sileo Chemistry 2:419-421

D00474 Mining in Colorado: A History of Henderson, C.W. 1926 U.S. Geological Survey, arkansas river, lake Discovery, Development, and Professional Paper 138 county, mining history, Production (Section on Lake County mining, production, only) development, placer, hydraulic D00603 Modelling and monitoring Hendriks, A.J., W.-C. Ma, 1995 Archives of Environmental metals, mammals, organochlorine and heavy metal J.J. Brouns, E.M. de Ruiter- Contamination and Toxicology invertebrates, terrestrial accumulation in soils, earthworms, Dijkman and R. Cast 29:115-127 and shrews in Rhine-Delta f loodplains D00130 Lead in Hawks, Falcons and Owls Henny, C.J., L.J. Blus, D.J. 1994 Environmental Monitoring and Birds, Raptors, Mining, Downstream from a Mining Site on Hoffman and R.A. Grove Assessment 29: 267-288 Metals, Lead, Coeur D'Alene the Coeur D'Alene River, Idaho River, Idaho, terrestrial

D00523 Restoration Ecology of Riverine Henry, C.P. and C. Amoros 1995 Environmental Management restoration, river, Wetlands: I. A Scientific Basis 19(6) :891-902. wetlands, stream, monitoring

D00132 Effects of Impoundment on Water Herrmann, S. J. and K. I Mahan 1977 CJ. S. Bureau of Reclamation, Sediments, aquatic, and Sediment in the Arkansas River Lower Missouri Region, Arkansas River, Pueblo River at Pueblo Reservoir Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, Colorado

Page 21 =-D6c No. •;•,;+ >;*l^Z-&:jm^*'-:&':^ff ?;-<•£. i-jDate^ . .-•••'.; •••-•t"J\?:i----.vt!;>:..5--.'?-:"..'i-w--":- "vv«-- £$".-

D00138 Variation in Suspended Sediment Horowitz, A.J., F.A. Rinella, 1990 Environmental Science and Metals, Transport, and Associated Trace Element P. Lamothe, T.L. Miller, T.K. Technology 24(91:1313-1320 Sediments, U.S. Rivers Concentrations in Selected Edwards, R.L. Roche and D.A. Riverine Cross Sections Rickert D00581 Variations in Suspended Sediment Horowitz, A.J., F.A. Rinella, 1990 Environmental Science & sediment, trace element and Associated Trace Element P. Lamothe, T.L. Miller, T.K. Technology 24(91:1313-1320 concentrations Concentrations in Selected Edwards, R.L. Roche, D.A. Riverine Cross Sections Rickert D00139 Copper Lethality to Rainbow Trout Howarth, R. S. and J. B. 1978 Water Research, 12:455-462 Fish, Metals, Trout, in Waters of Various Hardness and Sprague Copper, aquatic PH D00571 Photochemical and Seasonal Cycling Hrncir, D. and D. McKnight 2000 NCERQA Grant Annual Report upper arkansas, lake fork, of Manganese in Lake Fork metals, water, aquatic

D00140 Use of Watershed Characteristics Hughes, Robert M. 1985 Environmental Management Metals, Impacts, Study to Select Control Streams for 9(3) :253-262 Techniques, Mining, Estimating Effects of Metal Mining Watershed, aquatic Wastes on Extensively Disturbed Streams

Page 22 f : : Doc No, •Vilfct.:. iV: Title^ r:-.-.-V:>; ':->--; • ••. . -,-v .: -Authoivr. - •--"•;. .-:---i .' ::?':. /; Reference-; •. .' .. J-:c..:7.: --••- -:: Keywords : "^r--' ^ - ^^m-"--. .',-- '•":•---.• --.;..-; ^ "--•--• -: ". ' --• --••-•••--• .•-•.- :•-..':• -•••-•• -'•' •--'-• ": •jf£ D00041 Fo^^^H^in Relationships of Copper Hunter, B.A. and M.S. Johnson j Oikos 38:108-117 grasslands, copper, ^^B and^Hamium in Contaminated W cadmium, metals, mammals, ^M Grassland Ecosystems invertebrates

D00141 Review of the EPA California Gulch Hydrometrics, Inc. 1987 Counsel for Defendants in RI/FS, California Gulch Phase I Remedial Investigation Civil Action No. 86-C-1675 Report D00142 Testing Sediment Toxicity with Ingersoll, C. G. and M. K. 1990 American Society for Testing Invertebrates, sediment, Hyalella azteca (Amphipoda) and Nelson and Materials, Philadelphia, metals Chironomus riparius (Dipter) PA, Standard Technical Publication 1096 - 1990

D00143 Bioaccumulation of Metals by Ingersoll, Chris G., William 1994 Environmental Toxicology and Sediments, Bioaccumulation, Hyalella azteca Exposed to G. Brumbaugh, F. James Swyer, Chemistry 13 (12) :2013-2020 Invertebrates, Upper Clark Contaminated Sediments from the Nile E. Kemble Fork River, Montana, fish, Upper Clark Fork River, Montana aquatic, metals

D00457 Fluvial Geomorphologic Assessment Inter-Fluve, Inc. and FLO 1999 Prepared for URS Operating arkansas river, flows, of Upper Arkansas River: Final Engineering, Inc Services, Inc. hydrology, geomorphology, Report 11-mile reach, OU-11, sediments D00549 On the Need to Select an Ecosystem J. Aronson, S. Dhillion, E. 1995 Restoration Ecology 3(1): 1-3 reference, restoration, of Reference, However Imperfect: Le Floc'h monitoring. A Reply to Pickett & Parker

D00626 Linkage of Effects to Tissue Jarvinen, A.W., G.T. Ankley 1999 SETAC technical publications tissues, aquatic organisms, Residues: Development of a series chemicals, water quality, Comprehensive Database for Aquatic bioaccumulation Organisms Exposed to Inorganic and Organic Chemicals (Andrew has)

D00144 Biological Monitoring of Toxic Jenkins, Dale W. 1981 U. S. Environmental Metals, Bio-Monitoring Trace Elements Protection Agency, Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, Las Vegas, NV, Research and Development, EPA-600/S3-80-

D00543 Lead Exposure in Passerines Johnson, G.D., D.J. Audet, 1999 Environmental Toxicology and metals, birds, floodplain, Inhabiting Lead-Contaminated J.W. Kern, L.J. LeCaptain, M. Chemistry 18 (6) : 1190-1194 lead, American robin, Song Floodplains in the Coeur D'Alene D. Strickland, D.J. Hoffman, sparrow, idaho River Basin, Idaho, USA and L.L. McDonald D00145 Report of Explorations in Colorado Jordan, D.S. 1889 United States Fish Fish, Colorado, aquatic and Utah During the Summer of Commission, Vol. IX, 1889, with an Account of the Washington Government Fishes Found in Each of the River Printing Office 1891 Basins Examined D00146 Trace Elements in Soils and Plants Kabata-Pendias, A. and H. 1984 CRC Press, New York, New Vegetation Pendias York, 278 pp. D00147 Development of High Mountain Plant Kastning-Culp, Larry DeBrey 1993 University of Wyoming, Wetland/Riparian, Plants, Communities as Wetland Mitigation and J. Lockwood Department of Plant, Soil and Bioaccumulation, Little Systems for Copper Mine Effluent - Insect Sciences 4 June, 1993 Snake River, Wyoming, Metals Project End Report

Page 23 0 : ^^-^^/r^fRetei^c^iT^yV'-^..*:.; Doc Na ' : : • ? 1° /"^'K^^ff ^v^ vr."^*-'&*^?t&^$^^ £^&'^ y-ps+-' ifrDate^: *•'•.r.5-1.-.---.. ~.&j: ,••:-/ ; i;r."r* i^Key- :;';-.;:;;••:r Woijais'• •ST'-fe-VS?^!'.^ Wf^^F' n D00481 Cadmium Accumulation and Protein Kay, J., D.G. Thomas, M.W. 1986 Environmental Health fish, cadmium, aquatic, Binding Patterns in Tissues of the Brown, A. Cryer, D. Shurben, Perspectives 65: 133-139 protein binding, trout, Rainbow Trout, Salmo gairdneri J.F. Solbe, and J.S. Garvey metals

D00148 High Plains Reclamation and Keammerer, W. R. and R.L. 1995 Land and Water Restoration, Reclamation, Restoration at Black Thunder Mine Moore , Jr . September/October, 1995 Mining

D00354 Upper Arkansas River Research Keidel, J. 1995 Upper Arkansas River Research Upper Arkansas River Projects: A Compilation of Workshop April 17 & 18, Canon Summaries Presented to the Upper City, Colorado Arkansas River Research Workshop

D00149 Toxicity of Metal-Contaminated Kemble, N.E., W.G. Brumbaugh, 1994 Environmental Toxicology and Invertebrates, Aquatic, Sediments from the Upper Clark E.L. Brunson, F.J. Dwyer, Chemistry, Vol 13, No. 12, Metals, Sediments, Montana, Fork River, Montana, to Aquatic C.G. Ingersoll, D.P. Mondan pp. 1985-1997, 1994, 0730- Upper Clark Fork River, Fish Invertebrates and Fish in and D . F . Woodward 7268 (94) 00147-2 Laboratory Exposures D00150 Effects of Chronic Lead Ingestion Kendall, R. and P. Scanlon 1981 Environmental Pollution Birds, lead, metals on Reproductive Characteristics of (Series A) 26:203-213 Ringed Turtle Doves (Streptopelia risoria) and Tissue Lead Concentrations Adults and Their Progeny D00151 Identification of Heavy metal Kern, T. J. and J. D. Stednick 1993 Proceedings of the Vienna Water Quality, Modeling, Concentrations in Surface Waters Conference, April 1993, IAHS Upper Arkansas River, Through Coupling of GIS and Pub. 50, 211, 1993. Colorado, aquatic, metals Hydrochemical Models D00554 Effects of Heavy Metals on a Kiffney, P.J. and W.H. 1994 Journal of the North American aquatic, invertebrates, Macroinvertebrate Assemblage from Clements Benthological Society 13(4): metals, community a Rocky Mountain Stream in 511-523 structure, upper arkansas, Experimental Microcosms biomonitoring D00152 Bioaccumulation of Heavy Metals by Kiffney, P.M. and W.H. 1993 Environmental Toxicology and Invertebrates, Aquatic, Benthic Invertebrates at the Clements Chemistry 12:1507-1517 Metals, Arkansas River, Arkansas River, Colorado Colorado, bioaccumulation

D00516 Effects of Metals on Stream Kiffney, P.M. and W.H. 1996 Ecological Applications arkansas river, metals, Macroinvertebrate Assemblages from Clements 6(2) :472-481 invertebrates, streams, Different Altitudes aquatic D00153 Upper Arkansas River Surface-water Kimball, B.A. 1991 U. S. Geological Survey, Metals, Transport, Upper Toxics Projects, Selected Excerpts Upper Arkansas River Surface- Arkansas River Basin, Acid From: Physical, Chemical, and water Toxics Projects Mine Drainage, St. Kevin Biological Processes in Waters Gulch, Colorado Affected by Acid Mine Drainage: From Headwater Streams to Downstream Reservoirs D00154 Metal Partitioning and Kimball, B.A. and D.M. 1988 U. S. Geological Survey, Metals, Transport, Acid Photoreduction of Iron in McKnight Water Resources Mine Drainage, Leadville, Filtrates of Acid Streamwater, St. Investigations Report 88-4220 Colorado, St. Kevin Gulch Kevin Gulch, CO D00155 Effects of Colloids on Metal Kimball, B.A., E. Callender 1995 Applied Geochemistry 10:285- Metals, Transport, Acid Transport in a River Receiving and E.V. Axtmann 305 Mine Drainage, Upper Acid Mine Drainage, Upper Arkansas Arkansas River, Colorado River, Colorado, U.S. A. In: Metal Transport in an Acid Mine Impacted RIWM^^ ,m^ Page 24 ^ Doc No; ..; ^^•vor;:£S!v;:Tlt!«j.^-:\:';/-;;. v£::-;;Vv !v- ,•";:" /-V/v ^••Airthor -;.'•;• ; Vv- ,:L "•Jater ; '•<.'"^-} "^Reference A .'.- \-'~''^"-i , v; .; v /,:Key Wordsr ;^y-'^J D00157 In^^HBm Chemical Reactions of Kimball, B.A., G.A. Wetherbee^Hfil ~ U.S. Geological Survey Toxic Metals, Transport, Acid ^^H Ac^^wlne Water Entering a Neutral Substances Hydrology Program- - Mine Drainage, Water ^^B Stream Near Leadville, Colorado Proceedings of the Technical Quality, Leadville, Meeting, Phoenix, Arizona, Colorado, St. Kevin Gulch, September 26-30. Water Upper Arkansas River Investigations Report 88-4220

D00158 Research on Metals in Acid Mine Kimball, B.A., K.E. Bencala, 1989 U.S. Geological Survey Toxic Metals, Transport, Upper Drainage in the Leadville Colorado D.M. McKnight Substances Hydrology Program- - Arkansas River, Leadville, Area Proceedings of the Technical Colorado Meeting, Phoenix, Arizona, September 26-30, Water Investigations Report 88-4220

D00348 CNHP Memorandum RE: Publishing Kittel, G.M. 1996 Colorado Natural Heritage Riparian Task Force, Sub-committee Meeting Minutes, and Program 4/15/96 Publishing Sub-committee, Results Riparian Booklet D00527 Montane Riparian Vegetation in Kittel, G.M. 1994 Unpublished Thesis, riparian, habitat, Relation to Elevation and University of Wyoming, vegetation, river, Geomorphology Along the Cache la Laramie, WY. elevational gradient Poudre River, Colorado (Thesis Abstract Only) D00524 Five Elements for Effective Kondolf, G.M. 1995 Restoration Ecology 3(2):133- restoration, stream, river, Evaluation of Stream Restoration 136. monitoring.

D00485 The Effects of Natural Exposure to Kowalczyk, D.F., D.E. Gunson, 1986 Environmental Research 40: terrestrial, horse, metals, High Levels of Zinc and Cadmium in C. R. Shoop, and C.F. Ramberg 285-300 smelter, plants, lameness, the Immature Pony as a Function of Jr. tissues, trace element Age nutrition, osteochondrosis, mammals D00160 Bibliography of Selected water- Kuzmiak, J.M. and H.H. 1994 U. S. Geological Survey in Bibliography, Arkansas Resources Information for the Strickland cooperation with the River Basin Arkansas River Basin in Colorado Southeastern Colorado Water Through 1985 Conservancy District, Denver, Colorado, Open-File Report 94- 331 D00246 Assessment of Heavy Metals LaBounty, J.F., J.J. 1975 U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, Heavy Metals, contaminants, Pollution in the Upper Arkansas Sartoris, L.S. Klein, E.F. Engineering and Research Upper Arkansas River, River of Colorado Monk and H.A. Salman Center, Denver, CO, ERC-75-5 Colorado

D00052 Estimating the Number of Animals Lancia, R.A., J.D. Nichols, 1994 In: T.A. Bookhout, ed. terrestrial wildlife, in Wildlife Populations and K.H. Pollock Research and management populations techniques for wildlife and hbitats. Fifth ed. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, Md. D00340 Geosynthetically Reinforced Langford, R. 1996 Land and Water July/August Geosynthetic, Vegetation, Vegetation: A Soft Armor 1996 Riprap, terrestrial Alternative to Riprap D00477 Gold Mining Effects on Heavy LaPerriere, J.D., S.M. 1985 Hater Resources Bulletin placer mining, water Metals in Streams, Circle Wagener, and D.M. Bjerklie 21(2) : 245-252 quality, metals, aquatic, Quadrangle, Alaska stream, alaska

Page 25 •-..-." ••i'---,'p.;-3^.-':s!W-'.::?rT|»|a'.-'i-~: nV*?i.l- «>.. •':.;.";:! ; ; :,D6cNp4- ? "jDatiL-i ^^••5^ -^•"References ^^^s^-VJ .-oSW^';^Ke^WoiSds^s^ ; ^:i>; :.: ;.-^*,;;5;:^;-,jLl :€?;" T^ ^ 'M--.:--:-^ ££?\ sft'.^i^' -A'' ^t^bpr ^l&r -?^f- '.-"'-•< --. ~:. "1" -.-'.^~ ' -''-JO . • ••".«.t->,--.;.\ -•''..-•. "- "-•Xk:-'. ..-•rtrj-Ai-.f/i— ; .XLj^rS'-.-f <<.•;-:.••* D00163 Relationships Among Observed Metal LaPoint, T. W., S. M. 1984 Journal WPCF, 56 (9) :1030-1038 Invertebrates, Aquatic, Concentrations, Criteria, and Melancon, M. K. Morris Metals, Criteria Benthic Community Structural Responses in 15 Streams

D00614 Copper, Zinc, and Cadmium Laurinolli, M., and L.I. 1996 Archives of Environmental metals, mines, mammals, Concentrations in Peromyscus Bendell- Young Contamination and Toxicology. terrestrial raaniculatus Samples Near an 30:481-486. Abandoned Copper Mine D00164 Clear Creek Basin: The Effects of Lehnertz, C.S. 1991 Colorado Division of Aquatic Biota, Water Mining on Water Quality and the Wildlife, March, 1991 Quality, Heavy Metals, Aquatic Ecosystem Mining, Clear Creek, Colorado D00165 Heavy Metal Contamination in Soils Levy, D.B. 1990 Colorado State University, Soils, aquatic, metals, and Plant Species of the Arkansas Fort Collins, Colorado, M. S. vegetation, Leadville, Valley Near Leadville, Colorado Thesis Arkansas River, California Gulch D00591 Distribution and Partitioning of Levy, D.B., K.A. Barbarick, 1992 Journal of Environmental Metals, Leadville, Soils, Trace metals in Contaminated Soils E.G. Siemer, and L.E. Sommers Quality 21(2) California Gulch, Near Leadville, CO terrestrial

D00168 Heavy Metal Contamination in Soils Levy, D.B., K.A. Barbarick, 1989 Colorado State University Soils, aquatic, metals, and Plant Species of the Arkansas E.G. Siemer, L.E. Sommers Department of Agronomy vegetation, Leadville, Valley Near Leadville, Colorado Technical Report TR89-7 Arkansas River, California Gulch D00166 Aquatic Inhabitants of a Mine Lewis, M. 1977 USDA Forest Service, Rocky Aquatic Biota, Water Waste Stream in Arizona Mountain Forest and Range Quality, mine waste Experiment Station, Research Note, RM-849 D00535 How Does Streamflow Affect Metals Lewis, M.E. and M.L. Clark 1997 USGS Fact Sheet FS-226-96 upper arkansas, metals, in the Upper Arkansas River? water, flow, water quality, arkansas river, downstream, aquatic D00412 Physical, Chemical, and Biological Lewis , M.E. and P . Edelmarvn 1994 U.S. Geological Survey, Water- pueblo reservoir, Characteristics of Pueblo Resources Investigations downstream, arkansas river, Reservoir, Colorado, 1985-1989 Report 94-4097 water quality, sediment, metals, phytoplankton

D00167 An Evaluation of Mining Related Lewis, W. 1987 Colorado School of Mines, Heavy Metals, mining, Upper Metals Pollution in the Upper Golden, Colorado. M.S. Thesis Arkansas River Arkansas River Basin (Abstract) T-3442

D00496 Modelling Growth Responses of Lipton, J., J. Marr, D. 1995 presented at the Annual fish, copper, trout, Rainbow Trout Fry as a Function of Cacela, J. Hansen, and H.L. Meeting of Society of aquatic, tissue, toxicity, Tissue Copper Concentration and Bergman Environmental Toxicology and growth, metals Exposure Duration Chemistry D00499 Impacts of Smelter Emissions on Lipton, J., K. Le Jeune, D. 1995 presented at the Annual smelter, emissions, Vegetation - The Identification of Cacela, H. Galbraith, T. Meeting of Society of vegetation, soils, metals, Causal Mechanisms Podrabsky Environmental Toxicology and terrestrial Chemistry

Page 26 , Doc No. : - •.? .'- y' ; , ^. -Reference -;-/.-•" '; V'--~-; .. •.^•-•v :-:" -' -.-. l*fr^?«^-^fei£frfr£•s,g^7^v> ,; Author; •.-;; ^.'.Vyp: .'•_ : ,C,VV-vM. ' •=•.-,--•, ' ./Ke••;-..'--•.y Word. s .*;~.--''.-7;^i• ,-.---" .-^^H|| I^^^Bretive Report: Surface and Ljungberg, C. and M.L. Glaze M EPA Site ID COD-980 717-938, upper arkansas, metals, ^^H D00565 ^K3~ Gr^B&rfater Investigation TDD # R8-8303-11 water, California gulch ^^W California Gulch, Leadville, Colorado (do not have full report-- only some results tables)

D00174 Summary of Metal Toxicity by Group Luckey, T.D. and B. Venugopal 1977 In Metal Toxicity in Mammals metals, mammals, toxicity, 1: Physiologic and Chemical heavy metals, terrestrial Basis for Metal Toxicity. Plenum Press D00267 A brief history of the Yak Tunnel Luke, J. 1970s Resurrection Mining Company, Yak Tunnel, Leadville, US v. ASARCO case file mining

D00606 Lead in mammals Ma, W 1996 Environmental Contaminants in lead, metals, mammals Wildlife: Interpreting Tissue Concentrations. Beyer, W.N., G.H. Heinz, and A.W. Redmon- Norwood (eds.) . pp. 281- 296. SETAC Special Publication Series. Lewis Publishers D00604 Effect of soil pollution with Ma, W. 1989 Archives of Environmental metals, bioaccumulation, metallic lead pellets on lead Contamination and Toxicology mammals, terrestrial bioaccumulation and organ/body 18:617-622 weight alterations in small mammals

D00605 Hazardous exposure of ground- Ma, W. , W. Denneman, and J. 1991 Archives of Environmental metals, lead, cadmium, living small mammals to cadmium Faber Contamination and Toxicology mammals, terrestrial and lead in contaminated 20:266-270 terrestrial ecosystems D005B5 Development and Evaluation of MacDonald, D.D., C.G. 1999 Archives of Environmental Sediment quality Consensus -Based Sediment Quality Ingersoll, T.A. Berger Contamination and Toxicology guidelines, sediment, Guidelines for Freshwater toxicity, metals, PAHs, Ecosystems PCBs, pesticides, freshwater, aquatic D00170 Differences in Relative Marr, J. C. A., H. L. 1994 University of Wyoming, Fish, Metals, Trout, Sensitivity of Native and Metals- Bergman, C. Hogstrand and J. Department of Zoology and Acclimation, aquatic Acclimated Brown and Rainbow Trout Lipton Physiology, McMaster Exposed to Metals Representative University, Hamilton, of the Clark Fork River, Montana Ontario, Canada and RCG/Hagler Bailly, Boulder,

D00495 Acute Lethality and Marr, J., J. Lipton, A. 1995 presented at the Annual fish, copper, doc, aquatic, Bioavailability of Copper in the Maest, D. Cacela, J.S. Meyer, Meeting of Society of bioassay, toxicity, metals Presence of Dissolved Organic J. Hansen, and H.L. Bergman Environmental Toxicology and Carbon Chemistry D00447 Relative Sensitivity of Brown and Marr, J.C., H.L. Bergman, M. 1995 Canadian Journal of Fisheries clark fork, metals, Rainbow Trout to Pulsed Exposures Parker, J. Lipton, D. Cacela, and Aquatic Science 52: 2005- aquatic, water quality, fish of an Acutely Lethal Mixture of W. Erickson, and G.R. Phillips 2015 Metals Typical of the Clark Fork River, Montana D00171 Mycorrhizae: Fungal Tools for Marx, D.H. and C.E. Cordell 1995 Land and Water, Restoration, Mining, Establishing Trees on Mined-Lands July/August : 12-13 Mycorrhizae, fungi, terrestrial

Page 27 > : -:^^^ ' "^^^^Titir s^5®?^>f^v^ iVDafcr* ; DpcNbft 7 L i : r •. i '^y^"f • ?f-^Rtt!$P&%£-¥*i&&:'£ •? \ •• .~~ £'."^:- ' •' 'V>v^-* «-~.v>>^f <'"-'"?".''--*v^::. "~" - ? '~-."^ ~J ^^^g^Ke^^rtf^^s;^ D00347 Fish Kill Doesn't Sway the EPA Matthews, M. 1996 High Country News: 4/29/96 Fish Kill, EPA, Mining, Sediments, Toxic, Clark Fork River, Montana

D00620 Tissue Residues o£ Dietary Cadmium Mayack, L.A., P.B. Bush, O.J. 1981 Archives of Environmental Cadmium, wood ducks, in Wood Ducks Fletcher, R.K. Page and T.T. Contamination and Toxicology tissues, metals, birds Fendley 10: 637-645 D00577 Arkansas River Sediment and Water McCulley, Frick, & Oilman, 1990 McCulley, Frick & Oilman, arkansas River, water Quality Assessment -Final Report Inc . for Rocky Mountain Inc. Boulder, Colorado quality, metals, Consultants contaminant, yak tunnel, aquatic D00335 Hanford: Your Environment and McMakin, Andrea, and Mindy 1995 U.S. Dept . of Energy, Pacific Hanford, Environment, Your Health Strong Northwest Laboratory, Health, Washington Washington D00172 Behavioral Responses of Lake McNicol, R. and E. Scherer 1991 Environmental Toxicology and Fish, cadmium, metals, Whitefish (Coregonus clupeaformis) Chemistry 10:225-234 aquatic to Cadmium During Preference- Avoidance Testing D00241 Upper Arkansas Assessment McNicoll, C., D. Gilbert, W. 1999 U.S. BLM, Royal Gorge Upper Arkansas River, Hann, L. Klock, D. Long, M. Resource Area, Leadville and watershed, fish, habitat, Rowan, M. Sugaski Salida Ranger Districts Pike wildlife and San Isabel National Forest

D00173 Conceptual Model and the Medine, A.J. 1994 Cal Gulch Superfund Site Metals, Transport, Upper Development of a Contaminant Draft Technical Memorandum Arkansas River Basin, Transport Model for Metals in California Gulch California Gulch D00552 Responses of Diatom Communities to Medley, C.N. and W.H. Clements 1998 Ecological Applications metals, diatoms, rocky Heavy Metals in Streams: the 8(3) :631-644 mountains, water quality, Influence of Longitudinal Variation benthic, longitudinal variation, elevation, aquatic D00498 Use of Geochemical and Toxicity Meyer, J.S., D. Beltman, A. 1995 presented at the Annual copper, metals, aquatic, Modeling to Predict Lethality of Maest, J. Marr, J. Lipton, C. Meeting of Society of fish, toxicity Copper in a Metals-Impacted Stream Cors, D. Cacela, and R. MacRae Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry D00515 Analytical Results Report for Miller, J. 2000 URS Operating Services, Inc. arkansas river, metals, Focused Site Inspection: chalk for U.S. EPA, CERCLIS ID # soils, sediment, water Creek Watershed, Chaffee County, C00006875906 quality, water, ground-water Colorado D00156 Summitville Site Water Quality Miller, S.H., D.J.A. Van Zyl, 1995 Colorado Geological Survey; water quality, Summitville, Characterization and Modeling McPherson, P. Special Publication 38; copper, metals Proceedings: Summitville Forum '95 D00175 The Effects of Hardness, Miller, T. G. and W. C. Mackay 1980 Water Research 14:429-433 Fish, Metals, Trout, Alkalinity and pH of Test Water on Copper, pH, toxicity, the Toxicity of Copper to Rainbow alkalinity Trout (Salmo gairdneri)

D00494 Faded Glory Miniclier, K. 1996 14 April 1996, The Denver leadville, history, mining Post, Empire Magazine

Page 28 ; ! -Doc-No.'-. .-;;^'-.:. -c-:j^:ntie/^;-vv-,./y-:--. •"' •••-.- ~ -VV,:v':v.- J Autho_r.- : -.,-; ';.-••. >-•- ;_ •'^ >„'>.-.-." Reference ; -'V -•.'•-"•" ."••. -•;:::•- --; Key Words '^••\:^-i.--lf.\ •'.-•• ' * "''• - • ' •'''' ' •" *' '• "•"• '• •'•"•^' g *• '. '. .- • ' ' -: •.'.'-:.- -(," ; •-. " . ' '.:•-.. ;' •••,- -.:-.-. .:••'. ''•-^••: .•'.,- • "'-Jm D00177 Ef^^^V of Metal -Mine Drainage on Moran, R.E. and D.A. Wentz j U. S. Geological Survey in Water Quality, metals, i^^H Wa^H^uality in Selected Areas of Cooperation with the Colorado mining, Arkansas River, ^H Colorado, 1972-73 w Water Pollution Control California Gulch ^1 Commission, Denver, Colorado, Colorado Water Resources Circular No. 25 D00176 Variations in Metal Content of the Moran, R.E. and D.A. Wentz 1974 U. S. Geological Survey, Metals, Transport, Acid Kerber Creek Drainage, Colorado: Denver, Colorado, Mine Drainage, Water An Area Affected by Mining Proceedings: International Quality, Colorado, aquatic, Symposium on Water-Rock Kerber Creek Interaction Czechoslavakia D00178 Final Report for Lead Slag Pile Morrison Knudsen Corporation 1992 Denver & Rio Grand Western RI/FS, lead, metals, Remedial Investigation at the Railroad Company, December California Gulch, California Gulch Site Leadville, 11, 1992 Leadville, Colorado Colorado (Administrative Order on Consent CERCLA-VII-92-06) , Volume 1 of 3 D00181 Final Report for Lead Slag Pile Morrison Knudsen Corporation 1992 Denver & Rio Grand Western RI/FS, lead slag, metals, Remedial Investigation at the Railroad Company, December California Gulch, California Gulch Site Leadville, 11, 1992 Leadville, Colorado Colorado (Administrative Order on Consent CERCLA-VII-92-06), Volume 2 of 3 D001B2 Final Report for Lead Slag Pile Morrison Knudsen Corporation 1992 Denver & Rio Grand Western RI/FS, lead slag, metals, Remedial Investigation at the Railroad Company, December California Gulch, California Gulch Site Leadville, 11, 1992 Leadville, Colorado Colorado (Administrative Order on Consent CERCLA-VII-92-06), Volume 3 of 3 D001B3 Final Report for Zinc Slag Pile Morrison Knudsen Corporation 1992 Denver & Rio Grand Western RI/FS, lead slag, metals, Remedial Investigation at the Railroad Company, December California Gulch, California Gulch Site Leadville, 11, 1992 Leadville, Colorado Colorado (Administrative Order on Consent CERCLA-VIII-92-06) , Appendices D00180 Final Report for Zinc Slag Pile Morrison Knudsen Corporation 1992 Denver & Rio Grand Western RI/FS, zinc, metals, Remedial Investigation at the Railroad Company, December California Gulch, California Gulch Site Leadville, 11, 1992 Leadville, Colorado Colorado (Administrative Order on Consent CERCLA-VIII-92-06), Volume 1 of 2 D00179 Final Report for Zinc Slag Pile Morrison Knudsen Corporation 1992 Denver t Rio Grand Western RI/FS, zinc, metals, Remedial Investigation at the Railroad Company, December California Gulch, California Gulch Site Leadville, 11, 1992 Leadville, Colorado Colorado (Administrative Order on Consent CERCLA-VIII-92-06) , Volume 2 of 2 D00567 Reconnaissance Investigation of Mueller, O.K., L.R. DeWeese, 1991 U.S. Geologic Survey, Water- water, birds, metals, Water Quality, Bottom Sediment, A.J. Garner, and T.B. Spruill Resources Investigations pueblo reservoir, sediment, and Biota Associated with Report 91-4060 Irrigation Drainage in the Middle Arkansas River Basin, Colorado and Kansas, 1988-89

Page 29 Doc No. • ^^.^^.^^^g?^':i/ritle:^i:«^fer^%.•^;^ ^iSateJ- ^•f/X^f&lfyWo^g^^'S • -..-- .+ .3-,? .'..•?.:/.'• ,'!--•* .--.•;•-• f-?.£*X-z>'-•-.' !r^^^/yi^feren^5^^p| Mullins, W.H., S.A. Burch U.S. Fish and Wildlife D00350 Evaluation of Lead in Sediment and '^^^^^^^^^^^ 1994 Lead, Sediment, Biota, Biota, East and West Page Swamps, Service, Memorandum, Swamps, Idaho, Bunker Hill, Bunker Hill Superfund Site, Idaho Portland, Oregon metals (1019.3180) D00161 Metals in Soft Tissues of Mule Munshower, P.F., and D.R. 1979 Bulletin of Environmental heavy metals, mammals, mule Deer and Antelope Neuman Contaminant Toxicology deer, antelope

D00422 The Effects of Flow Augmentation Mussetter, R.A. and M.D. 1995 unpublished report geomorphology, flows, on Channel Geometry of the Harvey hydraulic, hydrology, Uncompahgre River channel stability, erosion, flow augmentation D00184 Arsenic (Cover Only) National Academy of Science, 1977 National Academy of Sciences, Heavy Metals, arsenic Committee on Medical and Washington, D.C. 332 pp. Biologic Effects of Environmental Pollution D00629 Mineral Tolerance of Domestic National Academy of Sciences, 1980 Mineral Tolerance of Domestic mammals, toxicity, metals, Animals (cadmium, copper, lead, subcommittee on Mineral Animals cadmium, copper, lead, zinc zinc) Toxicity in Animals D00327 Contaminants and Tree Swallows in National Biological Service 1995 U.S. National Biological Birds, Tree Swallows, the Fox River Drainage, Green Bay, Service, NBS Information Contaminants, Sediments, Wisconsin Bulletin Wisconsin, Green Bay, PCB, terrestrial D00342 Influence of Metal Concentrations National Biological Service 1995 U.S. National Biological Metals, pH, Toxicity, and pH on the Toxicity of Service, NBS Information Contamination, Floodplain, Contaminated Floodplain Soils, Bulletin No. 29 Soils, Montana, terrestrial Grant -Kohrs Ranch N.H.S., Montana

D00185 Prediction of Toxicity of National Biological Service 1995 U. S. National Biological Sediments, Metals, Model, Sediments Containing Complex Service, U. S. Department of Contaminants, Pore Water Contaminant Mixtures the Interior, NBS Information Bulletin, No. 23 1995

D00186 Seasonal Effects of the McLaren National Biological Service 1995 U. S. National Biological Aquatic Biota, Mining, Tailings on Soda Butte Creek and Service, U. S. Department of Montana, Heavy Metals Yellowstone National Park, Montana the Interior, NBS Information Bulletin, No. 25 1995

D00187 The Potential for Biological National Oceanic and 1990 National Oceanic and Sediments, Metals, Effects of Sediment-Sorbed Atmospheric Administration Atmospheric Administration, Contaminants, Effects, Contaminants Tested in the National Ocean Service, NOAA Aquatic Biota National Status and Trends Program Technical Memorandum NOS OMA 52, Seattle, Washington

D00382 Upper Arkansas River Vegetation Natural Resources 1997 NRCS Report, NRCS Alamosa, CO vegetation, riparian, Assessment Conservation Service arkansas river, lake county, terrestrial D00374 Determination of Population- Nehring, B.R., and R.M. 1993 Rivers 4:1-19 Brown Trout, Habitat limiting Critical Salmonid Anderson Limitations, Instream Flow, Habitats in Colorado Streams Using Rainbow Trout, aquatic, fish the Physical Habitat Simulation System

Page 30 Doc No. •-^.^^y --• , :Title: -.!j-.;U.vr-'.:V- • '•• :-•;':. ' r- ; '" "iV" Author. >• -;^~- ./^ '-•;- • _c .-;•;;'- -Reference -vj- '.uf""!'-SS: -••;-.-> -'-..-'Keywords' ..,-- •.•Jj-.-.J .-•^^•j,..^-;-.---- •-- -•• ' ± •~:T~:t*:- •' . ^•/^i- ;JB£. -..*>: ;--.-- .: -••••-• -.....-. "•^^B D00441 Ar^^^Buation of the Possible Nehring, R.B. T Colorado Division of Wildlife arkansas river, aquatic, ••! Im^MK of Heavy Metal Pollution fish, metals, brown trout^JI on the Brown Trout Population of water quality, contaminants] the Upper Arkansas River

D00372 Stream Fisheries Investigations, Nehring, R.B. 1988 Colorado Division of Stream Fisheries, Flow, Federal Aid Project F-51-R, Job 1. Wildlife, Ft. Collins, Trout, aquatic, fish Fish Flow Investigations, Job 2. Colorado, Federal Aid in Fish Wild Trout Introductions and Wildlife Restoration Job Progress Report F-51 D00288 Stream Fisheries Investigations, Nehring, R.B. 1989 Colorado Division of Stream Fisheries, flow, Federal Aid Project F-51-R, Job 1. Wildlife, Ft. Collins, trout, fish Fish Flow Investigations, Job 2. Colorado, Federal Aid in Fish Wild Trout Introductions, Job 3. and Wildlife Restoration Job Technical and Professional Progress Report F-51-R Publications D00575 Stream Fisheries Investigations, Nehring, R.B. 1986 Colorado Division of Stream Fisheries, Flow, Federal Aid Project F-51-R, Job 1. Wildlife, Ft. Collins, Trout, Aquatic Fish Flow Investigations, Job 3. Colorado, Federal Aid in Fish Invertebrate, fish Special Regulations Evaluations, and Wildlife Restoration Job Job 4. Wild Trout Introductions, Progress Report F-51-R Job 6 . Colorado River Aquatic Invertebrate Investigations

D00633 Evaluation of 16 Years of Trout Nehring, R.B. and G. Policky 2002 Colorado Division of wildlife Upper Arkansas River, Population Biometrics in the Upper trout, aquatic, heavy Arkansas River metals, fish D00189 Stream Fisheries Investigations, Nehring, R.B. and R. Anderson 1981 Colorado Division of Fish, Colorado, aquatic, Job Progress Report, Project F-51- Wildlife, Fish Research Arkansas River R-6 Section, Ft. Collins, Colorado

D00568 Letter from NRCS to USFWS re: Nelson, J. 2001 NRCS Letter to USFWS, forage, upper arkansas, forage samples in Lake County February 13, 2001 lake county, terrestrial, metals D00194 Aquatic Macrophytes of Shadow Nelson, P.C. 1982 Colorado State University, Wetland/Riparian, Mountain Reservoir, Grand Lake, Fort Collins, Colorado, Vegetation, Macrophytes, and Lake Granby, Colorado, Department of Fishery and Shadow Mountain Reservoir, Technical Report Wildlife Biology, Master's Grand Lake, Lake Granby, Thesis Colorado, aquatic D00558 Comparison of Two Sampling Methods Nelson, S.M. 2000 U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, invertebrates, benthic, for Measuring the Impact of Metals Technical Service Center, tiyporheic, community on Benthic Communities in a Denver, CO. Technical structure, upper arkansas, Regulated River Memorandum No. 8220-00-3 metals, lake fork, aquatic

D00384 Leaf Pack Breakdown and Nelson, S.M. 1999 Environmental Pollution aquatic, invertebrates, Macroinvertebrate Colonization: metals, arkansas river, Bioassessment Tools for a High lake fork, bioassessment Altitude Regulated System? D00390 Monitoring of Heavy Metal Nelson, S.M. 1996 U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, aquatic, bryophytes, Concentrations in the Arkansas Technical Service Center, metals, water, arkansas River Using Transplanted Aquatic Denver, CO. Technical river, biomonitoring Bryophytes Memorandum 8220-96-18

Page 31 •: ••• -v';.V^ v^*-^' Tltlifr W".^&:&i¥:'AJi ;::^^;,v;/,-;--;T^renc!Bfc^::; ^$%g? ; , Doc No/ '"•:"...•„•• .-..:•, \'^^-.<>-3:'*>j-i"-S.'-.-:'ll^-s>^i •;';•-•-«;£?"•'••.>;••••':•::^>:w^^r/toh6^":<^>^. : -wSos-f&^-.y- ^.-vi«\-.:,.-.r<..s'._ •"•:-'- ;v ^i •' -•£?%•• • £s£;2>#;; ;K«0fv°#f^S^> D00237 Observed Field Tolerance of Nelson, S.M. 1994 Journal of Freshwater Ecology caddisfly, metals, pH, mine Caddisfly Larvae (Hesperophylax 9(2) :169-170 tailings sp.) to High Metal Concentrations and Low pH D00551 Progress Report for Upper Arkansas Nelson, S.M. 1991 Progress Report, US BOR, upper arkansas, box creek, River Water Quality and Applied Science Referral Memo water quality, metals, lake Macroinvertebrate Studies, Applied No. 92-2-1 fork, half moon, tributaries Science Referral Memorandum No. 92- 2-1 D00195 An Assessment of Riparian Nelson, S.M. and D.C. Andersen 1994 The Southwestern Naturalist Wetland/Riparian, Environmental Quality by using 39(2) 137-142 Invertebrates, Butterflies, Butterflies and Disturbance Bio-Monitoring, Colorado Susceptibility Scores River, Arizona, aquatic

D00392 Aquatic Macroinvertebrate Nelson, S.M. and R.A. Roline 1995 U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, aquatic, invertebrates, Communities and Probable Impacts Technical Service Center, arkansas river, flow, of Various Discharges, Upper Denver, CO. Technical water, hydrology Arkansas River Memorandum 8220-95-4

D00386 Assessment of Leadville Mine Nelson, S.M. and R.A. Roline 1997 U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, aquatic, invertebrates, Drainage Tunnel Impacts on the Technical Service Center, metals, Leadville mine Upper Arkansas River using Denver, CO. Technical drainage tunnel, arkansas Hyporheic Pot Samples Memorandum No . 8220-97-10 river, water, east fork,

D00391 Distribution of Aquatic Nelson, S.M. and R.A. Roline 1996 U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, aquatic, invertebrates, Macroinvertebrates in Relation to Technical Service Center, flow, water, arkansas Stream Flow Characteristics in the Denver, CO. Technical river, hydrology Arkansas River Memorandum 8220-96-19

D00563 Effects of Multiple Stressors on Nelson, S.M. and R.A. Roline 2000 Ecological Research and upper arkansas, lake fork, Hyporheic Invertebrates in a Lotic Investigations Group, invertebrates, metals, System- -DRAFT Technical Services Center, regulated river, hyporheic, Bureau of Reclamation, aquatic Denver, CO 80225 D00383 Relationships Between Metals and Nelson, S.M. and R.A. Roline 1999 Hydrobiologia 397:211-226 aquatic, invertebrates, Hyporheic Invertebrate Community (1999) metals, arkansas river, Structure in a River Recovering water, east fork from Metals Contamination

D00385 Relationships between Metals and Nelson, S.M. and R.A. Roline 1998 0. S. Bureau of Reclamation, aquatic, invertebrates, Hyporheic Invertebrate Community Technical Service Center, metals, arkansas river, Structure in a River Recovering Denver, CO. Technical water, east fork from Metals Contamination Memorandum No. 8220-98-7

D00191 Results of Macroinvertebrate Nelson, S.M. and R.A. Roline 1994 U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, Invertebrates, Aquatic, Surveys in the Upper Arkansas Denver Office Metals, Upper Arkansas River Related to the Leadville River, Leadville Mine Mine Drainage Tunnel Discharge - Drainage Tunnel 1994 D00192 Selection of an Indicator Organism Nelson, S.M. and R.A. Roline 1993 U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, Invertebrates, Aquatic, for Biological Monitoring of Metal Denver Office, Applied Metals, Upper Arkansas Pollution on the Upper Arkansas Sciences Referral Memorandum River, Bio-Monitoring, River No. 93-2-5 Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel

Page 32 1 4 ; ; e l n< e : Doc No. :• -••— '^:'- : :^-TIHO .:- " -•-••-.-••.::• :•.-••^"v.-T/i• • '?" ;'.'-• TAuthor - y •:^1/. v-'J - -,-'•'••' ;'' 'f.^'-R ^ * - rv:-'K X- - .-'.":---.:.-•-• • •>• --Key Words.--;:.'-: .'..v-J -^^fc;— ' ''-•• •• — •••*-• ••^••--•.- - =.'..-V; ::V::•..•--<::.: •-.«s-"'V-^ •-.:• ..•--•-• .«--- ,?• :.-.-. .^.., ,.*,-*-.•;; -:. .-_-... v,.-.:'-rg*| D00190 Se^^^pbn of the Mayfly Rithrogena Nelson, S.M. and R.A. Roline | Journal of Freshwater Invertebrates, Aquatic, ^^B hag^^r as an Indicator of Metal Ecology 8 (2) : 111-119 Metals, Upper Arkansas ^|l Pollution in the Upper Arkansas River, Colorado, Leadville River Mine Drainage Tunnel

D00389 Results of Macroinvertebrate Nelson, S.M. Nelson and R.A. 1996 U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, aquatic. Lake Fork, metals, Sampling on Lake Fork and Some Roline Technical Service Center, Dinero Tunnel, arkansas Recommendations for Monitoring Denver, CO. Technical river, invertebrates, water Dinero Tunnel Impacts on Lake Fork Memorandum No. 8220-96-17

D00238 Leaf Litter Breakdown in a Nelson, S.M., and R.A. Roline 2000 Journal of Freshwater Ecology aquatic, invertebrates, Mountain Stream Impacted by a 15(4) :479-490 leaves. Lake Fork, Arkansas Hypolimnetic Release Reservoir River

D00193 Use of Hyporheic Samplers in Nelson, S.M., R.A. Roline, 1993 Journal of Freshwater Ecology Invertebrates, Aquatic, Assessing Mine Drainage Impacts A.M. Montana 8 (2) :103-110 Metals, Sediments, Upper Arkansas River, Colorado, Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel D00396 Assessment of Effects of Altered Nelson, W., G. Horak, M. 1976 US FWS Biological Services stream flow, aquatic, fish Stream Flow Characteristics on Lewis, J. Colt Program FWS/OBS-76/29 Fish and Wildlife Part A: Rocky Mountains and Pacific Northwest FINAL REPORT D00196 Metals Mining and Milling Process Nerkervis, R. J. and J. B. 1976 U. S. Environmental Heavy Metals, mining Profiles with Environmental Aspects Hallowell Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development Industrial Environmental Research Laboratory Research Triangle Park, N.C. D00197 The Fish Populations and Fishery Nesler, T.P. 1982 U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, USER, fish, Upper Arkansas of the Upper Arkansas River 1977- Contract No. 7-07-83-V0701 River, aquatic, metals 1980, Final Report, Fryingpan- Arkansas Fish Research Investigations D00100 Effects of Suspended Sediments on Newcombe, C.P., D.D. MacDonald 1991 North American Journal of sediments, aquatic, Aquatic Ecosystems Fisheries Management 11:72-82

D00198 Metals in Riparian Wildlife of the Niethammer, R.D. Atkinson, 1985 Archives of Environmental Wetland/Riparian, Lead, Lead Mining District of T.S. Basket t, and F.B. Samson Contaminants and Toxicology Cadmium, Zinc, Wading Southeastern Missouri 14:213-223 Birds, Amphibians, Reptiles, Missouri, metals, terrestrial D00533 Influences of water and substrate Niyogi, D., D.M. McKnight, 1999 Limnol . Oceanogr. 44(3 part st. Kevin's gulch, upper quality for periphyton in a and W.M. Lewis Jr. 2) :804-809 arkansas, acid mine montane stream affected by acid drainage, periphyton, water mine drainage quality, metals, mining,

D00534 Effects of Stress from Mine Niyogi, D.K. 1999 Ph. D. Dissertation, upper arkansas, metals, Drainage on Ecosystem Functions in University of Colorado, water, st. Kevin's gulch, Rocky Mountain Streams Boulder, CO acid mine drainage, water quality, mining, ecosystem functions

Page 33 ; -Doc No. > '. ^ttrr'^pAirthor^^s1 1 b j V v\ 3 4"'-%'^>^: : 1 , ' R#ererice^;.::^^£ry

D00188 California Gulch Project: yak Noble, Alan C. 1985 California Gulch Case File Yak Tunnel, geology. Iron Tunnel Connections and Geology Box 4 Of 136 hill

D00381 Identifying and Setting Priority O'Neill, M.P. 1997 Final Report submitted to EPA riparian, water, flow, for Riparian Wetland Restoration Wetlands Research Branch arkansas river, wetlands, Sites: Upper Arkansas River aquatic Basin, CO D00380 Description of Physical O'Neill, M.P., J.C. Schmidt, 1997 Interim Report submitted to hydrology, flow, water, (Hydrologic/Geomorphic) C.P. Hawkins, J.P. EPA Wetlands Research Branch arkansas river, Characteristics: Upper Arkansas Dobrowolski, and C.M.U. Neale geomorphology, aquatic River Basin, CO D00131 Identifying Sites for Riparian O'Neill, M.P., J.C. Schmidt, 1997 Restoration Ecology 5(4S):85- Upper Arkansas River, Wetland Restoration: Application J.P. Dobrowolski, C.P. 102 riparian, wetland, of a Model to the Upper Arkansas Hawkins, C.M.U. Neale restoration River Basin D00410 Water-Quality Assessment of the Ortiz, R.F., M.E. Lewis, and 1998 U.S. Geological Survey, Water- water quality, arkansas Arkansas River Basin, Southeastern M.J. Radell Resources Investigations river, metals, trace Colorado, 1990-93 Report 97-4111 elements, sediment

D00621 Epidemiology of Lead Poisoning in Osweiler, G.D., G.A. Van 1978 In Toxicity of Heavy metals Lead, mammals, metals, Animals Gelder, and W.B. Buck in the Environment. Oehme, terrestrial F.W. (ed.) pp. 143-171

D00008 Haematological Parameters as Pain, D.J. 1989 Environmental Pollution 60:67- lead poisoning, metals, Predictors of Blood Lead and 81 slood, birds Indicators of Lead Poisoning in the Black Duck (Anas rubripes)

D00199 Molybdenum Parker, G.A. 1986 In: The Handbook of Metals, Molybdenum Environmental Chemistry, Vol 3 Part D, Anthropogenic Compounds, ed. D. Hutzinger, Published by Springer -Verlag

D00546 Various Water Rights in the Parkville Water District 1986 Asarco Memo water rights, upper Leadville Area Memo arkansas, parkville water district, ditches D00562 Zinc Toxicity Thresholds for Paschke, M.W., E.F. Redente, 2000 Environmental Toxicology and reclamation, grasses, Important Reclamation Grass and D . B . Levy Chemistry, 19 (11) : 2751-2756 terrestrial, metals, zinc, Species of the Western United phytotoxicity, risk States assessment, restoration, vegetation

Page 34 3 Doc No. • ^=r ...v- -.'.:-:• _ Title •;• ':. ; /-•- :-••.--; :;v..-.: "'j-; .v-; -'• Author \_ ' ^-,. '.•-:"- ;!••:?'••'•• :• •'•'•-;:r- Reference :-';i :-.,:'- •"••."•, _" •'- > .:,:.,„;• Key Words •;-.> :£. ?r^l •- J^^^^K.^':: ':•.•-•••-••- •,-•.'*- :"•.(_- : . . r "C — .-:•-• : • ---* '• < "'•• " . "- -• •-..•<- •-.'- . D00559 Ef^^^p of Acidic Recharge on Paschke, S.S., W.J. Harrison,! Journal of Geochemistry, upper arkansas, ^^H GroW^Water at the St . Kevin and K. Walton-Day ™ Exploration, Environment, groundwater, st . kevin ^^B Gulch Site, Leadville, Colorado Analysis (in press) gulch, metals, water, aquatic, acid mine drainage, D00560 Planning and Implementation of a Pascoe, G.A. and J.A. 1994 Environmental Toxicology and clark fork river, Comprehensive Ecological Risk DalSoglio Chemistry, 13 (12) : 1943-1956 sediments, risk assessment, Assessment at the Milltown metals, water, wetlands Reservoir-Clark Fork River Superfund Site, Montana D00607 Bioavailability of metals and Pascoe, G.A., R.J. Blanchet 1994 Archives of Environmental metals, mammals, wetland, arsenic to small mammals at a and G. Linder Contamination and Toxicology mines, arsenic, terrestrial mining waste-contaminated wetland 27:44-50

D00615 Food Chain Analysis of Exposures Pascoe, G.A., R.J. Blanchet, 1996 Archives of Environmental metals, wetland, mammals, and Risks to Wildlife at a Metals- G. Linder Contamination and Toxicology wildlife, terrestrial Contaminated Wetland 30:306-318

D00398 Characterization of Ecological Pascoe, G.A., R.J. Blanchet, 1994 Environmental Toxicology and aquatic, fish, clark fork Risks at the Milltown Reservoir- G. Linder, D. Palawski, W.G. Chemistry 13 (12) : 2043-2058 river, metals uptake, Clark Fork River Sediments Brumbaugh, T.J. Canfield, ecological risk, sediments Superfund Site, Montana N.E. Kemble, C.G. Intersoll, A, Farag, and J.A. DalSoglio

D00526 Grazing History and Overstory Peck, L.E. 1999 Unpublished Thesis, Colorado grazing, riparian, habitat, Canopy Affect Understory Diversity State University, Ft. Colorado in a Montane Riparian Ecosystem Collins, CO (Thesis Abstract Only)

D00506 Mechanisms of Groundwater Peebles, T.H. 2000 Unpublished Thesis, Colorado arkansas river, Contamination at a Fluvial School of Mines, Golden, CO groundwater, fluvial, 11- Tailings Site, Leadville, Colorado mile reach, tailings, water, metals, biosolids D00425 Fisheries Inventories: Upper Policky, G 1996 Colorado Division of Wildlife fish, arkansas river, fish Arkansas Basin, 1996 populations, aquatic

D00426 Fisheries Inventories: Upper Policky, G 1997 Colorado Division of Wildlife fish, arkansas river, fish Arkansas Basin, 1997 populations, aquatic

D00254 Brown Trout Survey Results for Policky, G. 1995 Colorado Division of Wildlife trout, fish, arkansas Arkansas River - 1993, 1994, 1995 river, populations, aquatic

D00395 Fisheries Inventories Data: Upper Policky, G. 1999 Colorado Division of Wildlife fish, arkansas river, Arkansas Basin, 1999 populations, aquatic

D00378 Fisheries Inventories, Upper Policky, G. 1998 State of Colorado, Department fish, arkansas river, Arkansas River Basin of Natural Resources, CDOW, aquatic Salida, CO D00424 Fisheries Inventories: Upper Policky, G. 1994 Colorado Division of Wildlife fish, arkansas river, fish Arkansas and South Platte Basins, populations, aquatic 1994

Page 35 1 Doc No.. VvDatiB^; •rAl'^^'^iJ.'Reterelic^?";;^V /;-?.^-. " .C. "./.'•' f> ' • •':"*.• ••'•^/.. £j;.,'"r' •. .'".•- '-.r "•,.- . .^ . .'.'v-' ^W??:^y^.Xmi:;:' . D00126 Summitville Mine/Alamosa River: Ramsdell, H., S. Zylstra 1999 Department of Environmental Summitville, Alamosa, Livestock Exposure Investigation Health and Center for copper, metals, sheep, Environmental Toxicology and mammals, vegetation, soil Technology Colorado state University D00202 Colloidal Properties of Ranville, J.F., K.S. Smith, 1988 U. S. Geological Survey, Metals, Transport, Acid Flocculated Bed Material in a D.L. Macalady and T.F. Rees Hater Resources Mine Drainage, St. Kevin Stream Contaminated by Acid Mine Investigations Report 88-4220 Gulch, Colorado, aquatic Drainage, St. Kevin Gulch, Colorado

D00608 The effect of heavy metals on Read, H.J. and M.H. Martin 1993 Chemosphere 27:2197-2211 metals, mammals, woodlands, populations of small mammals from terrestrial woodlands in Avon (England) with particular emphasis on metal concentrations in Sorex araneus L. and Sorex minutus L D00442 Direct Revegetation of Mine Redente, E.F. and D.A. Baker 1996 In: Proceedings of tailings, idarado, Tailing: A Case Study in Colorado Planning, Rehabilitation and revegetation, metals, Treatment of Disturbed Lands, reclamation, terrestrial, 7th Billings Symposium, soils, soil amendments, Reclamation Research Unit plants Publication No. 9603, pp!83- 191 D00338 Status of Instream Flow Reiser, D.W., T.A. Weshe, and 1989 Fisheries 14:22-29 Legislation, Flow, Legislation and Practices in North C. Estes Instream, aquatic America D00326 Work Area Management Plan for the Resurrection Mining Company Resurrection Mining Company California Gulch, California Gulch Superfund Site, Resurrection Mining Implementation by Resurrection Company, Asarco, EPA, RI , Mining Company, Appendix D Leadville, Arkansas River, Yak Tunnel, Contaminants, Metals D00203 Final Work Plan, Metal Speciation Resurrection Mining 1992 Resurrection Mining Company Heavy Metals, California and Source Characterization Company/Camp Dresser & McKee Gulch California Gulch D00204 The Transport of Heavy Metals Revitt, D. M., R. S. 1990 The Science of the Total Metals, Transport Within a Small Urban Catchment Hamilton, and R. S. Warren Environment 93 (1990) 359-373

D00205 Dispersal of Heavy Metals from Roberts, R. D. and M. S. 1978 Environmental Pollutants 16: Metals, Transport, Mining, Abandoned Mine Workings and Their Johnson 293-310 Terrestrial Foodchain Transference Through Terrestrial Food Chains D00209 Effects of Diversions on Water Roline, R.A. 1983 U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, Invertebrates, Aquatic, Quality and Macroinvertebrate Environmental Sciences Metals, Flow Modifications, Populations in the Upper Arkansas Section, Applied Sciences Upper Arkansas River, River Referral No. 83-2-18 Colorado

D00208 The Effects of Heavy Metals Roline, R.A. 1988 Hydrobiologia 160:3-8 Invertebrates, Aquatic, Pollution of the Upper Arkansas Metals, Upper Arkansas River on the Distribution of River, Colorado Aquatic Macroinvertebrates

Page 36 Doc No. "-.^^-••IvrvVTltle.- .:- ••:•--."-- -\ '^ .•:'. .'- .'.; ••,:•:- ,i^' : Author -V -<:-:-. ;.- •.'•. j-' •'..•-' iv.v'- •'•-• Reference ^ ";'.• ''-'^••---•• V:-'. ;l ~: \ Keywords^ -'.. .> ' ;vj •• ^^^ . . -. . -M. -,•:.;. .': ...> - '...:, • ^te_ • >>; .-•- •' - - • -"•' •*""--. -:--'r^^H D00210 He^^^Betals Pollution of the Roline, R.A. and J.R. Boehmke j U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, Aquatic Biota, Upper ^H Uppe^^rkansas River, Colorado, 9^ Engineering Research Center, Arkansas River, Colorado, ^H and Its Effects on the Denver, Colorado, REC-ERC-81- Heavy Metals, Water ^ Distribution of Aquatic Macrofauna 15 Quality, Contaminants

D00212 Metal Retention by the Sugarloaf Rowe, C. 1994 Colorado State University, Wetland/Riparian, Metals, Gulch Wetland, Lake County, Department of Earth Lake Fork, Sugar Loaf, Colorado - Abstract of Thesis Resources, Fall, 1994 Upper Arkansas River, Colorado, aquatic D00627 Ecological Risk Assessment for the Roy F. Weston, Inc. & Terra 1997 US EPA Region 8, EPA Work California Gulch, NPL site, Terrestrial Ecosystem; California Technologies Assignment No. 04601-032; risk assessment, Leadville, Gulch NPL Site, Leadville, Colorado Document Control No. 4800-32- soils 0118 D00401 Relative Importance of Water and Roy, I. And L. Hare 1999 Canadian Journal of Fisheries aquatic, invertebrates, Food as Cadmium Sources to the and Aquatic Sciences 56: cadmium, metals uptake, Predatory Insect Sialis velata 1143-1149 metals (Megaloptera) D00213 Contaminants, Fish, and Hydrology Ruelle, R., R. Koth and C. 1993 U. S. National Biological Fish, aquatic, Missouri of the Missouri River and Western Stone Survey, Biological Report 19, River, metals, contaminants Tributaries. In: Proceedings of October 1993 the Symposium on Restoration Planning for the Rivers of the Mississippi River Ecosystem

D00583 Metals in Water: Determining Runnells, D.D. , T.A. Sheperd, 1992 Environmental Science & metals, concentrations, Natural Background Concentrations E.E. Angino Technology 26 (12) : 2316-2323 mining, aquatic in Mineralized Areas

D00440 Plecoptera and Trichoptera Species Ruse, L.P. and S.J. Herrmann 2000 Western North American arkansas river, Distribution Related to Naturalist 60(1): 57-65 invertebrates, aquatic, Environmental Characteristics of diptera, trichoptera, the Metal-Polluted Arkansas River, metals, sediments Colorado D00439 Chironomidae (Dipter) Species Ruse, L.P., S.J. Herrmann, 2000 Western North American arkansas river, Distribution Related to and J.E. Sublette Naturalist 60(11:34-56 invertebrates, aquatic, Environmental Characteristics of chironomidae, metals, the Metal-Polluted Arkansas River, sediments Colorado D00373 The Canada Geese of Southeastern Rutherford, W.H. 1970 Colorado Game, Fish and Parks Canada Geese, Southeastern Colorado Division, Department of Colorado, Hunting, Natural Resources, Migratory Waterfowl, Arkansas River Bird Investigations, Project Valley, Migratory Birds, W-88-R, Federal Aid in terrestrial Wildlife Restoration

D00214 Active-, Inactive-, and Abandoned- Ryder, J. 1994 U. S. Geological Survey, Open- Geochemistry, mining Mine Information and Selected file Report 94-579, Diskette Geochemical Data for the State of Version, Denver, Colorado Colorado

Page 37 :-Dp.cNor ^a*fr(v ~S'&'&-:?' ' *L Rs^rence"--^:'^;?^;;'-";: D00520 Lincoln Park Superfund Site S. M. Stoller Corporation, 1998 Ecological Risk Assessment Lincoln Park, Cotter Mill, Boulder, CO, and Schager & for Cotter Corporation, arkansas river, Canon City, Associates, Inc., Golden, CO Lakewood, CO tailings, uranium, radon, molybdenum, radioactivity, water, ground-water, soils, biota, vegetation, birds, mammals

D00434 Lincoln Park Superfund Site, S.M. Stoller Corp. and 1998 Ecological Risk Assessment lincoln park, ecological Ecological Risk Assessment, Draft Schafer & Assoc. for Cotter risk assessment, arkansas Corp. river, downstream, uranium, water quality, terrestrial, aquatic, sediment, soil, birds, mammals, metals, radionuclides

D00584 Screening-Level Ecological Risk S.M. Stoller Corporation for 1996 Ecological Risk Assessment, California Gulch, risk Assessment Operable Unit No. 4, Resurrection Mining Company for Resurrection Mining Assessment, Resurrection, California Gulch Superfund Site Company Leadville, metals, tailings, soils, phytotoxicity D00216 Twin Lakes Colorado (Preliminary Sartoris, J.J. and J.W. Yahnke 1987 U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, USER, aquatic, Twin Lakes Report) (Introduction Only) Denver Federal Center, Denver, Colorado D00215 Historical, Physical, and Chemical Sartoris, J.J., J.F. LaBounty 1977 U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, Water Management, Twin Limnology of Twin Lakes, Colorado and H. D. Newkirk Engineering and Research Lakes, Colorado, Metals, (Partial Article) Center, Denver, Colorado, REC- Sediments, aquatic ERC-77-13, September 1977

D00631 Derivation of Soil Quality Sauve, S., A. Dumestre, M. 1998 Environmental Toxicology and lead, copper, soil quality, Criteria Using Predicted Chemical McBride, and W. Hendershot Chemistry 17 (8) : 1481-1489 toxicology, free metal Speciation of Pb and Cu activity, Speciation, metals

D00632 Chemical Speciation, Solubility Sauve , S . F . 1999 bissertation presented to the lead, copper, cadmium, and Bioavailability of Lead, faculty of the Graduate soils, Speciation, Copper, and Cadmium in School of Cornell University bioavailability, metals contaminated Soils in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

D00217 Acute Oral Toxicity and Repellency Schafer, E. W., Jr., and W. 1985 Archives of Environmental Mammals, Oral Toxicity, of 933 Chemicals to House and Deer A. Bowles, Jr. Contamination and Toxicology House Mice, Deer Mice, Mice 14:111-129 Metals D00027 Erythrocyte a-aminolevulinic acid Scheuhammer, A.M. 1987 Toxicology 45:155-163 metals, birds, pH, blood dehydratase in birds. I. The Effects of Lead and Other Metals in Vitro D00218 Biomonitoring of Lead-Contaminated Schmitt, C. J., M. L. 1993 Archives of Environmental Fish, Metals, Lead, Bio- Missouri Streams with an Assay for Wildhaber, J. B. Hunn, T. Contamination and Monitoring, aquatic Erythrocyte ?-Aninolevulinic Acid Nash, M. N. Tieger and B. L. Toxicology 25:464-475 Dehydratase Activity in Pish Blood Steadman

Page 38 ; : Doc. No. -"•- ^: -: v : •' ; -Title*.-,"-- J> - '•:;;,- ^.-^-v.,:«vvv , /Author •*£;. ' :V.;4-- •.. •"":!;.;•..'' .; Reference... - _ : : . •- ^..-•r; ;;-: '•:: '.Key-Words::, !; .;Ti.-..'.^J • -^^^»' " '• - .•"••'r . ^•--••:*-- '.•; ,-.-• •• ',-.---• •• •- - .- - -.. - -.-v -.:••-....• = <: - ••- D00220 Ge^^^Bum, Tin and Arsenic in Schroeder, H., M. Kanisawa, 1 jjr surnal of Nutrition 96:37-45 Mammals, arsenic, tin, ^^H RaS^^ffects on Growth, Survival, D. Frost and M. Mitchener germanium ^^1 pathological Lesions, and Life Span ^ ^^ D00221 pH-Dependent Toxicity of Cd, Cu, Schubauer-Berigan, Mary K. , 1993 Environmental Toxicology, and Invertebrates, Aquatic, Mi, Ph, and Zn to Ceriodaphnia Joseph R. Dierkes, Philip D. Chemistry 12:1261-1268 Metals, pH, Toxicity dubia, Pimephales promelas, Monson, Gerald T. Ankley Hyalella Azteca and Lumbriculus variegatus) D00573 Status Report on Eutrema Penlandii Schwendinger, R.B., G.K. 1991 Report to USFWS, Colorado eutrema, penland alpine fen Rollins as a result of Field Carlson, and C.O. Spielman, Field Office mustard, plants, mosquito Investigations in Park, Summit, Jr. range, endangered species, Gunnison, Chafee, and Clear Creek upper arkansas, terrestrial Counties, Colorado in July and August 1991 D00482 Responses of Folsomia Fimetaria Scott -Fordsmand, J.J., P.H. 2000 Environmental Toxicology and terrestrial, copper, soil, (Collembola: Isotomidae) to Copper Krogh, and J.M. Weeks Chemistry 19 (5) : 1297-1303 invertebrates, metals Under Different Soil Copper Contamination Histories in Relation to Risk Assessment

D00222 Element Concentrations in Soils Shacklette, H.T. and J.G. 1984 U. S. Geological Survey, Soils, Metals, terrestrial and Other Surficial Materials of Boerngen Profession Paper 1270 the Conterminous United States

D00223 Trace Metals in Ecosystems: Sharma, R. P. and J. L. Shupe 1970 titan State University, Logan, Mammals, metals, copper, Relationships of the Residues of Utah, Utah State University selenium, zinc, soil, Copper, Molybdenum, Selenium, and Agricultural ' Experiment vegetation, terrestrial, Zinc in Animal Tissues to Those in Station Journal Paper No. 2037 animals Vegetation and Soil in the Surrounding Environment D00224 Final Work Plan for the Shepherd Miller, 1994 Resurrection Mining Company, Sediments, work plan, Engineering Evaluation/Cost Inc . /TerraMatrix Denver, Colorado Oregon Gulch Analysis for Stream Sediments within Oregon Gulch Operable Unit 10 (Partial) D00225 Ingested Soil: Bioavailability of Sheppard, S. C., W. G. 1995 Journal of Environmental Soils, Soil-Ingestion, Sorbed Lead, Cadmium, Cesium, Evenden and W. J. Schwartz Quality 24:498-505 (1995) Bioavailability, Metals, Iodine, and Mercury Contaminants, Lead, Cadmium, Cesium, Iodine, Mercury, terrestrial D00609 Predicting cadmium, lead and Shore, R.F. 1995 Environmental Pollution metals, mammals, soil, fluoride levels in small mammals 88:333-340 terrestrial, cadmium, lead from soil residues and by species- species extrapolation

D00226 Effects of Acid-Mine Drainage on Short, T.M., J.A. Black and 1990 Archives of Environmental Aquatic Biota, Metals, the Chemical and Biological W.J. Birge Contamination and Toxicology Effects, acid mine, Character of an Alkaline Headwater 19:241-248 sediments Stream D00505 Agronomic Investigations for the Siemer, E.G. 2000 Unpublished report arkansas river, vegetation, Upper Arkansas River Restoration soils, 11-mile reach, Project -- Part 2 (year 2000) grazing

Page 39 - yv." ••-'<••'";'•••;•.•' ; .'~<-i t'Tifle •"S'-'i-5"-""lf;''s- '-'* j^'jVK^ -Doc'Np.V : '?.':•* :'~;?:^K'"'':!;2'--%-:»'-':}< ^.vW^-^tf^^ -•,•£''<••'-. -'?; « •J; patch;.'^^-^•^f^^^o^^--:.;]:^^ D00486 Agronomic Investigations for the Siemer, E.G. 1999 unpublished report arkansas river, lake Upper Arkansas River Restoration county, soils, plants, Project in 1999 grazing, private lands, forage, vegetation D00227 Hydroxyl Radical Formation in St. Sigleo, A. C., K. M. 1988 U. S. Geological Survey, Metals, Transport, Acid Kevin Gulch, and Iron-Rich Stream Cuningham, M. C. Goldberg and Water Resources Mine Drainage, St. Kevin in Colorado. In: U. S. Geological B.A. Kimball Investigations Report 88-4220 Gulch, Colorado, Upper Survey, Toxic Substances Hydrology Arkansas River Program- -Proceedings of the Technical Meeting, Phoenix, Arizona, September 26-30, 1988

D00228 Restoration of a Placer Mined Skidmore, P.B. 1995 Land and Water July/August, Restoration, Mining, Trout, Trout Stream 1995 Montana, Cutthroat, aquatic, fish D00206 Transcript from Bernie Smith Smith, B., M.R. Nivens 2000 Lake County Government Leadville, Hallenbeck Interview regarding Hayden & Transcripts Ranch, Hayden Ranch Hallenbeck ranches D00229 Water/Sediment Partitioning of Smith, K.S. and D.L. Macalady 1992 Water-Rock Interaction, Metals, Transport, Trace Elements in a Stream Proceedings of the 7th Sediments, Acid Mine Receiving Acid-Mine Drainage International Symposium on Drainage, Upper Arkansas Water-Rock Interaction - WR- River Basin, Colorado, St. 7/Park City/Utah/USA 13-18 Kevin Gulch July 1992 D00230 Partitioning of Metals Between Smith, K.S., D.L. Macalady 1988 U. S. Geological Survey, Metals, Transport, Water And Flocculated Bed Material and P.H. Briggs Water Resources Sediments, Acid Mine in a Stream Contaminated by Acid Investigations Report 88-4220 Drainage, Leadville, Mine Drainage near Leadville, Colorado, St. Kevin Gulch Colorado D00231 Predictive Modeling of Copper, Smith, K.S., J.F. Ranville 1991 U.S.G.S. Toxic Substances Sediments, metals, acid Cadmium, and Zinc Partitioning and D.L. Macalady Hydrology Program- - mine, St. Kevin's Gulch Between Streamwater and Bed Proceedings of the technical Sediment from a Stream Receiving meeting, Monterey California, Acid Mine Drainage, St. Kevin March 11-15, 1991. Water Gulch, Colorado Investigations Report 91-4034

D00512 Considerations of Observational Smith, K.S., K. Walton-Day, 1999 In: Morganwalp, D.W. and arkansas river, fluvial, Scale when Evaluating the Effect and J.F. Ranville Buxton, H.T. eds., U.S. tailings, 11-mile reach, of, and Remediation Strategies Geological Survey Toxic metals, soils, water for, a Fluvial Tailings Deposit in Substances Hydrology Program- quality, water, ground the Upper Arkansas River Basin, Proceedings of the Technical water, remediation Colorado Meeting, Charleston, SC, 8-12 March 1999, Vol. I. D00511 Evaluating the Effects of Fluvial Smith, K.S., K. Walton-Day, 2000 In: Proceedings from the 5th arkansas river, fluvial, Tailings Deposits on Water Quality and J.F. Ranville International Conference on tailings, 11-mile reach, in the Upper Arkansas River Basin, Acid Rock Drainage, Volume metals, soils, water Colorado: Observational Scale II. Published by the Society quality, water, ground Considerations for Mining, Metallurgy, and water, remediation Exploration, Inc., Littleton, CO.

Page 40 Doc No. - . .- -^-' ; : '•:•• :U • v; ~ Titlef. - :- •- -C-. - ':-^. ~^VV'"-'- ' -V< •-•."•: :;.:: Author ". -.;..-:•,-••'•>••.• '.,^ate: .• ^.'•-.'vX /-"'Reference. ::! ;•;* :•••--:- /-; v ;;--;" Key Words' -..•-•':2-.-'V^ ^^^^ •••-- ..-•.' - . , '.;.--.: v ...-.••:.>. •.:..-. • -.'-:-.-:•- ."-.• •'- ••- :.--.'•• -..'-•---:• .-...-.•;•<•'? . . :-:. . •".:.<.- >•-;•-: : ••-.•. ' :~^H D00475 Me^^^Jeaching through a Fluvial Smith, K.S., P.J. Lamothe, J In Proceedings of the 6th arkansas river, fluvial, ^H Ta^M^s Deposit along the Upper A.L. Meier, K. Walton-Day, ' International Conference on tailings, metals, water ^^B Arkansas River, Colorado and J.F. Ranville *Tailings and Mine Waste '99, quality, ground water Fort Collins, Colorado, 24-27 January 1999: 627-632. Rotterdam: Balkema

D00510 Trends in water- leachable lead Smith, K.S., S.J. Sutley, 1998 In: Proceedings of the 5th arkansas river, fluvial, from a fluvial tailings deposit P.H. Briggs, A.L. Meier, K. International Conference on tailings, metals, soils, 11- along the upper Arkansas River, Walton-Day Tailings and Mine Waste '98, mile reach, water- leachable Colorado Fort Collins, Colorado, 26-29 January 1998: 627-632. Rotterdam: Balkema

D00320 Metal and Arsenic Partitioning Smith, K.S., W.H. Ficklin, 1992 Hater-Rock Interaction, Metals, Transport, Between Water and Suspended G.S. Plumlee and A.L. Meier Proceedings of the 7th Sediments, Copper, Arsenic, Sediment at Mine-Drainage Site in International Symposium on Zinc, Cadmium, Nickel, Diverse Geologic Settings Water-Rock Interaction - WR- mining, drainage 7/Park City/Utah/USA 13-18 July 1992 D00556 Arkansas River Water Needs Smith, R.E. and L.M. Hill 2000 Bureau of Land Management , arkansas river, water, Assessment (eds.) Bureau of Reclamation, Forest recreation, natural Service, and Colorado resources, water needs, Department of Natural hydrology, aquatic Resources D00232 Geochemical Maps of Copper, Lead, Smith, S.M. 1994 U. S. Geological Survey, Open- Metals, Contaminants, Upper and Zinc, Upper Arkansas River File Report 94-408 Arkansas River Basin, Drainage Basin, Colorado Copper, Zinc, Lead, Geochemistry D00233 Behavior of Trace Metals in Sommers, L.E., K.A. Barbarick 1991 Colorado State University, Soils, Metals, Mountain Meadow Soils. In: and D.B. Levy Fort Collins, Colorado Contaminants, Upper Proceedings of the 3rd Arkansas River, Leadville, Intermountain Meadow Symposium, Colorado July 1-3, 1991, Steamboat Springs, Colorado D00234 Toxicity and bioaccumulation of Spehar, R. , R.L. Anderson, 1978 Environmental Pollution 15:195 Invertebrates, cadmium, Cadmium and Lead in Aquatic J.T. Fiandt lead, aquatic Invertebrates D00544 Agenda: Mining, Forest & Land Sponsors: Rocky Mtn. Water 2000 Agenda with Abstracts from biosolids, restoration, Restoration Symposium/Workshop Environment Association presentations remediation, mining, Biosolids Committee, EPA, USCOE D00235 Main and Interactive Effects of Stanley, T. R., J. W. Spann, 1994 Archives of Environmental Birds, Waterfowl, Metals, Arsenic and Selenium on Mallard G. J. Smith and R. Rosscoe Contaminants and Toxicology Arsenic, Selenium, Reproduction and Duckling Growth 26:444-431 Reproduction, terrestrial and Survival D00619 The Uptake and Effects of Lead in Stansley, W. , D.E. Roscoe 1996 Archives of Environmental Lead, mammals, terrestrial, Small Mammals and Frogs at a Trap Contamination and Toxicology forgs, metals and Skeet Range 30:220-226

D00436 Sampling Activities Report, START, U.S. Environmental 1996 U.S. Environmental Protection college of the canons, College of the Canons Protection Agency Agency arkansas river, downstream, metals, smelter, soils

Page 41 ; ; Doc No. •H&.^::f^^?"^»:uthor:">;'4f-^/:«J;J ••y?a*e^ ;^: :';V;;f^^^l^fer^e^:^;^^:f';:;<'•• ••;:^&iV ":Key;W6rifc^;i^'H^ ; l - !-V:-:5«--i:T3i:-,%-i:':5- •'&:-• \± •^'i^*-.-^'^".'-* : • ~v- •••--• - ''vv.'*. •.-•;- -v; •-•.-/ ivv-.v.--.''-rV-yk-.''r D00522 Cotter Corporation Uranium Mill State of Colorado/Cotter 1986 Administrative Record, Lincoln Park, Cotter Mill, Site Remedial Action Plan, arkansas river, Canon City, Appendix A tailings, uranium, radon, molybdenum, radiation, water, ground-water, soils, biota, vegetation, birds, mammals D00324 Investigations on Impacts of High Stednick, J.D. 1994 Colorado State University, Runoff, Sediments, Arkansas Runoff on Flushing Sediments from Department of Earth River, Toxicity, Metals, the Arkansas River and the Resources, Ft. Collins, CO Aquatic Life, Water Column Dissolution and Toxicity of Metals from Sediments on Aquatic Life

D00377 Deposition of Cadmium in Tissues Stoewsand, G.S., R.A. Morse, 1987 Bulletin of Environmental Cadmium, Coturnix Quail, of Coturnix Quail Fed Honey Bees C.A. Bache, and D.J. Lisk Contamination and Toxicology Honey Bees, Metals, 38:783-788 Contaminant, Insect, birds, terrestrial D00239 Vertebrate Abundance and Wildlife Storm, G., R. Yahner and E. 1993 Archives of Environmental Terrestrial Environment, Habitat Suitability Near the Bellis Contaminants and Toxicology vertebrates, metals, Palmerton Zinc Smelters, 25:428-437 smelters Pennsylvania D00339 Recent Developments in Federal Strand, Margaret N. 1996 ELR News & Analysis, 6-96 Wetlands, Federal Law, Wetlands Law: Part I Clean Water Act, Section 404

D00514 Flow Regime Limitations of Strange, E. M. 1998 Trout Unlimited, Boulder, CO flows, river, Colorado, Colorado Trout Populations: watershed management, fish, Perspectives for Watershed trout, arkansas river, Management water, aquatic D00240 Trace Element Accumulation In the Stripp, R. A., M. Heit, D. C. 1990 Hater, Air and Soil Pollution Fish, Metals, pH, aquatic Tissues of Fish From Lakes with Bogen, J. Bidanset and L. 54:75-87, 1990 Different pH Values Trombetta

D00502 The Utility of Metal Biomarkers in Strom, S.M. 2000 Unpublished Thesis, Colorado birds, arkansas river, Assessing the Toxicity of Metals State University, Ft. metals, aquatic, in the American Dipper (Cinclus Collins, CO invertebrates, water, alad, mexicanus) biomarkers, dipper D00454 A Summary of Environmental Studies Studzinski, M. 1995 University College. arkansas river, metals, Done in the Upper Arkansas Basin soils, water quality, as They Pertain to Streambank erosion, lake county, flows, Erosion in the Area- DRAFT

D00242 Reconnaissance of Water Quality of Sullivan, J.R. Jr. 1993 U. S. Geological Survey, Water Quality, Upper Lake Henry and Lake Meredith Water -Resources Arkansas River Basin, Reservoir, Crowley County, Investigations Report 91-4102 Colorado, aquatic Southeastern Colorado, April - October 1987 D00610 Accumulation of cadmium in and its Swiergosz, R., M. Zakrzewska, 1998 Ecotoxicology and mammals, cadmium, metals, effect on bank vole tissues after K. Sawicka-Kapusta, K. Bacia, Environmental Safety 41:130- toxicity, terrestrial chronic exposure and I . Janowska 136

D00453 Metal Contamination of a High Swyers, J.A. 1990 Dept . of Environmental arkansas river, soils, Altitude Mountain Valley Meadow Technology, Colorado Mountain Seppi, metals, terrestrial due to Heavy Metal Mining of a College, Leadville, Colorado. World Class Ore Body

Page 42 : Doc No. • • -^- ^..-x.w-vjndflcV^ ,.::>-,,:..>v~-.'•>'&,*.-*• •£---. . Author---- ,- •-••••>.:-Jate.; .: "Ui- --Reference •>_ : -:- .- '; -'.•.:•>•^> i^gv Keywords V-vrJfcl •^^^---•. J-;^.^.. «.-, v^-^-r •.•.-•• ..-. ••.--.;; '.;.--.•- -y-..'•:.•• -•-•,•••..•:., : - . •,.-..•••*• ' • '. .. .- ••.. -t : D00595 Th^^^Bects of Mining on Mammals Szumski, M.J. 1 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Mining, mammals, Coeur ^^H of^Be Coeur d'Alene River Basin, d'Alene, Idaho, metals, ^^B Idaho P" terrestrial D00628 Small Mammals as Monitors of Talmage, S.S. and B.T. Walton 1991 In Reviews of Environmental mammals, metals, Environmental Contaminants Contamination and Toxicology. contaminants, cadmium, Hare, G.W. (ed.) Vol. 119 copper, lead, zinc.

D00371 Biological Resource Inventory - Todd , D . 1985 Colorado Division of Biological Resources, Pueblo County Wildlife, Ft. Collins, Pueblo County, Colorado, Colorado for Department of Corps of Engineers, Flood the Army, Corps of Engineers, Control, invertebrates, Albuquerque District, aquatics, terrestrial, Albuquerque, New Mexico wildlife D00611 Appraisal of Ground Water in the Turk, J.T., O.J. Taylor, USGS 1979 USGS Open-File Report 79-1538 Leadville Drainage Tunnel, Vicinity of the Leadville Drainage Ground Water, California Tunnel, Lake County, Colorado Gulch

D00248 Dinero Tunnel Site, Project U.S. Bureau of Reclamation 1994 U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, Water Quality, Lake Fork, Implementation Plan-DRAFT Eastern Colorado Area Office, Sugarloaf, Dinero Tunnel, Great Plains Region, August, Upper Arkansas River, 1994 Metals, Contaminants, aquatic D00480 Interpretive Report- -Water Quality U.S. Bureau of Reclamation 1993 unpublished report arkansas river, sediments, and Sediment Chemistry, Upper water quality, metals, Arkansas River, Colorado: Bedload aquatic, invertebrates Sediment Sampling Arkansas River near Leadville Colorado

D00247 Review of Operations Fryingpan- U.S. Bureau of Reclamation 1990 U. S. Bureau of Reclamation, Water Management , Twin Arkansas Project Colorado in cooperation with Lakes, Colorado, Metals, Southeastern Colorado Water Sediments Conservancy District • D00249 Heavy Metal Effects on Plant U.S. Bureau of Reclamation/E 1982 U. S. Bureau of Reclamation Vegetation, Metals, Growth as Related to Animal & A Environmental Mammals, Human Health, Nutrition Consultants, Inc. Contaminants, terrestrial

D00250 Special Report: Study of Effects U.S. Department of Interior 1979 U.S. BOR, Geological Survey, Leadville Drainage Tunnel, on Plugging the Leadville Drainage Bureau of Mines Arkansas River, Mines, Tunnel D00262 Ambient Water Quality Criteria for U.S. Environmental Protection 1980 U. S. Environmental Water Quality, cadmium, Cadmium (Cover and Criteria) Agency Protection Agency, Off. metals Water. Reg. and Standards, Criteria and Standards Division, Washington, D. C., EPA 440\5-80-025 D00264 Ambient Water Quality Criteria for U.S. Environmental Protection 1980 U. S. Environmental Water Quality, metals, lead Lead Agency Protection Agency, Off. Water. Reg. and Standards, Criteria and Standards Division, Washington, D. C., EPA 440/5-84-027

Page 43 T •DocNo. : V.DatiK ; :^-^^¥iiilKiyW[6rdsC'r%-V;^-,f ;%•; •< ^m3&?mzm&*m^^;^??l^^!w^xi?v|. ^y t: -.-',: - :• •- ;*?'.« "'p^v.^R^e^'&^^tv^'^-i :< D00263 Ambient Water Quality Criteria for U.S. Environmental Protection 1980 U. S. Environmental Water Quality, zinc, metals Zinc (Cover and criteria only) Agency Protection Agency, Off. Water. Reg. and Standards, Criteria and Standards Division, Washington, D. C., EPA 440\5-80-079 D00356 Arkansas River Basin Database and U.S. Environmental Protection 1994 U.S. Environmental Protection Arkansas River, Water CIS Database Content Listing Agency Agency Region VIII Chemistry, Fish, Headwaters Mining Initiative Invertebrates, Metals, CIS Committee in Conjunction with U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Colorado Field Office

D00261 California Gulch, Colorado Site U.S. Environmental Protection 1995 U. S. Environmental California Gulch-General Fact Sheet Agency Protection Agency D00435 College of the Canons Site U.S. Environmental Protection 1995 U.S. Environmental Protection college of the canons, Inspection Report Agency Agency arkansas river, downstream, metals, smelter, aquatic, air, sediment, water quality, soils D00357 Colorado Department of Health U.S. Environmental Protection 1994 U.S. Environmental Protection Arkansas River Basin, Arkansas River Database and CIS Agency Agency Region VIII Headwaters Hardrock Mining, Smelting, Database Listings Mining Initiative Committee water Quality, Fish, in conjunction with U.S. Fish Sediment, Metals and Wildlife Service Colorado Field Office, September 1994

D00365 Draft RI/FS Work Plan, Smeltertown U.S. Environmental Protection 1993 U.S. Environmental Protection RI, FS, Smeltertown Superfund Site Agency Agency, EPA Work Assignment Superfund Site, Salida, No. 63-8LJ6, ARCS Contract Colorado, Zinc, No. 68-W8-0112 Contamination, metals

D00260 Drinking Water Regulations and U.S. Environmental Protection 1995 U. S. Environmental Water Quality Standards, Health Advisories Agency Protection Agency, Office of Drinking Water Regulations, Water, Washington, D. C., Human Health May, 1995 D00251 Ecological Effects of Soil Lead U.S. Environmental Protection 1992 U. S. Environmental Soils, Metals, Lead, Contamination Agency Protection Agency, Toxics Effects, Bioavailability, Integration Branch, Office of Invertebrates, Plants, Emergency and Remedial Mycorrhizae, Mammals, Response terrestrial D00253 Effects of Exposure to Heavy U.S. Environmental Protection 1976 U. S. Environmental Fish, Metals, Effects, Metals on Selected Fresh Fish, Agency Protection Agency, aquatic Toxicity of Copper, Cadmium, Environmental Research Chromium and Lead to Eggs and Fry Laboratory, Duluth, Minnesota of Seven Fish Species 55884 EPA-600/3-76-105, October 1976 D00259 EPA Federal Center Library - U.S. Environmental Protection 1995 U. S. Environmental Bibliography Contaminants Search Agency Protection Agency Library

D00427 Final Engineering Evaluation/Cost U.S. Environmental Protection 1995 U.S. Environmental Protection Smeltertown, downstream, Analysis Feasibility Study: Agency Agency, ARCS Contract No. 68- arkansas river, metals, Smeltertown Superfund Site, W8-0112, EPA Work Assignment remediation, smelting, Smelter Subsite No. 63-8LJ6 ecological risk summary *_ ^ Page 44 ^ - : r : . Doc No'. •••--'-:•' :.--:-• A.?; Title \- -.'.••-"• --^^---.- - • -.--Author' -:..-!•;• -, , Date ;;-.. •'-.'; - ^Reference ... r > . . .' . •'•---• -'AKey Words' •-•••: -.-*J.VJJ -.•^•k "•.'-••i.-/.'- -•--.-••• •.-•--..•..-, '. ,-.-•-••• '- : . -,-.-••_•••• --• • -..-.,.-• ..-.. . • • .•:••••••-:•-- • •._-••.... : -!•••.<•- .-.-• t '."..•.:•.• '.jjgBj D00429 Fi^^^Kport Smelter town Super fund U.S. Environmental Protection j U.S. Environmental Protection Smeltertown, downstream, ^^H SiSMrcvestigation, Volume 1 of 3 Agency Agency, EPA Work Assignment arkansas river, metals, ^H No. 4-650, Weston work Order remediation, smelting, No. 3347-34-01-5650-01, EPA soils, water quality, •Contract No. 68-03-3482 ground water

D00430 Final Report Smeltertown Superfund U.S. Environmental Protection 1993 U.S. Environmental Protection Smeltertown, downstream, Site Investigation, Volume 2 of 3 Agency Agency, EPA Work Assignment arkansas river, metals, (Appendix A: XRF Final Report) No. 4-650, Weston Work Order remediation, smelting, soils No. 3347-34-01-5650-01, EPA Contract No. 68-03-3482

D00438 Final Report, Smeltertown Site U.S. Environmental Protection 1994 U.S. Environmental Protection smeltertown, arkansas Investigation II: Extended Site Agency Agency, EPA Work Assignment river, downstream, water Characterization, Volume 1 of 4 No. 5-650, Weston Work Order quality, metals, soils, No. 3347-35-01-6650-01, EPA aquatic, toxicity testing, Contract No. 68-03-3482 smelter, fish

D00431 Human Health Baseline Risk U.S. Environmental Protection 1995 U.S. Environmental Protection smeltertown, downstream, Assessment, Smeltertown Superfund Agency Agency, Contract No. 68-W8- arkansas river, metals, Site 0112, EPA Work Assignment No. remediation, smelting, 63-8LJ6, CH2M Hill Master soils, human health Project No. RME68111

D00257 Interpretive Addenda for U.S. Environmental Protection 1987 U. S. Environmental RI/FS, California Gulch, California Gulch Remedial Agency Protection Agency, WA Leadville, Colorado, metals Investigation, Leadville, Colorado 25.8V29.0

D00256 Phase I Remedial Investigation U.S. Environmental Protection 1987 U. S. Environmental RI/FS, California Gulch, Report, California Gulch, Agency Protection Agency, WA 53- Leadville, Colorado Leadville, Colorado 8L29.0/W63781.R1, May, 1987

D00416 Proceedings of Public Meeting Re: U.S. Environmental Protection 1997 U.S. Environmental Protection smeltertown, downstream, Proposed Plan for the Former Agency Agency arkansas river, public Koppers Woodtreating Site, meeting Smeltertown Superfund Site

D00368 Quality Assurance Project Plan U.S. Environmental Protection 1993 U.S. Environmental Protection RI, Hazardous Waste Sites, Smeltertown RI/FS Agency Agency, EPA Work Assignment Smeltertown, Superfund Site No. 63-8LJ6, ARCS Contract No. 68-W8-0112

D00101 Record of Decision (ROD) Abstracts- U.S. Environmental Protection 1999 U.S. EPA website, abstracts, California California Gulch Agency http : //www. epa . gov/ super fund/sGulch, record of decision, ites/rodsites/0801478 .htm ROD

D00504 Responsiveness Summary to Comments U.S. Environmental Protection 2000 Unpublished response to arkansas river, biosolids, on the "Work Plan", Upper Arkansas Agency comments vegetation, metals, soils, River Fluvial Tailings III - Soil amendments, fluvial, 11- Amendment Remediation Project mile reach, tailings

Page 45 : iiBate^ ;••:.« -x£ K-.;'; JReferehce}^.-i->i^-v ;&^ DooNp.^ • ?$*&} x£ /^f^foK^^r^f ¥• ! w:; i •!-.<:';-'-- :.oJv.---.-..;i'.->--!-^ff!T~.'^"\i -'•?* 7^« gi™^Key:yy^^f^ggiii D00490 Responsiveness Summary to Comments U.S. Environmental Protection 1999 letter report to Upper arkansas river, fluvial, to Alternatives Analysis Upper Agency Arkansas River Restoration tailings, metals, Arkansas River Fluvial Tailings - Project Core Team remediation, 11-mile reach, Soil Amendment Remediation Project soils, amendments, biosolids

D00432 Smeltertown Ecological Risk U.S. Environmental Protection 1995 U.S. Environmental Protection Smeltertown, downstream, Assessment, Smeltertown Superfund Agency Agency, Contract No. 68-W8- arkansas river, metals, Site 0112, EPA Work Assignment No. smelting, soils, ecological 63-8LJ6, CM2M Hill Master risk, water quality, Project No. RME68111 aquatic, terrestrial, birds, mammals, plants, sediment D00433 Smeltertown Superfund Site, U.S. Environmental Protection 1999 U.S. Environmental Protection Smeltertown, consent Consent Decree for Remedial Agency Agency decree, arkansas river, Design/Remedial Action for OU2 downstream, remediation

D00418 Smeltertown Superfund Site, Record U.S. Environmental Protection 1998 U.S. Environmental Protection Smeltertown, arkansas of Decision, 6/4/98 Agency Agency river, rod, metals, downstream D00428 Smeltertown Superfund Site, U.S. Environmental Protection 1994 U.S. Environmental Protection Smeltertown, downstream, Smelter Subsite RI , Volume ! Of II Agency Agency, ARCS Contract No. 68- arkansas river, metals, H8-0112, EPA Work Assignment remediation, smelting, No. 63-8LJ6, CH2M Hill Master soils, water quality, Project No. RME68111 ground water

D00258 Smeltertown, Colorado Site Fact U.S. Environmental Protection 1993 U. S. Environmental Smeltertown Sheet Agency Protection Agency D00245 Summary, California Gulch, U.S. Environmental Protection 1983 U.S. EPA Region VIII, RI/FS, California Gulch Remedial Investigation/ Feasibility Agency Superfund Program 83-C-2388 Study D00252 Tailings Pile Inventory of U.S. Environmental Protection 1988 U. S. Environmental California Gulch-General, California Gulch (SCAP) Site, Agency Protection Agency, tailings Leadville, Colorado (cover only) Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, Las Vegas , Nevada D00290 Upper Arkansas Fluvial Tailing U.S. Environmental Protection 2002 U.S. Environmental Protection fluvial tailings, mining, Removals 2002 Interim Monitoring Agency Agency Region 8 upper arkansas river, report biosolids, lime, metals, groundwater D00255 Yak Tunnel Operable Unit U.S. Environmental Protection 1987 CJ. S. Environmental Yak Tunnel, California Feasibility Study, California Agency Protection Agency, WA 53- Gulch, RI/FS Gulch Site - Volume I and Volume II 8L29.0/W63785.T1, June 1987

D00266 Final Scoping Document, Strategy U.S. Environmental Protection 1992 U. S. Environmental Soils, California Gulch, for Development of the Work Plan Agency, Roy F.Weston, Inc. Protection Agency, In: Leadville, Colorado, to Assess Pre-mining Geochemistry, Remedial Planning Activities geochemistry, work plan California Gulch Study Area, at Selected Uncontrolled Leadville, Colorado Hazardous Substance Disposal Sites in the Zone of Regions VI, VII, and VIII, Arcs VI, VII, VIII

D00407 1988 Leadville Mine Drainage U.S. Environmental Protection 1988 Unpublished Study Report Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel Pilot Plant Studies: Acute Agency, U.S. Bureau of Tunnel, toxicity tests, and Chronic Toxicity Results Reclamation arkansas river A Ife- Page 46 ; Doc No.\.-.^^:f- •.","-•.'•-;"•'•• ™«.: V'v;... '-'..'.%•-.. -•'•••/•'-.':"::"• '"••^^•Authprv.-;. -.••:;- ' ^J>ate '-.;j:'1.-:>\- :- Reference "; j^'-A -^ •"* O'^r-fvVKeyWofts-^;,-? j '^\ D00355 Di^^^H'ield Sampling Plan: U.S. Environmental Protection 1 mf U.S. Environmental Protection Smelt ertown, RI, ^^H SmSWrtown Remedial Agency/CH2M Hill " Agency, EPA Work Assignment Feasibility, Superfund, ^^1 Investigation/Feasibility Study No. 68-W8-0112 Colorado Zinc Company, Beazers East D00268 Final Baseline Aquatic Ecological U.S. Environmental Protection 1995 CJ. S. Environmental Ecological Risk Assessment, Risk Assessment: California Gulch Agency/Roy F. Weston, Inc. Protection Agency, Region Aquatic, Leadville, NPL Site VIII, Work Assignment No. 31- Colorado, Upper Arkansas 8L29, DCN 4800-31-0123 River, California Gulch

D00272 Minimal Program Requirements for U.S. Environmental Protection 1991 U. S. Environmental Soils, California Gulch, Soil Sampling for the Terrestrial Agency/Roy F. Weston, Inc. Protection Agency, Region terrestrial, Leadville Ecosystem Evaluation at the VIII, Denver, Colorado DCN California Gulch Site, Leadville, 4800-01-0799 Colorado D00270 Minimum Program Requirements for U.S. Environmental Protection 1991 U.S. Environmental Protection RI/FS, terrestrial, Field Surveys for Terrestrial Agency/Roy F. Weston, Inc. Agency, Region VIII, Denver, California Gulch Ecosystem Evaluation at the Colorado DCS 4800-01-0793 California Gulch Site, Leadville, Colorado D00269 Site Management Plan, Volume III, U.S. Environmental Protection 1991 U. S. Environmental Management Plan, California California Gulch NPL Site, Agency/Roy F. Weston, Inc. Protection Agency, Region Gulch, Leadville, CO Leadville, Colorado VIII, Denver, Colorado DCN 4800-01-0666 D00578 Volume I, Site Management Plan, U.S. Environmental Protection 1990 U.S. Environmental Protection California Gulch, California Gulch, Leadville, CO Agency/Roy F. Weston, Inc. Agency, Region VIII, Denver, Leadville, Arkansas River, CO, DCN: 4800-01-0382 RI, Metals, Contaminants

D00579 Volume II, Site Management Plan, U.S. Environmental Protection 1990 U.S. Environmental Protection California Gulch, California Gulch, Leadville, CO Agency/Roy F. Weston, Inc. Agency, Region VIII, Denver, Leadville, Arkansas River, CO, DCN: 4800-01-0382 RI, Metals, Contaminants

D00574 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, U.S. Fish and Wildife 2001 U.S. Fish and Wildlife streams, stabilization, Region 6, Policy on Streambed Service, Region 6, Denver, Service, Region 6, Denver, morphology, restoration Stabilization Projects Colorado Colorado

D00274 Greenback Cutthroat Trout Recovery U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1995 U. S. Fish and Wildlife Fish, Trout, Cutthroat, Plan, Final Greenback Cutthroat Service, Region 6, Denver, Greenback, Recovery Plan, Trout Recovery Team Submission- Colorado, Prepared and aquatic DRAFT Submitted by: Greenback Cutthroat Trout Recovery Team, 28 February 1995 D00276 Lead Hazards to Fish, Wildlife, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1988 U. S. Fish and Wildlife Fish, aquatic, lead, metals and Invertebrates: A Synoptic Service, Biological Report Review (cover only) 85(1.14) , April 1988

D00277 Methods for the Assessment and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1978 U. S. Fish and Wildlife Aquatic Biota, Mining, Prediction of Mineral Mining Service, Office of Biological Impacts Assessment Impacts on Aquatic Communities: A Services, Eastern Energy and Review and Analysis Land Use Group, Workshop Proceedings, December 6-7, 1977, April 1978, William T. Mason, Jr., Editor

Page 47 '•"Doc-No:-' ?pate-4 ^v^"^i!Key:-W6rais&Sa::.%?«,^ft ?* '-^i!^!i^^PMl^?l;lvM 3$^g$^$^g&*^? .-^i .-.«.-.- ,:« QsViPi 'V.V. • Z i'«fe*1* !v-&4.;?--r D00370 Two Forks Reservoir & William's U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1987 U.S. Pish and Wildlife Two Forks Reservoir, Fork Gravity Collection System Service^^^ik^^^^^^^^n, Fish and Wildlife William's Fork Gravity Projects Colorado Coordination Report, Denver, Collection System, Colorado Colorado, Coordination, Biological Opinions D00487 Clear Creek Reservoir Reclamation U.S. Fish and Wildlife 1988 unpublished report arkansas river, fish, and Arkansas River Fish Kill: A Service for Colorado Division aquatic, fish kill, trout, Review and Evaluation of the Use of Wildlife clear creek reservoir, of Rotenone rotenone D00280 Assessment of the Trout Population U.S. Fish and Wildlife 1993 U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, fish, trout, brown trout, in the Upper Arkansas River Basin Service with Colorado Eastern Colorado Projects arkansas river, metals, of Central Colorado Division of Wildlife Office, Loveland, CO aquatic, water quality. Upper Arkansas River

D00279 Compilation of Records of Surface U.S. Geological Survey 1955 U. S. Geological Survey, Hydrology, Surface Water, Waters of the United States Hater-Supply Paper 1311 Discharge Records, Arkansas through September 1950 River Basin, Colorado

D00333 Summary of Discharge Measurement U.S. Geological Survey 1996 U.S. Geological Survey, Water Discharge, Arkansas River, Data, Arkansas River, CO Resources Division, Summary Colorado, Malta, Leadville Data D00278 Upper Arkansas Surf ace -Water U.S. Geological Survey 1993 U. S. Geological Survey Bibliography Toxics Project Bibliography

D00281 A Colorado History (Cover Only) Ubbelohde, C., M. Benson, 1995 Pruett Press, Boulder, Colorado History D.A. Smith Colorado 339p. D00282 A Colorado Reader (Cover only) Ubbelohde, C., M. Benson, 1982 Pruett Press, Boulder, Colorado History D.A. Smith Colorado 342p. D00063 1998 Sampling and Analysis URS Operating Services 1999 URS, START EPA Region 8, Arkansas River, aquatic, Report : Upper Arkansas River Contract No. 68-W5-0031, TDD wells, groundwater Monitoring Wells, Leadville, . No. 9702-0025 Colorado D00465 Alternatives Analysis, Upper URS Operating Services, US 1997 URS, START EPA Region 8, arkansas river, tailings, Arkansas River Fluvial Tailings, Environmental Protection Contract No. 68-W5-0031, TDD metals, soils, 11-mile Lake County, Colorado Agency No. 9702-0025 reach, fluvial, amendments, revegetation, biosolids, remediation D00468 Alternatives Analysis, Upper URS Operating Services, US 1999 URS, START EPA Region 8, arkansas river, tailings, Arkansas River Fluvial Tailings, Environmental Protection Contract No. 68-W5-0031, TDD metals, soils, 11-mile Lake County, Colorado Agency No. 9702-0025 reach, fluvial, amendments, revegetation, biosolids, remediation D00469 Alternatives Analysis, Upper URS Operating Services, US 1999 URS, START EPA Region 8, arkansas river, tailings, Arkansas River Fluvial Tailings, Environmental Protection Contract No. 6B-W5-0031, TDD metals, soils, 11-mile Lake County, Colorado Agency No. 9702-0025 reach, fluvial, amendments, revegetation, biosolids, remediation D00472 Biosolids Sampling Plan, Upper URS Operating Services, US 1998 URS, START EPA Region 8, arkansas river, tailings, Arkansas Fluvial Tailings Environmental Protection Contract No. 68-W5-0031, TDD metals, soils, 11-mile Biosolids Revegetation Project, Agency No. 9702-0025 reach, fluvial, ground Leadville, Colorado water, water quality, sampling

Page 48 v : : Doc No. .. -^v • •,-, ; :-; .?.;-%TOte *; • •, ;;-.;- $$. ;;v,y:#*&•:^' •;;,• .Author *,-; ..._; ;' / ^ate „•;;• .'-.rj .'-:'. .Reference;. •'-; '^•V^.V' *-'--^.f;:* j yyr-Key Words: '. i- /' > JX-^J D00473 B^^^Hds Sampling Report, Upper URS Operating Services, US 1 ^•g~URS, START EPA Region 8, arkansas river, tailings ,^^H ArnlKs River Tailings Biosolids Environmental Protection * Contract No. 68-W5-0031, TDD metals, soils, 11-mile ^^H Revegetation Project, Leadville, Agency No. 9702-0025 reach, fluvial, amendments, Colorado - DRAFT biosolids

D00508 Draft Alternatives Analysis for URS Operating Services, US 1999 URS, START EPA Region 8, arkansas river, fluvial, the Year 2000, Upper Arkansas Environmental Protection Contract No. 68-W5-0031, TDD tailings, metals, River Fluvial Tailings, Lake Agency No. 9702-0025 remediation, 11-mile reach, County, Colorado soils, amendments, biosolids, remediation D00500 Draft Work Plan/2000 Field Season, URS Operating Services, US 2000 URS, START EPA Region 8, arkansas river, tailings, Upper Arkansas River Fluvial Environmental Protection Contract No. 68-W5-0031, TDD metals, soils, 11-mile Tailings Soil Amendment/ Agency No. 9702-0025 reach, fluvial, amendments, Revegetation Project biosolids D00463 DRAFT- -Work Plan, Upper Arkansas URS Operating Services, US 1999 URS, START EPA Region 8, arkansas river, tailings, River Fluvial Tailings Soil Environmental Protection Contract No. 68-W5-0031, TDD metals, soils, 11-mile Amendments/Revegetation Project, Agency No. 9702-0025 reach, fluvial, amendments, Leadville, Colorado revegetation, biosolids, remediation D00466 Field Sampling Plan, California URS Operating Services, US 1996 URS, START EPA Region 8, arkansas river, tailings, Gulch, Arkansas River Fluvial Environmental Protection Contract No. 68-W5-0031, TDD metals, soils, 11-mile Tailings, Leadville, Colorado Agency No. 9605-0016 reach, fluvial, sampling

D00470 Field Sampling Plan, Upper URS Operating Services, US 1998 URS, START EPA Region 8, arkansas river, tailings, Arkansas River Fluvial Tailings Environmental Protection Contract No. 68-W5-0031, TDD metals, soils, 11-mile Monitoring Wells, Leadville, Agency No. 9702-0025 reach, fluvial, ground Colorado water, water quality, sampling D00458 Hydrologic and Hydraulic URS Operating Services, US 1998 URS, START EPA Region 8, arkansas river, hydrology, Assessment, Brovmfields- -Upper Environmental Protection Contract No. 68-W5-0031, TDD hydraulics, flows, 11-mile Arkansas River, Leadville, Colorado Agency No. 9703-0008 reach

D00509 Monitoring Plan, Biosolids URS Operating Services, US 1999 URS, START EPA Region 8, arkansas river, fluvial, Revegetation Project, Upper Environmental Protection Contract No. 68-W5-0031, TDD tailings, metals, Arkansas River Fluvial Tailings, Agency NO. 9702-0025 remediation, 11-mile reach, Lake County, Colorado soils, amendments, biosolids, remediation D00467 Sampling Activities Report, Fall URS Operating Services, US 1998 URS, START EPA Region 8, arkansas river, tailings, 1997 Sampling, Upper Arkansas Environmental Protection Contract No. 68-W5-0031, TDD metals, soils, 11-mile River Fluvial Tailings, Leadville, Agency No. 9702-0025 reach, fluvial, sampling, Colorado hayden ranch D00467B Sampling Activities Report, Fall URS Operating Services, US 1998 ORS, START EPA Region 8, arkansas river, tailings, 1997 Sampling, Upper Arkansas Environmental Protection Contract No. 68-W5-0031, TDD metals, soils, 11-mile River Fluvial Tailings, Leadville, Agency NO. 9702-0025 reach, fluvial, sampling, Colorado, Appendix B, Photographic hayden ranch Results D00460 Sampling Activities Report, Upper URS Operating Services, US 1997 URS, START EPA Region 8, arkansas river, tailings, Arkansas River Fluvial Tailings, Environmental Protection Contract No. 6B-W5-0031, TDD metals, soils, 11-mile Leadville, Colorado Agency No. 9609-0005 reach, fluvial, characterization D00461 Sampling Activities Report, Upper URS Operating Services, US 1997 URS, START EPA Region 8, arkansas river, tailings, Arkansas River Fluvial Tailings, Environmental Protection Contract No. 68-WS-0031, TDD metals, soils, 11-mile Leadville, Colorado: Appendix B-- Agency No. 9609-0005 reach, fluvial, Photographic Results characterization, photos

Page 49 ; ; : : \PpcNp^^ •'^ *%Sj Sv^-^-OT«e.*f*S/^:s;1 J ^fevi^i^>:A}V A' M:&csi . Afith'or.S\Htfl:; r -a t-v.'*-.-=#SPate*-: :>. ;: •'••S*,^.*.-.:--:-*?!.-'.---.--™ •.•«"-4' : *r/*;-}1.-J-.-i.-.:-A--.-r-. .':l-'y/;. .::vCr-'....-..'-v--f.';S-.r-i"?t. -T.;" »' ". -' ~ •".-:.- ^ ••f^W^^^mnct^jj^^^^ n^^^^^m^Mm D00462 Sampling Activities Report, Upper URS Operating Services, US 1998 URS, START EPA Region 8, arkansas river, tailings, Arkansas River Fluvial Tailings, Environmental Protection Contract No. 68-W5-0031, TDD metals, soils, 11-mile Leadville, Colorado: Appendix B-- Agency No. 9702-0025 reach, fluvial, Photographic Results characterization, photos

D00459 Sampling Activities Report --July URS Operating Services, US 1998 URS, START EPA Region 8, arkansas river, tailings, 1998, Upper Arkansas River Fluvial Environmental Protection Contract No. 68-W5-0031, TDD ground water, monitoring, Tailings Monitoring Wells, Agency NO. 9702-0025 metals, water quality, 11- Leadville, Colorado mile reach, demonstration sites D00464 Work Plan 1998 Biosolids Projects, URS Operating Services, US 1998 URS, START EPA Region 8, arkansas river, tailings, Upper Arkansas River Fluvial Environmental Protection Contract No. 68-W5-0031, TDD metals, soils, 11-mile Tailings, Leadville, Colorado Agency No. 9702-0025 reach, fluvial, amendments, revegetation, biosolids, remediation D00471 Work Plan, Upper Arkansas Fluvial URS Operating Services, US 1998 URS, START EPA Region 8, arkansas river, tailings, Tailings Biosolids Revegetation Environmental Protection Contract No. 68-W5-0031, TDD metals, soils, ll-mile Project, Leadville, Colorado Agency No. 9702-0025 reach, fluvial, amendments, revegetation, biosolids, remediation D00550 Screening Level Soil Sampling US Bureau of Reclamation and 2001 Memo from US BOR to Lake soil sampling, upper Results on Private Property, Upper US Bureau of Land Management County Soil Conservation arkansas, metals, private Arkansas River District lands, D00283 Abiotic and Biotic Factors van Hattum, Bert, Klaas R. 1991 Environmental Toxicology and Invertebrates, Aquatic, Influencing in situ Trace Metal Timmermans, Harrie A. Covers Chemistry, 10:275-292 Metals, bioavailability, levels in Macroinvertebrates in sediment Freshwater Ecosystems D00476 Effects of Placer Gold Mining on Van Nieuwenhuyse and J.D. 1986 Hater Resources Bulletin placer mining, effects, Primary Production in Subarctic LaPerriere 22(1) : 91-99 primary production, Streams of Alaska sediments, algae, mining, oxygen, aquatic, stream, water quality, alaska D00445 Data provided by Dr. B. Smith various 1999 unpublished reports arkansas river, osteochondrosis, forage, terrestrial, livestock, soils, plants, 11-mile reach

D00451 Data provided by Mrs. Edith Seppi various 1999 various soils, forage, metals, 11- mile reach, California gulch, water, livestock, arkansas river, maps, range management D00450 Restoration Ecology: Special various 1997 Restoration Ecology 5 (4s) restoration, riparian, Supplement. ..Riparian Restoration 121pp. upper arkansas, landscape approach, watershed scale, prioritization D00415 U.S. Geological Survey Toxic various... . see contents 1991 U.S. Geological Survey, Water- arkansas river, toxic Substances Hydrology Program- - page-articles highlighted are Resources Investigations substances, acid mine Proceedings of the Technical included Report 91-4034 drainage, sediments, Meeting, Monterey, CA, March 1991 metals, water quality, metal loading

Page 50 Doc No. ' . :-^JL .^r" "X;-;^ .-Title'-1;. ^- -H-, ',-.v •••.:,- -?.'• --.v'i"' .-«•>•-, Author- ; - •:. --'.-' t'--^Dat "^? V/r' •;•". -v'-r Reference;.' - -*:*:':-v;.';"V ''•-. o-v- .-, - -.0 .Ke/Wbrds-x i- ; > V 1 :-.j^^^.~ .'-•',-• -;...-.. •-- •-,.-; •:. .-. ,• . :;. -•• ... .•' • '.. '- . ' -f~ - '-'. --•.'- •'•'. ~i . ..v.... .--.•-.•;• -.'.-•.•• ••:• fjj.,.^m*i D00613 H^^^Kdmium Residues Observed Vermeer, K. and J.C. Castillafl ^Bn~Bulletin of Environmental metals, cadmium, copper, ^^^B du^^Bg a Pilot Study in Shorebirds Contaminant Toxicology 46:242- mines, birds, terrestrial^^l and Their Prey Downstream from the 248 El Salvador Copper Mine, Chile

D00532 Bird List - Upper Arkansas River, Voynick, S. 1992 bird list from Mr. Steve birds, species list, upper Lake County Voynick arkansas, riparian

D00313 Seasonal Relationships Between the W. , David S. 1988 Colorado State University, Fish, Trout, invertebrates, Benthos, Invertebrate Drift and Fort Collins, Colorado, M. S. aquatic Brown Trout Predation (Abstract Thesis Only) D00284 Effects of Copper, pH and Hardness Waiwood, K. G. and F. W. H. 1978 Water Research 12:611-619 Fish, Metals, Trout, on the Critical Swimming Beamish Copper, aquatic, pH Performance of Rainbow Trout (Salmo giardneri Richardson)

D00285 Mercury, Arsenic Lead, Cadmium, Walsh, D., B Berger and J. 1977 Pesticides Monitoring Fish, mercury, arsenic, and Selenium Residues in Fish, Bean Journal 11:5-34 lead, cadmium, selenium, 1971-1973, National Pesticide metals, pesticidess Monitoring Program D00394 Impact of Water Level Changes on Walters, M.A., R.O. Teskey, 1980 US FWS Biological Services water, riparian, wetland, Woody Riparian and Wetland T.M. Hinckley Program, Volume VIII Pacific aquatic Communities Northwest and Rocky Mountain Regions (FWS/OBS-78/94)

D00376 Preliminary Assessment of the Walton-Day, K. , and P.H. 1988 U.S. Geological Survey, Water St. Kevin Gulch, Leadville, Effects of Acid Mine Drainage on Briggs Resources Investigations Acid Mine Drainage, Ground Water Beneath a Wetland Report 88-4220 Wetland, Tennessee Creek, Near Leadville, Colorado East Fork of the Arkansas River, Sulfide D00446 Effects of Fluvial Tailings Walton-Day, K. , F.J. Rossi, 2000 U.S. Geological Survey, Water- arkansas river, 11-mile Deposits on Soils and Surface- and L.J. Gerner, J.B. Evans, T.J. Resources Investigations reach, tailings, water Ground-Water Quality, and Yager, J.F. Ranville, and Report 99-4273100pp. quality, aquatic, metals, Implications for Remediation- - K.S. Smith soils, fluvial deposits Upper Arkansas River, Colorado, 1992-96 D00588 use of Mass-Flow Calculations to Walton-Day, K., P.H. Briggs, 1991 In Proceedings of water quality, acid mine, Identify Processes Controlling and S . B . Romberger International Conference on wetland, cadmium, zinc, Water Quality in a Subalpine Tailings/ Mine Waste metals Wetland Receiving Acid Mine Drainage, St. Kevin Gulch, Colorado

D00286 Hydrology and Geochemistry of a Walton-Day, Katherine 1995 U. S. Geological Survey, Wetland/Riparian, Metals, Natural Wetland Affected by Acid Denver, CO Acid Mine Drainage, St. Mine Drainage, St. Kevin Gulch, Kevin Gulch, Leadville, Lake County, Colorado - DRAFT Colorado, Hydrology, Geochemistry, aquatic

Page 51 : v a ; : ; L : :.DocNi'-- -y? :;,•';• :.;:•;.• vSi -f~ .:• :>v "•••'•' JT- ?•'*"'«";•&!;•«-•••!••• :- ^X'« . ,: •: •;»'• ~.:~fi~. ' :•• •" ?.' -" :, ••• ••". V -. Wi ••' > 5~^ " >-:T i. D00287 Iron and Zinc Budgets in Surface Walton-Day, Katherine 1995 in Morganwalp, D.W., and Wetland/Riparianj;^|:g;^^^S^^, Metals, ^ Water for a Natural Wetland Aronson, D.A, (eds.), U.S. Acid Mine Drainage, St. Affected by Acidic Mine Drainage, Geological Survey Toxic Kevin Gulch, Leadville, St. Kevin Gulch, Lake County, Substances in Hydrology Colorado, Iron, Zinc, Colorado- DRAFT Program- -Proceedings of the aquatic Technical Meeting, Colorado Springs, CO: U.S.G.S. Water- Resources Investigations Report 94-4015, 2:759-764 D00289 CONFIDENTIAL - Water-Quality, Soil Walton-Day, Katherine and 1992 U. S. Bureau of Land Soils, Water Quality, Soil Chemistry, and Geologic Data for a Tracy J. Yager Management , prepared by U . S . Chemistry, Geology, Upper Property along the Arkansas River Geological Survey, Water Arkansas River, Leadville, near Leadville, Colorado Resources Division, Colorado Colorado District, December, 1992

D00557 Effects of Remediation on Walton-Day, K. , R.w. Healy, 2000 In Proceedings from the Fifth upper arkansas, tailings, Geochemistry and Hydrology of the F.B. Maestas, and A. Ranalli International Conference on fluvial, metals, hydrology, Unsaturated Zone of Fluvial Acid Rock Drainage, Volume water, remediation, Tailings Deposits in the II, 2000, pp. 1450 biosolids, floodplain Floodplain of the Upper Arkansas River, Colorado D00404 Effect of Placer Mining (Dredging) Webb, W.E. and O.E. Casey 1961 State of Idaho, Department of aquatic, fish, placer on a Trout Stream Fish and Game Report, Project mining, dredging, stream, DJ-F-34-R, Job 3 physical change

D00291 Effect of Mine Drainage on the Wentz, D. 1974 U. S. Geological Survey, Water Quality, Acid Mine Quality of Streams in Colorado Colorado Resource Circ. No. Drainage, Colorado, Metals, 21, 117p. Contaminants, aquatic

D00011 The WRRI Trout Cover Rating Wesche, T.A. 1980 Water Resources Series No. 78 fish, trout, instream flow, Method: Development and Application Completion Report, Water aquatic, cover Resources Research Institute, University of Wyoming

D00292 The Effect of Graded Doses of Wesenberg, G. B. R. , G. Fosse 1981 American Journal of Mammals, Metals, Rats, Cadmium on Lead, Zinc and Copper and P. Rasmussen Environmental Studies 17:191- Cadmium, Lead, Zinc, Copper Content of Target and Indicator 200 Organs in Rats (Front page)

D00293 Cadmium Content of Indicator and Wesenberg, G., G. Fosse, P. 1981 International Journal of Mammals, Metals, Rats, Target Organs in Rats after Graded Rasmussen and N. P. B. Environmental Studies 16:147- Cadmium, Toxicity Doses of Cadmium (First page) Justesen 155

D00537 Use of Environmental Variables to Wetherbee, G.A. and B.A. 1991 in Mallard, G.E. and Aronson, upper arkansas, metals, Estimate Metal Loads in Streams, Kimball D.E. (eds.) USGS Toxic water, aquatic, sediment, Upper Arkansas River Basin, Substances Hydrology Program; water quality Colorado proceedings of the technical meeting, Monterey CA, March 11-15, 1991, WRI 91-4034, p. 398-406 D00294 Selected Hydrologic Data for the Wetherbee, G.A., B.A. Kimball1991 U. S. Geological Survey, Open- Water Quality, Upper Upper Arkansas River Basin, and W.S. Maura File Report 91-528 Arkansas River Basin Colorado, 1986-1989 D00295 Uptake and Retention of Cadmium by White, D. and M. Finley 1978 Environmental Research 17:53- Birds, cadmium, metals, M|^^£d Ducks 59 ducks ,^^J ^_ Page 52 : Doc No. •-^-- "••/:-•••'' :.- -Title ^ -••'.• V.-:--v ^•-r]•: :-: *•- '• - .':.' Author v.'-lT. _. -'•: ,> Date ,-,'•' ,-'4-- '•'•••-•:•;... Reference.; ::;-.'• '•'-.*•.':>'-"•". ^^^; •--"->•.. -.--.-s- :_'.,- ;-..'•<• -..-.'.- .'- •'•'. "•--••- . i? Key Wordsyy, > ' •'.r-y-.^j D00296 H:^^^Btt ho logic Effects of Dietary White, D., M. Finley and J. I ^^ Journal of Toxicology and Birds, ducks, cadmium, ^^H CaaMKn on Kidneys and Testes of Ferrell ™ 8 Environmental Health 4:551-558 metals ^^1 Mallard Ducks ^V D00297 Bird Use and Heavy Metal White, D.H. and E. Cromartie 1985 Bulletin of Environmental Birds, Waterfowl, Metals, Accumulation in Waterbirds at Contaminants and Toxicology Mining, terrestrial Dredge Disposal Impoundments, 34: 295-300 Corpus Christi, Texas D00298 Residues of Environmental White, D.H. and E. Cromartie 1977 The Wilson Bulletin 89(4) Birds, Contaminants, Eggs, Pollutants and Shell Thinning in Reproduction, terrestrial Merganser Eggs D00299 Residues of Organochlorines and White, D.H. and T.E. Kaiser 1976 Pesticides Monitoring Journal Birds, Waterfowl, Metals, Heavy Metals in Ruddy Ducks from 9(4) :155-156 Contaminants, Toxicity, the Delaware River, 1973 terrestrial

D00300 Reproductive Success of Black White, D.H., C.A. Mitchell 1984 Journal of Field Ornithology Birds, Contaminants, Eggs, Skimmers in Texas Relative to and D.M. Swineford 55(1) :18-30 Reproduction, terrestrial Environmental Pollutants

D00301 Significance of Organochlorine and White, D.H., K.A. King, and 1980 Pesticides Monitoring Journal Birds, Metals, Standards, Heavy Metal Residues in Wintering R.M. Prouty 14(2) :58-63 Bioaccumulation, Shorebirds at Corpus Christi, Shorebirds, terrestrial Texas, 1976-1977 D00302 Trace Elements in Sediments, White, D.H., K.A. King, C.A. 1986 Bulletin of Environmental Birds, Water Fowl, Water, and American Coots (Fulica Mitchell and B.M. Mulhern Contaminants Toxicology Sediments, Water, Power americana) at a Coal -fired Power 36:376-383, Plant, terrestrial Plant in Texas, 1979-1982

D00303 Relations of Wintering Canvasbacks White, D.H., R.C. Stendell 1979 Wilson Bulletin 91(21:279-287 Birds, Waterfowl, Metals, to Environmental Pollutants -- and B.M. Mulhern Effects, Foodchain, Chesapeake Bay, Maryland Physiologic, terrestrial

D00304 Effects of Dietary Boron and Whitworth, M.R., G.W. 1991 Environmental Toxicology and Birds, Waterfowl, Metals, Arsenic on the Behavior of Mallard Pendleton, D.J. Hoffman and Chemistry 10:911-916 Boron, Arsenic, terrestrial Ducklings M . B . Camardese D00305 Patterns of Vegetation Response to Wickman, D.E. 1982 Presented at the Vegetation, heavy metals, Heavy Metal Stress International Symposium on terrestrial Remote Sensing of Environment Second Thematic Conference, Remote Sensing for Exploration Geology, Fort Worth, Texas, December 6-10,

D00306 Enhanced Bioaccumulation of Wiener, J. G. and P. M. Stokes 1990 Environmental Toxicology and Fish, Metals, Mercury, Cadmium and Lead in Low- Chemistry 9:821-823 Bioaccumulation, aquatic Alkalinity Waters: An Emerging Regional Environmental Problem

D00307 A Water Handbook fpr Metal Mining Wildeman, T.R. 1981 Colorado State University, Metals, Mining, Acid Mine Operations Colorado Water Resources, Drainage, Water Quality Research Institute, Ft. Collins, Colorado, Completion Report No. 113

Page 53 : : ^pbcNbi v- ;•;' '* i •; «^?£&8 ^Titife^y'^c^jS^i,^r-^r^^'E^^UtKotl^^SiK:'^^=-^i , : V"-'.:^3?;ji ^^B&fyfi?-??- ix •£%£'£* -.vu- u±;;>. ..-• .wsih'jo-*!. :, «?.3$;;-jv.vi' ;.~- '-.:• •<:--.'~i *&v&"J• •-••-. -.-i • '-:• X--±*i '.-fa •- . • * .;.--?_:;!?t ,* >^m^,--'T-'. • D00308 PC-Based Design of Channel Williams, D.T., D.N. Austin 1995 Land and Water Restoration, Streambank Protection Using Permanent September/October, 1995 Erosion Geosynthetic Reinforcement Mattings

D00582 Water Resource Management Willingham, T., A. Medine 1992 Second International Joint water quality, Arkansas Strategies for Restoring and EPA- Peoples Republic of China River, aquatic life, Maintaining Aquatic Life Uses Symposium on Fish Toxicology, management Physiology and Water Quality Management

D00309 Copper, Zinc, and Cadmium Wilson, D. 1980 California Department of Fish Fish, copper, zinc, Concentrations of Resident Trout and Game, Pesticides cadmium, metals, acid mine Related to Acid-Mine Wastes Investigations Unit, Sacramento, California D00310 Lichens as Indicators of Air Wilson, M.J. 1991 U. S. Environmental Smelters, Metals Pollution Impacts at Superfund Protection Agency, Exposure Deposition, Study Sites Assessment Group, EGA Techniques, vegetation Contract No. 68-DO-0100 D00366 Water Quality Study; Arkansas Windell, J.T., M.L. Kline, US 1985 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Arkansas River, water River above Salida, Colorado (In Army Corps of Engineers, ARIX Albuquerque District quality, metals, dredging, contaminants database #4019) aquatic

D00312 Seasonal Variability in the Winner, R.W., H.A. Owen and 1990 Aquatic Toxicology 17:75-92 Aquatic Biota, Heavy Sensitivity of Freshwater Lentic M.V. Moore Metals, Copper Communities to a Chronic Copper Stress D00311 Insect Community Structure as an Winner, R.W., M. W. Boesel, 1980 Canadian Journal of Fish and Invertebrates, Aquatic, Index of Heavy-Metal Pollution in and M. P. Farrell Aquatic Sciences 37:647-655 Metals, Indices Lotic Ecosystems

D00314 Stampede to Timberline (Cover Only) Wolle, M. 1974 Sage Books, Chicago, Colorado History, mining Illinois, 544p. D00489 Use Attainability Study, Woodling, J., Colorado 1990 Colorado Department of Public arkansas river, California California Gulch, Colorado Department of Public Health Health and Environment, and gulch, metals, fish, and Environment, and U.S. U.S. Environmental Protection invertebrates, aquatic, Environmental Protection Agency Report riparian habitat Agency D00507 Survival and Mortality of Brown Woodling, J.D. 1993 Dissertation, University of arkansas river, trout, Trout (Salmo trutta) to In Situ Colorado, Boulder, CO metals, aquatic, water, Acutely Toxic Concentrations of toxicology, cadmium, zinc Cadmium and Zinc D00315 Sensitivity of Greenback Cutthroat Woodward, D. F., A. M. Farag, 1991 Transactions of the American Fish, Trout, Cutthroat, pH, Trout to Acidic pH and Elevated E. E. Little, B. Steadman and Fisheries Society 120: 34-42 Greenback, aquatic, metals Aluminum R. Yancik D00403 Metals -Contaminated Benthic Woodward, D.F., A.M. Farag, 1995 Canadian Journal of Fisheries aquatic, fish, Invertebrates in the Clark Fork H.L. Bergman, A.J. DeLonay, and Aquatic Sciences 52: invertebrates, metals River, Montana: Effects on Age-0 E.E. Little, C.E. Smith, and 1994-2004 uptake, metals, clark fork Brown Trout and Rainbow Trout F.T. Barrows river

D00449 Brown Trout Avoidance of Metals in Woodward, D.F., J.A. Hansen, 1995 Canadian Journal of Fisheries clark fork, metals, Water Characteristic of the Clark H.L. Bergman, E.E. Little, and Aquatic Science 52: 2031- aquatic, water quality, Fork, Montana and A.J. DeLonay 2037 fish, behavior,

Page 54 : : /: : Doc No. •••••|^k_• ^_:--'- •• •'••••:•>• • v. ' ..•-..-•-••-•..-.•.•Title*.-..-:' -:.' •.••.•.--.'' ;.,'•, --*'.'" ..-.••:••' •:-•,*.'.-^£>:. '-"^""- Author :•.,;"• rV --.^ ^ Date^ :,- '. p.>w;,':';';i Reference ; Y^;; '"•"•; '•-/• :• . . ;;'; :-Key'Words.,'_:;.,:., ,.'_:| D00316 E^^^BF on Rainbow Trout Fry of a Woodward, D.F., W.G. I jjr Transactions of the American Fish, , aquatic, metals, ^^H M^^^F-Contaminated Diet of Brumbaugh, A.J. DeLonay, E.E.^ Fisheries Society 123:51-62 diet, invertebrates, troi^^H Benthic Invertebrates from the Little and C.E. Smith Clark Fork River, Montana

D00530 Revegetation of Pb/Zn Mine Ye, Z.E., J.W.C. Wong , M . H . 2000 Restoration Ecology 8(11:87- revegetation, mine tails, Tailings, Guangdong Province, China Wong, A.J.M. Baker, W.S. Shu, 92. tailings, lead, zinc, C.Y. Lan mining, soil, reclamation, metals D00414 Uraniferous Waters of the Arkansas Zielinski, R.A. , S. Asher- 1995 Applied Geochemistry 10: 133- water quality, downstream, River valley, Colorado USA: a Bolinder, and A.L. Meier 144 arkansas river, uranium, Function of Geology and Land Use land use, geology

Page 55 APPENDIX B Hydrographs TURQUOISE LAKE 1970 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERSUS RELEASE TO LAKE FORK 500 oO LU CO a: LoU. » «*• i- »» UJ 1 » LU "l * LL ,'•'. ,--.'. 1 . • o r> \ • V t • • % m ' f"'* • t i « ID >r\ r\ \\ .**' • ' * « O u • A"' .•* \ A •! \j t .•" // \\ ; 1 > «' • f ••"»•!'•' .« i • t •'!j .'.I- • \' /»A'v; '.-•••'. ,* 9 200 1 : ' •; * ' / V i •••••-., « u_ : ;: . • \ r ' • * • f • 1 * v § • . * LU " /! i • i' , i . t CD !A'I ' i * 'j \: / ^—^l X • • • . . '. • / \ x ;•'_•• • • r » t : • • ' .••*.. i i ; . .s\ \ • • • * o: » . % , f . : s » ^ i • • •« » • LU I ; / \ .. . ' < • ? , / i, i.'- / <" N' •U \" " ' » — ."•• i! \ ^ 1 < ..../T n" \! i • V Q W 1 V M\ ^ \ *\- ' j> '\ - •'.'•'•'_ / ' ll ' V \ i 0 V " 1 •• " ' .V A / APR MAY JUN JUL Total inflow = 22,934 Total outflow = 39,406 Gage below dam Native inflow Percent increase = 172% TURQUOISE LAKE 1971 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERSUS RELEASE TO LAKE FORK

500

450

400

350

300

250

200

150

100

APR MAY JUN JUL Total inflow = 21,471 • Gage below dam ^-— Native inflow Total outflow = 41,844 Percent increase = 195% TURQUOISE LAKE 1972 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERSUS RELEASE TO LAKE FORK ouu -

Acr\ . nOU

: ' . ' ,'<'\- ... /inn . # ifUU v . ' '.' "v** V i • •• '••'*.• •". • ' .• • ocr\ . .._ • ' i - ' " oOU \ * • • •.' * -1 - i' . * i . ' .' '• ' "• • • e » • • • ^ • . . N : t * •• -' ' - : ; * onn - •' i • • " '•'•• /i - . .-v -• -.-. * GUU • . - • > 1: ... ;\^ M'/\v./;- ;; • ocn _ • ZOU A . \-/i/-\- •*-/ » » . '.\ i \V- .,V,-4f^y';,:- i ...-••« •i. • i • : .'. : / .- v- --•. • • • onn • i - «... ; I~ • m '• • ^UU • « * /. ,\ . t . V r- v • B• : t . « :\ / : — •ten - • • •« / U i V" " . 1 OU •i •»i ; - '•"» -" • t " .W • • • . ,-' » ::«...... ; inn ,., ff} IUU ••/ \ • '. v ,-: /' - " • •-' %. /••-: •;>• -./• . . . , > . .-•.. , •:'/•"• V- -A- CA _ f — •••^ • . r \ ou : /:. . V•'• —- — -*A i i/ \ V/^i ... \y . v \^JA • 'v. ^ *. • _/ W-' ^

APR MAY JUN JUL TDtal inflow = 23,707 Total outflow - 49,41 1 oagr^ e DeioLI w dai m - Native inflow Percent increase = 208% TURQUOISE LAKE 1973 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERSUS RELEASE TO LAKE FORK

500

450

400

350

300

250

200

150

100

APR MAY JUN JUL Totalinflow= 10,191 Gage below dam - Native inflow Total outflow = 22,326 Percent increase = 219% TURQUOISE LAKE 1974 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERSUS RELEASE TO LAKE FORK

500

450

APR MAY JUN JUL Total inflow = 21,037 Gage below dam • •'' .Native inflow Total outflow = 61,322 Percent increase = 292% TURQUOISE LAKE 1975 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERSUS RELEASE TO LAKE FORK

500

350

100

-';" '1

0 APR MAY JUN JUL Total inflow = 26,578 Total outflow = 68,332 • Gage below dam Native inflow Percent increase = 257% TURQUOISE LAKE 1976 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERSUS RELEASE TO LAKE FORK 500

450

•• • i

' V '. • Jit

100

0 APR MAY JUN JUL Total inflow = 14,632 Total outflow = 24,595 • Gage below dam Native inflow Percent increase = 168% TURQUOISE LAKE 1977 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERSUS RELEASE TO LAKE FORK

500

O O co QL UJ 0-

01 UJ o co o u_ UJ so 150 LU >

APR MAY JUN JUL

Total inflow = 10,640 Total outflow = 27,967 Gage below dam • Native inflow Percent increase = 263% TURQUOISE LAKE 1978 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERSUS RELEASE TO LAKE FORK

500

•V

300 »«-.» l« • *.

150 3^r

100

50

APR MAY JUN JUL Total inflow = 28,571 Total outflow = 56,002 below dam Native inflow Percent ir 196% TURQUOISE LAKE 1979 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERSUS RELEASE TO LAKE FORK 500

O o LU CO

LU Q.

LU LU

O m o

O

LU O a: LU

APR MAY JUN JUL Total inflow = 30,726 Total outflow = 63,583 I Gage below dam ^—^ Native inflow Percent increase = 207% TURQUOISE LAKE 1980 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERSUS RELEASE TO LAKE FORK

500

APR MAY JUN JUL Total inflow = 28,560 Total outflow = 64,138 •Gage below dam ^7-^—— Native inflow Percent increase = 225% TURQUOISE LAKE 1981 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERSUS RELEASE TO LAKE FORK ouu -

/1CA . *fOU

*HJ/innU -

OCA . oOU ouor\un . - '*<•-. OCA . jiDU

*LUOAAU . -...- . ^-Mv, '• '.:•..•• i, « 4/v-S' 1I ^OnU - / :••>•;.. .. •& - '." ' " W : . t. " ' inn - -/-v. ;•••>.-: i \j\j : ' V ' y ;-- . I- ".' ' •i' • .• • '• , ' A

-''.'•''•- -;. ':.• • f.. • "' ' '* ...-.••. Rn - \ Kl^ia/ ' "'r' ' ' ": • / ' OU ; ';-^;^;::;;.- ff • --V v>c\./^^>^- *v^ : . /" ^- ' •'"• * " ^ • . v •!i^']^J^-'-*. V ..* - "'. 'VX-.'^!'V^j \ ••/ 0 :: ;.--•• -.,'•/ v. •-... • " .: .•>. ' APR MAY JUN JUL TDtal inflow = 1 1 ,537 v^agr+ e uDGIO i W daj m ^ —~ — Native inflow Total outflow = 15,677 Percent increase = 1 36% TURQUOISE LAKE 1982 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERSUS RELEASE TO LAKE FORK

ouu -

4OA eUn

4UAr\r\U - oOocUn . .R - • fl

I '••i: ouonnu - '- ( ': ;^/Y . zoOCfu) - ' i : :: :! /f:.:\. ^uonnu - - ^ : ::A/^ ' : r : !V^.\.v. j. 1CA . y(^/^ " : '- 1 UU ; 1 • • ' • • '•'. -. •"' .., 1 ^ • V: M.- /.V = ••'•• • ' :: - V A ••' ) V mI UnU - ; ' • • •;• ^-^XjA ' 1^1' -;.' /Y , 'j(:: ,/^-:.\l;;.>:--. oeun . ••; - y-;-^-; ; --VS !'•$ A •; ':.. • •••- •'•.": .;. .• ^ " ;.: : t\ 1 \ ••"•••' "."—s~, .•''•••''•'••' ..H%. '•'•.•'^^ .-: . -- ••-:: U"./' o . • • . ' - ... .-..:• , . :. ..;.....• ••.-..' . .' 'U APR MA1Y JUN JUL

Total inflow = 25,230 Tntal r>i itflnu/ — ^ 1ft1 /"> , I , . .. . . _ 1 Uldl UulllUW O, 1 O 1 • • • • uage oeiow aam : ••• Native intlow Percent reduction = 87% TURQUOISE LAKE 1983 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERSUS RELEASE TO LAKE FORK

IUUU • yuQnnu - •/•-. . »''• ouQf\f\u . ••*.-• .*.• «... ''.'•••• ' ' ' v >' r • . • ynn - /uu ^ »' ' ' • • • '• •• . ouRonu - I''':''-' ••;V::-f- ouKnnu - * : • ...... • ^

r » : ^' • ' -'. . ' 1

/inn - A .• .• H-UU ". "• * '*.''' AA '- . ' - • ' ' If" oU••anUn - -.A-- '7- ••: H ..... J\i^}-:: ;:;A zuonou - '-^^'.--K v ^ ^V^ . . .V-;. .; : \ ,- /' \ ••'/•'••.' •inn - :ij,. • '. '".• .-.. . • .'. - .'. IUU •:., --/I- •-' .'< .•...••• • ' • '. •;- V^ A •• :" -••^^^ -'v-'^-lL .-:-•-: -.-•,:.-••

APR MAY JUN JUL Total inflow = 28,411 _ . . . Total outflow = 50,931 oage oeiow dam — Native inflow Pe*rppnt inrrpaQp ~ 1TQ% TURQUOISE LAKE 1984 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERSUS RELEASE TO LAKE FORK

500

450 --

300

'.'..'. >.:- •• '

100

0 APR MAY JUN JUL Total inflow = 40,631 Total outflow = 33,270 Gage below dam -r-r-1—^ Native inflow Percent reduction = 18% TURQUOISE LAKE 1985 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERSUS RELEASE TO LAKE FORK

500

APR MAY JUN JUL Total inflow = 32,834 below dam Native inflow Total outflow = 5,138 Percent reduction = 84% TURQUOISE LAKE 1986 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERSUS RELEASE TO LAKE FORK

500

450

400

350

300

250

fi 150 •-•

100 . '/' ;- \ ".

0 APR MAY JUN JUL Total inflow = 26,203 Gage below dam Native inflow Total outflow = 11,731 Percent reduction = 55% TURQUOISE LAKE 1987 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERSUS RELEASE TO LAKE FORK

450

400

350

300

250

200 '''"'A >i ;.

150

100

50

' 7'^ V.^'^^-T'JK? ^^'^ •••^'•^n;j^^^^" V ^":T" """ 0 31 61 91 121 Total inflow = 16,095 Gage below dam '':"V;- Native inflow Total outflow = 3,137 Percent reduction = 81 % TURQUOISE LAKE 1988 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERSUS RELEASE TO LAKE FORK

500

450

300

250

150

100

50

0 *M-i APR MAY JUN JUL Total inflow = 17,891

j 1 Total outflow = 3,122 below dam :~-rr- Native inflow Percent reduction = 83% TURQUOISE LAKE 1989 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERSUS RELEASE TO LAKE FORK 500

450

400

350

300

250 -

200 -

150

100

0 APR MAY JUN JUL Total inflow = 17,931 Total outflow = 3,760 Gage below dam :^-^— Native inflow Percent reduction = 79% TURQUOISE LAKE 1990 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERSUS RELEASE TO LAKE FORK ouu -

4OA txUA

4U/inUn -

OOocn, U . • "->v:: A •*"";• . onn - ouu -• ..../.'-•- V- i..,-; zoocun . ;;;'• • ; 1, ' ' ' '". 1 ' 'V| J~---

Z.U9nUn - 1 ••:•'.-• N :...

-ICO . -,^| 1 QU : ; ;! inI UnU - ?^ ' -^ ^fe ^^^Wy!$^'.&- «. \j

^.;.:;:^r:;^-r---^-*^;: t-:.::;^.^M!^ .'•/tv n - A^A^v/V/^ ->...^^j^LM- . . •- - . -. .;,- . • •- ' . j- APR MAY JUN JUL fotal inflow = 19,533 fntal ni itflnw - "^979 oage oeiow •-•••.. i\jative inflow f3ercent reduction = 83% TURQUOISE LAKE 1991 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERSUS RELEASE TO LAKE FORK

500

450

?i| A1"-. 300 . ..-•:. •n.ri.V,- V :i/ Vyi ; v ••fc :•/ -• ffi :s ; \ . > • V.V ": ; w. : • ' ' . • • '''-A / :\-r .:> ', '• ' . . -!•.' •-- ; ' W -i ; •'' 1\ 150 4vV;.x> ••'•'• • : ' • •' A' .^/>^;V& .;^\' ,I' :|i f '" •'.-. "'.•'•' •'':..-!-. •'" " 0"^f. .'•'"*•• ' .11%, , ... - .' J- - •': •;- " ;• .• •' >: -• ' V\/V. XV, ^\ /\ : '•••IJB ••••••'•••••*• ••••••• • • :- --- .'.''<""".i;^:.;:^:y.:.l'£V^'• ' "•''•.- " ' X- - 0 C*-*.. -i J/; \ . . ff^., . ,l>f. PM J»f r\ y^^ • '''.-., • APR MAY JUN JUL Total inflow = 23,398 Total outflow = 2,890 below dam Native inflow Percent reduction = 88% TURQUOISE LAI^^992 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERSUS RELEASE TO LAKE FORK

500

450

400

350

APR MAY JUN JUL

Total inflow = 20,191 Total outflow = 3,262 - - - Gage Below Dam .-i Native Inflow Percent reduction = 84% TURQUOISE L/^Bl993 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERSUS RELEASE TO LAKE FORK

APR MAY JUN JUL

Total inflow = 35,827 Total outflow = 18,193 - - - Gage Below Dam >^.u Native Inflow Percent reduction = 49% TURQUOISE L^m 1994 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERSWRELEASE TO LAKE FORK

500

450

400

APR MAY JUN JUL

Total inflow = 23,161 Total outflow = 4,780 - - - Gage Below Dam ^TT? Native Inflow Percent reduction = 79% TURQUOISE LAKE 1995 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERSUS RELEASE TO LAKE FORK

800

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

APR MAY JUN JUL Total inflow = 42,824 Total outflow = 10,744 • - - Gage Below Dam Native Inflow Percent reduction = 75% TURQUOISE LAKE 1996 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERSUS RELEASE TO LAKE FORK

500

450

400

350

300

250

200

150

100

APR MAY JUN JUL

Total inflow = 30,320 Total outflow = 24,744 - - - Gage Below Dam Native Inflow Percent reduction = 18% TURQUOISE LA OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VERS RELEASE TO LAKE FORK

500

O-11 APR MAY JUN JUL Total Native Inflow = 31,142 (acft) Total outflow = 3,053 (acft) • - - Gage Below Dam • Native Inflow Percent reduction = 90% TURQUOIS 2000 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW US RELEASE TO LAKE FORK

800

700 a o o LLJ 600 V)

Q. In 600 u01. o m O 400

O u. in 300

S£E UJ 200

100

APR MAY JUN JUL Total Native Inflow = 28,640 (acft) Total outflow = 13,296 (actt) • - - Gage Below Dam Native Inflow Percent reduction = 54% TURQUOISE 2001 OPERATION NATIVE INFLOW VE RELEASE TO LAKE FORK

800

APR MAY JUN JUL Total Native Inflow = 26,771 (acft) Total outflow = 2,920 (acft) - • • Gage Below Dam Native Inflow Percent reduction = 89% APPENDIX C, Chemical Data Electronic Database Documentation for Chemical Database

Database Structure

The Upper Arkansas River Basin Natural Resource Damage Assessment Chemical Database (the database) stores information concerning environmental conditions in the Upper Arkansas River Basin. One of the major goals of building the database is to compile large volumes of water, soil, and sediment quality information from numerous sources into a common repository, organized in a manner such that the combined data can be readily analyzed, (e.g. Statistical measures developed for specific time periods, and graphs of temporal and spatial trends produced). Another goal of the database is to provide a record of those data used in the site characterization.

The data are stored in the Microsoft Access 2000 relational database, and the database is structured in a manner that allows the information to be stored efficiently, while enforcing data integrity and minimizing redundancy. This is accomplished by storing the data in a set of hierarchically related tables that model the hierarchical nature of environmental data. The database contains information from numerous "datasets". For the purposes of this report, a "dataset" is a single collection of data received as a discreet "deliverable", e.g. data from a report, paper, spreadsheet, etc. Each dataset may contain data from numerous sampling stations. Many samples may be collected from an individual station over time. Each sample may be analyzed for numerous analytical parameters, and a numerical result will be generated to quantify each parameter. Thus, the primary tables in the database store information about data sources, stations, samples, analytical parameters, and analytical results. Logical connections, or links between data records in the various tables are maintained through table relationships and values in key data fields. All key values used in relationships between the primary data tables are long integer data type, and are assigned during the data import process by the import program.

Many data fields in the primary data tables store information as coded values. These codes are typically integer values or one or two -character text strings. Each data field that stores coded values is linked to a lookup table that defines the codes. The use of data codes and lookup tables promotes data storage efficiency and data consistency. Data codes are assigned during the import process, and a database table documents these assignments and translates the original values to the data codes.

All relationships in the database are set up and maintained to enforce referential integrity. This means that entries in a coded value field are limited to the values in that field's associated lookup table, and that a sample record (for example) cannot exist in the samples table without an associated record describing the sampling station in the stations table.

J:\OI0004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_CI_Chem.doc Cpl Tables, queries, and other database objects are named following standard naming conventions. Object names consist of a lower-case prefix to indicate object type, followed by a proper case descriptive name. The prefixes tbl, Ik, and qry are used to indicate primary data tables, lookup tables, and queries, respectively.

A table of Data Sources for the Upper Arkansas Site Characterization Database can be found at the end of this appendix. An Entity-Relationship Diagram for the database table is also included in this appendix.

Dataset Processing & Import

Raw datasets received from all data sources were checked for a minimum set of required information for each sample, and if sufficient information was available to allow processing, a restructuring process was performed prior to importing into the database. Datasets were prioritized for entry into the database based on how recent and how complete and pertinent the data were for site characterization purposes. A pair of digital data folders was created to store files associated with each dataset. A read-only folder was created to preserve the original unprocessed data files as they were received from the data provider. The second folder was made to store files as they underwent the restructuring necessary for import to the database.

Datasets were required to have (at a minimum) a) complete sample location, i.e. known geographic coordinates, b) sample collection date, c) analytical parameter, d) numerical result value, and e) units of measure information in order to be included in the database. In addition to these minimum requirements, every effort was made to obtain sample depth, analytical method, and limits of detection data for each dataset.

Sampling station location data was requested, and typically received, as X-Y coordinate pairs. In cases of datasets lacking coordinate data but having detailed location descriptions, the descriptions and GIS software were used to generate coordinates. Datasets lacking both coordinates and detailed location descriptions were not usable. However, in cases where a small percentage of a dataset's stations lacked sufficient locational data these stations were included in the database in the hope that the locational data may be obtained through ongoing data acquisition efforts. (Data associated with these stations were excluded from data analysis efforts until coordinates were obtained.)

J:\OI0004\Task3 -SCR\Appendices\App_Ct_Chem.doc C\-2 Sample collection date information was requested and typically received as complete month/day/year dates. Certain datasets contained incomplete sample date information, typically as month/year. The database structure requires dates to be stored in month/day/year format. When incomplete dates were encountered, a request was made to the data provider to obtain the missing information. If attempts to obtain exact sample date data were unsuccessful, sample dates were assumed based on available information and a note was made in the samples table for those records.

After all essential data components were obtained, the datasets were prepared for import to the database. All data was brought into the database through a custom import program. This program is built into the database, and receives the incoming data via an import template table. The process of adding data to the database involves two principal steps. First, each dataset must be processed into the structural format of the template table, and then the import program is run to move the data elements from the template table to the appropriate tables in the repository database.

A Microsoft Access 2000 database file was created for each source dataset for pre-processing purposes. Each one of these database files contains all original data files and tables associated with a dataset and any queries, utility programs, and intermediate tables that were created in order to restructure the dataset into the import table. The import table is a flat-file table containing 34 data fields to accommodate anticipated data elements, five long text fields for notes and miscellaneous data, and three long integer fields to store key values assigned by the import program.

At the conclusion of the pre-processing, each dataset (in the import template format) was brought into the main repository database and the import program was run. This program consists of four steps initiated from a user interface form. Step one opens a. form for entry of general information about the dataset including: title, author, source organization, date published, etc. The second step runs a procedure that converts all null values in the import table to missing data flags. This is necessary because procedures used in the program require that all data fields contain non-null values. Null date and time data elements were set to 11/11/1111, and null numeric and text values were replaced with -9999.99. Step three of the program opens an interactive form used to assign lookup values for data fields that are stored as coded values tied to lookup tables. The form displays a list of fields for which lookup values need to be assigned. When a field is selected, two new lists are populated. One displays a list of unique values for the field from the import table, and the other lists the values currently in the associated lookup table. Lookup codes are assigned by selecting a value from the import table list and double-clicking the desired value in the lookup table list. An option exists on the form to add entries to the lookup table if necessary. All lookup code assignments are written to a database table. This table is used by the final step of the import program to translate the original values to lookup codes as records are written to the

J:\010004\Task3-SCR\Appendices\App_CI_Chem.doc Cp3 repository database tables. The table also provides documentation of the data translations made during import. The final step of the import process runs a series of procedures that assign key values used in the database relationships, and append the data to the appropriate tables in the repository database.

Post-Import Data Conversion

The database was constructed with the philosophy of preserving data values as they were originally reported, to the extent possible. This approach minimizes opportunity for errors induced by data conversion and manipulation, and facilitates easy comparison between the database and original files, but is in apparent conflict with the database goal of normalizing data to a readily comparable state. This conflict was handled by storing original data values in the database, but then providing means to dynamically normalize the data to a readily comparable state. This normalization process was carried out for station locations, station types, analyte names, numerical values/units of measure, and data qualifiers.

Sampling stations provided numerous data normalization challenges. Due to the variety of data sources, numerous station naming conventions and coordinate systems were encountered. Station names were not usable in efforts to group all samples collected at a given location because different data sources assigned different names to common sampling stations. Conversely, common station names were assigned to a variety of different sampling locations by various organizations. In addition, stations associated with sample records common to multiple datasets were often found to have slightly different coordinates in the separate datasets. These discrepancies were introduced by the variety of conventions and electronic storage formats used by various data source organizations. The GIS was used to project all coordinates into a standard geographic projection (UTM, NAD 27 meters). Coordinate data are stored in the stations table both in their original form and in the standard projection. The standard projection was used for all mapping and analysis tasks. Stations were normalized for data grouping and comparison in the GIS using spatial buffers. For station counting purposes, all stations within two meters of each other were considered to be the same station and assigned a common buffer identifier. These identifiers are of long integer data type and were written to a field in the stations table by a GIS macro. For duplicate data identification across multiple datasets, a 100-meter buffer was also generated for each station. These buffer identifiers were used to identify stations for all data analysis tasks.

Station type information is used by data queries to group and select data. For example, a query may use station type as a selection criterion to retrieve all data associated with river sampling stations. Some source datasets contained a data field indicating sampling location type, such as river, soil boring, well, seep, etc. This data was translated to lookup codes during the import process and stored in the stations table and station type lookup table. With other datasets the station type may not be explicitly

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_C l_Chem.doc C | -4 stated in the source files, but may be readily inferred from text describing the station, sample media reported, or station X-Y location. For example, stations associated with groundwater samples were inferred to be wells. A location type table in the database stores sampling location type information for all stations. The table contains a record corresponding to every station record in the stations table. Location type codes are assigned in this table for each station after a dataset is imported. A code source field indicates whether the location type code was based on data in the original source file, or inferred based on other information such as station description or X-Y location.

Each station in the database was assigned a summary zone, or reach designation, in order to group data by spatial location within the drainage basin. Summary zones exist for distinct reaches of the Arkansas River, as well as its major tributaries and surrounding upland areas. Stations in a dataset were assigned to summary zones after the dataset was imported. Summary zone assignments were based primarily on station location, but other data such as textual descriptions of sampling locations were used to support zone assignments. This auxiliary data was given greater weight when station coordinates were of questionable quality.

Analytical result values are stored in the results table in the units of measure reported in the original data files. Records in the results table are linked to records in the parameters table. The parameters table stores the original parameter names and units as reported by the data provider. In order to readily query and compare values from different data sources a system of standard analyte names and units is necessary. For example, a source dataset may report values for 'Dissolved Zinc' in micrograms per liter. Another source dataset may report values for 'Zn, D' in milligrams per liter. To facilitate comparison of this data, the parameters table contains Standard Analyte, Standard Unit, and Multiplier data fields used to normalize data to common names and units. Records for the example given would be assigned a Standard Analyte of 'Zinc, Dissolved' and a Standard Unit of 'mg/L'. Records having original units of milligrams per liter would be given ' 1' as a multiplier, while records originally reported as micrograms per liter would be assigned a multiplier of '0.001'. The standard analyte and unit fields, when used in conjunction with the product of the original value and the multiplier, produce a normalized dataset. This approach is used by all saved queries that extract results information for comparison and analysis. A similar approach is used with sample depth data. Values are stored in their original units, and a standard unit and multiplier are used to normalize values.

Many datasets contained a variety of qualifiers associated with result values. During dataset pre- processing and import these qualifiers were put into one of three data fields depending on whether they were assigned by an analytical lab, data validator, or other or unknown source. After data were imported to the database each record was assigned an additional qualifier code. This code serves as a master

J:\OI0004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_CI_Chem.doc C[-5 qualifier and groups all other qualifiers into several basic categories for data comparison and analysis purposes. Records were classified as either unqualified, non-detect, or rejected.

Analysis Sub-Datasets

Additional data processing steps were performed to prepare the data for use in a data analysis program. These steps include setting flags to indicate duplicate records (records with the same location, date, parameter, and analytical result, arising from obtaining partially overlapping datasets from multiple agencies or sources), statistical outliers, and assigning codes to indicate the appropriate analysis time period and flow regime (high flow, low flow) for each record. This additional processing and all subsequent data analysis were performed in a separate database file. This was done to keep file sizes manageable and to keep a clear distinction between raw data and the processed data used for statistical analysis and interpretations. The database is a raw data repository that preserves data as it was received from the data provider to the extent possible. The data analysis database file accesses the tables in the raw data repository through live links, and uses queries to create static copies of the appropriate data for charting and statistics purposes. It is in these copied tables that all interpretive flags and codes are assigned. A set of queries and Visual Basic programs in the data analysis file are used to refresh the analysis tables as needed. The refresh process deletes the current analysis table, queries the data repository and constructs a new analysis table containing the appropriate data, then runs a series of procedures that update the several "flag" fields in the table.

Analysis tables are created for each of the following media: Surface Water, Groundwater, Sediment, Lowland Soil, and Upland Soil. The queries that create these tables limit the data to include only complete and valid records for the media and parameters of interest. Records lacking coordinates are excluded, as are those describing field duplicate and lab QA/QC samples. Records flagged as rejected or otherwise invalid by the data validator are also excluded. The queries that create the analysis tables normalize all parameters to standardized parameter names, and convert numerical values to consistent units of measure so that they may be readily compared.

Duplicate Flags

The database is a compilation of numerous source datasets from numerous data providers. Many of these datasets originate from databases maintained by public agencies or from consultants working with these public datasets. Thus, there can be considerable overlap between datasets received from different data providers. Datasets were added to the database in their entirety, no effort was made to exclude records that were already included in the database from a previously added data source. This was

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_CI_Chem.doc C|-6 done to preserve datasets intact and avoid difficulties in identifying areas of overlap induced by rounding and other formatting performed by individual dataset providers. As a preferred alternative to identifying and excluding duplicated records prior to import, a Visual Basic program was developed to identify duplicated records during the analysis table refresh process.

Each analysis table contains a field that stores a duplicate flag for each record. This flag's value is initialized to '0' for all records at the start of the duplicate flagging program. Then the program creates a temporary table containing all unique combinations of normalized sample location, date, analyte, and value entries from the subject table. The program steps through the records in this temporary table. For each record in the temporary table the program retrieves all records from the subject table matching the record's normalized sample location, date, analyte, and value. If only one matching record is retrieved, the record's duplicate flag is left as 0 and the program moves on to the next record in the temporary table. If more than one matching record is retrieved, the program steps through the matching records and increments their duplicate flags from 1 to n (the number of duplicates). When the program has finished running, a duplicate-free recordset may be retrieved by selecting only records having a duplicate flag of 0 or 1.

Time Flags

For data analysis purposes, the time continuum is split into three periods corresponding to historical events influencing water flow and quality. The annual cycle is also split into periods of high and low flow. The dates of these period breaks are stored in a table in the analysis database (illustrated below). Each analysis data table contains data fields that store a period value and flow flag for each record. A series of procedures are run to update the period and flow flags based on each record's sample date when an analysis data table is refreshed.

Ty.' .•:' •';-''•.'.'." .:-'-:-:"-''-'-'- -•••/••', •••-,'' : High Flow 5/1 /XX 8/14/XX

Low Flow 8/15/XX 4/30/XX

Period 1 1/1/1900 5/31/81

Period 2 6/1/81 1/31/92

Period 3 2/1/92 Present Date

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_Cl_Chem.doc C.-7 Non-Detects

Records in the analysis tables having qualifiers indicating non-detect results were updated to one- half of the reported value (the reported value for non-detect records is typically the detection limit). This operation is performed by a Visual Basic procedure when the analysis tables are refreshed.

Outlier Flags

Outlier flagging is performed on the surface water data analysis table. Data records which are determined to be statistical outliers are flagged with an 'O' in the qualifier field. The outlier flagging procedure begins by resetting all qualifiers in the surface water data analysis table to the qualifier value stored in the main data repository (clears all outlier flags). The program then retrieves lists of the summary zone groups and analytes to be considered in the outlier test. Currently the program considers data from Arkansas River reaches 0-4 (grouped collectively as Ark R) and the Cal Gulch and Cal Gulch at Ark Riv zones (grouped together as Cal Gulch). Analytes considered include dissolved and total Cadmium, Copper, Lead, and Zinc, as well as Hardness. The program steps through all possible zone- analyte combinations. For each iteration, the procedure retrieves a recordset consisting of all data records for the current zone and analyte. It then calculates the mean and standard deviation of this recordset. The procedure then finds all records within the recordset having values greater than or equal to the mean plus four standard deviations (one-sided test), and updates the qualifier field to 'O' for these records. (It should be noted that data from all dates and flow periods are considered together in the outlier tests. The recordsets used in the outlier tests are defined solely by summary zone and analyte.)

Table Value Standards

Acute and chronic Colorado Table Value Standards (TVS) were calculated for dissolved cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc for selected river reaches. These calculations were performed by a Visual Basic program and the resulting values were stored in a table in the analysis database file. The program begins by creating lists of all analytes, river reaches, time periods, and flow periods for which standards are to be calculated. It then steps through all possible combinations of analyte, reach, time period, and flow period. During each iteration of the loop, the program calculates an average hardness value for use in the standards calculations, then calculates the acute and chronic standards based on the average hardness, and counts the number of records exceeding each of the standards for the current analyte-reach-time-flow scenario.

J:\OI0004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_Cl_Chem.doc C|-8 Average hardness values are calculated for each scenario using available hardness data applicable to the scenario's reach, time period, and flow period. Hardness, Total Hardness, and Calculated Hardness values were used, while Carbonate and Non-Carbonate Hardness values were not included. For TVS calculation purposes, average hardness values less than 25 mg/L or greater than 400 mg/L were reset to 25 and 400 mg/L, respectively.

Charting and Statistics

The data analysis database file includes a set of forms that provide a graphical user interface for selecting and charting data. This interface provides users with a means to select specific data subsets based on sample media, river reach, analyte, flow period, and time period criteria, and display charts and statistical summaries of the selected data. Two types of charts are available in the program. One is a time-series chart displaying a parameter's values for a single reach over time. The other allows comparison between reaches by displaying a parameter's minimum, maximum, and average values for multiple reaches.

A maximum series-axis value is specified in the database for each parameter that is plotted on the time-series charts. These values are used by the charting program to limit the scale of the vertical axis so that all charts produced for a given parameter have the same scale and are readily comparable. Data points that exceed the chart limit are displayed in a table below the chart.

There are several display options for the time-series charts that may be toggled on and off using check boxes on the user interface. Data points representing non-detect analysis results may be displayed with a different symbol than results greater than the detection limit. Acute and chronic Table Value Standards may be displayed on the chart as horizontal lines at the standard levels. This option is available when the 'High Flow' and/or 'Low Flow' options are selected, but is disabled when the 'All Flow' option is chosen because Table Value Standards only exist for the high and low flow divisions of the annual flow cycle. An option is available to display period breaks on the chart when the 'All Periods' sample date option is chosen. Period breaks appear on the charts as vertical lines marking the division points between the three data analysis periods.

J:\Ol0004\Task3 -SCR\Appendices\App_Cl_Chem.doc Cp9 Data Sources for the Upper Arl Site Characterization Database Record Count by and Data Source

Source Query: JA010004VTask 2 - Data Acquisltion\DataAnalysis\LNRD_DataAnalysis.mdb - p,ryOa/aSrc_Report Media ..'.jeiBA n ooqln g -M S

Tola) "publish "••.Dale Result

: : :

'SoifceOrgartotkih .•;•„;' -Autria '?•': MJn Date'" Max Date 'Count- • V -; ' 1 bate . •. .' RleName • Entered: IrV - Un'sp'eclfle d Wate r LNRD # MS-Mln e Soli d Wast SO - Sediment' ' SL- . Soi l Vi \ ••-''.,. ' •' TS - Tissu e . VG-VSfletallo n ; ' i 1 : LNRD-001 Surface Water Quality Data for the USFWS Arkansas River Database- USFWS 07/01/94;samples.data 12/14/99 01/01/01 01/21/94 118477 118477J Arkansas River il1994 l t LNRD-006 !Cal Gulch Water Quality Data MSSI Cal Gulch WQ Data IISSI 09/29/99) mfg.mdb 01/19/00 11/11/11 11/20/98 2886. i 16698 LNRD-010 Surface Water Quality Data from CSU- CSU-AEHS IWator Quality data (1968- -Clements (CSU) 1 1/05/OOjcsuarkwq.mdb 03/07/00 11/08/39 10/13/99 1664 \ 1664 AEHS (1968-1996) I 1996) ! LNRD-011 Colorado River Watch Dala - Surface CDOW CDOW-RiverWatch data CDOW 01/24/OOiarkansas.dbf 02/09/00 06/26/22 04/11/99 44174 " 44174 Water i j . ... ] LNRD-015 i Division of Wildlife Water Quality Data CSU - Department of DOW WQ and Discharge iCIements (CSU) 01/13/99JH2O.CDOW.data.w 03/23/00 j 09/17/96 09/02/99 4162 4162 Fishery and Wildlife Dala jb3 Biology L LNRD-016 Soil and Vegetation -Plant Cover. CSU [1986/1987 Soil and Keammerer Soil and Vegetation 03/03/00 08/1 5/87 08/15/87 200 200 Production. Tissue & Soil Metal j [vegetation Metals Dala JData.xls Concentrations ! LNRD-017 1996 Upper Arkansas Soil Data ! URS Operating 1996 Upper Arkansas Soil EPA/URS 02/10/97 96soildata.mdb 05/22/00 09/12/96 12/10/96 6938 6938 j - Services (EPA) Data LNRD-020 1997 Upper Arkansas Soils Data JURS Operating ; 1997 Upper Arkansas Soil EPA/URS 01/16/98j97soildata.mdb 05/22/00 j 10/17/97 10/17/97 3429 3429 [Services (EPA) iDala-URS f LNRD-021 Upper Arkansas 1998 Monitoring Well URS Operating Upper Arkansas 1998 EPAAJRS. |98 Monitoring Well 05/04/00 ! 06/09/93 11/09/98 784 768 Data Services (EPA) Monitoring Well Dala Walton-Day lData.mdb i 1 (USGS) i LNRD-023 i Upper Arkansas 1999 Monitoring Well URS Operating Upper Arkansas 1999 EPA/URS !1999weHs.mdb;T- 05/04/00 03/22/99 10/29/99 2409 2361 i ! I 48; JData Services (EPA) Monitoring Well Data ILocations-2.mdb LNRD-024 NURE Hydrogeochemical and Stream JUSGS NURE Stream Sediment Data USGS http://greenwood.cr. 03/22/00 04/07/76 09/19/79 18169 16169 ! Sediment Data usgs.gov/pub/open- file-reports/ofr-97- 0492/state/nure_co .htm

LNRD-OM USGS Flow data and field parameters JUSGS Flow and f eld parameter data USGS 06/13/00 04/01/10 12/19/99 147897 147897 I 1 j I LNRD-030 ! 1994 & 1995 REMAP data ~1EPA J1994& 1995 REMAP data EPA ;s_rockies.remap.m 06/14/00 09/12/94 09/05/95 141 42 99 i idb I j LNRD-031 STORET groundwater and surface water EPA jSTORETdata EPA 02/11/00, 02/1 5/00 06/16/06 03/26/98" 203157 8465 319 i 194341" 32 i data j i I I i LNRD-033 Seppi Ranch Soils - Swyers Data {Colorado Mountain jSeppi Ranch Soils - Swyers ! Swyers (CMC) 04/26/90 05/25/00 10/01/89 10/01/89 148 148J i College JData Levy Thesis Data - Plant and Soils JCSU Metal Contamination in Soils David Levy 06/01/89; 04/09/01 06/01/88 06/01/88 915 795 120j and Plant Near Leadville (CSU) i __| LNRD-038 Seppi Ranch Soils - Colby Data Colorado Mountain iSeppi Ranch Soils - Colby Colby (CMC) 04/25/39 05/22/00 10/01/98 10/01/98 100 100 i College [Data LNRD-039 jGroundwaterS Surface Water Data -SeppiiWWL JWW&L Groundwaler & JWWL 02/02/90 06/22/00 10/25/89 11/02/89 184 37 147 'Ranch j i Surface Water Data LNRD-041 Selected sediment and surface water data iUSGS Selected hydrologic data for Kimball, 03/01/95J 04/05/01 | 10/01/88 05/01/89 879 417 462 - for the upper Arkansas River basin, i the upper Arkansas River CaDender and Colorado. 1988-89 i basin. Colorado. 1986-89 Axtmann I (USGS) LNRO-044 iGeochemical and Lead Isotope data for USGS Geocnemical and Lead S.E. Church 01/01/93; 08/14/00 07/01/93 07/01/93 680! 6 368 304 j sir earn and lake sediments Isotope data for stream and (USGS) j i lake sediments I i LNRD-049 [Total Zinc in 3 SW station, 1992-1997 BOR. Denver CO Relationships Between Metals Nelson and 03/13/99 03/06/01 07/07/92 10/07/97 72 72 and Hyporheic Invertebrate 'Richard (BOR) Community Structure 1 i - i I i Table C,-l J:\010004VTask 3...\Appendices\App_C1_Tbl_1o3_dataSources.xls Page 1 of2 10/22/2002 Data Sources for the Upper A Site Characterization Database Record Count b and Data Source

: v • T • -•; •'.: '• '.';.• '"''•' ' •111 I tSs Total . Result & ••K

MinDaUr Max Date. 1 • *: FSeNanw /.Entered • Count l/y - Unspecifie d Wate r UNRD# OW-Groundwaler -' . j MS-Mih e Soli d Waste . ..••• • •• ; . ''"..' I YG - Vegetatio n '"•'.-, ] SD-'Sedlm'antri; . • •-.''••Date:'/ SW - Surfac e Wate r ^f* LNRD-050 USGS 1992-96 Soil. SW & GW data USGS Effects of Fluvial Tailings on Katie Walton- 01/01/00 WRIR99-4273.mdb 08/02/00 09/01/92 09/01/92 2376 1372 i 52 952'; Soils and Surface and Day et al. Groundwater- Upper (USGS) i i Arkansas River, Colorado, 1992-96 LNRD-051 Resurrection Database - Groundwater, Shepherd-Miller Resurrection Database i Shepherd-Miller jdbforMFG.mdb 07/31/00 04/26/94 09/16/99 70124 8021 288 77 61738 i Pore Water. Sediment and Surface Water Dala LNRD-052 OU4 Cal Gulch Eco RA S. M. Sloller Screening-Level Ecological JS.M. Sloller 12/10/96 02/27/01 01/07/94 10/04/95 3720 1858~ I*. Risk Assessment OU4 California Gulch Superfund : Site i LNRD-054 USFWS Sediment Samples (1998) USFWS USFWS Sediment Samples jUSFWS 05/01/98 SEDIMENT • 04/25/01 i 07/30/96 05/14/98 2070 2070 pooled.xls i i LNRDJ055 CDOW/BOR/CSU 1995-1999 WQ Data CDOW CDOW/BOR/CSU 1995-1999 Davies, 1 1/01/01 [Reportdbf i 06/15/01 06/05/96 10/01/99 11641 11641 from CDOW WQ Data from CDOW Clements, et al. ! LNRD-057 BLM July 2000 Soil/Sediment Data (2nd BLM BLM July 2000 Soil/Sediment BLM j 03/07/01 07/06/00 ' 08/02/00 1088 | 1088 import, private land data) Data i | ! ! LNRD-058 .2000 Monitoring Well Data URS Operating Upper Arkansas 2000 EPA/URS 2000 Monitoring j 12/06/00 06/15/00 08/30/00 2032 2032 Services (EPA) Monitoring Well Data Well Data.mdb | ! r LNRD-060 2000 spring/storm SW data, OU6/Cal EPA - Mike Holmes 2000 Spring/Storm Surface CDM Federal 01/18/OOitblChemRes cal gul j 04/05/01 05/04/00 08/21/00 3341 3341 j Gulch, collected by Colorado Mountain Water Data - OU6/Cal Gulch !OU 6TEMPjds, College IblChemResTEMP. ids LNRD-061 Surface soils data - 0 to 2 inches Walsh Surface soils data - 0 to 2 jwaisri 03/15/00;mfgsails.mdb 04/24/01 j 05/29/86 09/08/97 4087 4087 ! inches ! i i LNRD-062 Ecology & Environment, Surface and Ecology & Surface and Groundwater {Ecology & 06/20/83! 06/18/01 02/15/83 02/21/83 362 226 n 136 Groundwater data. Cal Gulch/Arkansas Environment, Inc. data, Cal Gulch/Arkansas Environment, River area (1983) River area Inc. LNRD-063 1995-1996 Sediment data from CSU CSU 1995-1996 Sediment data Clements (CSU) sedimenLHarrahy.x 06/19/01 08/10/95 08/23/96 90! 90 from CSU tS i ! i LN"RD-664 USGS Semi-Annual Water Level Data USGS j USGS Upper Arkansas Basin JMike Haley 06/21/01 table.upark 06/26/01 08/05/63 11/03/00 1234 1234 i Semi-Annual Well Network j(USGS) (Water Levels 196 3-2000) i i LNRD-065 GW data for well at Dr. Smiths residence URS/EPA Preliminary EPA GW data for EPA/URS DocsWellCombine 07/25/01 05/07/01 05/07/01 30 30 well at Dr. Smiths residence d.xls

LNRD-068 iCDPHEGW Dala (1984-2001) CDPHE CDPHE GW Data (1984- CDPHE 08/24/01 Metals, dbf, 09/04/01 07/23/84 03/28/01 1003 1003 "" i 2001) Colo_src.dbf

Table Crl J:\010004\Task 3...\Appendices\App_C1_Tbl_1o3_dataSources.xls Page 2 of2 10/22/2002 : Arkansas River Outliers for Surface Water •: o-',.V i 'i ' , ";;£. :'/' •j l|||jjf ||| p;f|;;if ..'•.:':'.' .'I ••!.*';•'• ,..*.. 1< . to t - . •• StandandYatutf' - HI ReauHIp- - -' : • ArkRO ArkR Period 1 Lead, Total 11/13/1970 L 0.4 mg/L 106309 934 0.022 0.077 0.33 LNRD-001 ArkRO ArkR Period 3 Copper, Dissolved 5/3/1995 H 0.056 mg/L .143001 913 0.005 0.008 0.037 LNRD-006 ArkRI ArkR Period 2 Cadmium. Total 5/8/1991 H 0.043 mg/L 394197 1086 0.003 0.01 0.043, LNRD-010 ArkRI ArkR j Period 2 Cadmium, Total 9/11/1991 L 0.251 mg/L jj 44074 1086 0.003 0.01 I 0.04~3I~LNRD-006 ArkRI ArkR Period 2 Cadmium, Total 9/12/1991 L 0.0852 mg/L 144080 1086 0.003 6.01 6.043 LNRD-006 ArkRI ArkR Period 2 Copger. Dissolved 11/19/1986) L 0.04 mg/L 385142 913 0.005 0.008 L 0.037 LNRD-031 ArkRI ArkR Period 2_^Copper, Total 3/25/19851 L 0.189 mg/L L 132687 1033 0.012 0.032 0.14 LNRD-006 ArkRI ArkR Period 2 Copper, Total 5/8/1991 i H 0.3~63~ mg/L j 394198 1033 0.012 0.032 0.14 LNRD-010

ArkRI ArkR Period 2 Copper, Total 9/11/1991 L t 0.687 mg/L 144076 1033 0.012 0.032 0.14 LNRD-006 ArkRI ArkR Period 2 Copper, Total 9/12/1991 L 0.333 mg/L 144062 1033 0.012 0.032 0.14 LNRD-006 r ArkRI ArkR Period 2 Lead, Total 3/25/1985 L 0.439 mg/L 132689 934 0.022 0.077 0.33 LNRD-006 ArkRI ArkR Period 2 Lead, Total 9/11/1991 Ll 1.2 mg/L 144077 934 0.022 6.077 0.33 LNRD-006 r ArkRI ArkR Period 2 Lead. Total 9/12/1 99"l Lj 1.09 mg/L 144083 934 0.022 0.077 0.33 LNRD-006 ArkRI ArkR Period 2 Zinc, Dissolved 2/16/1983 L 1 2.9 mg/L 747057 960 0.296 0.532 2.424 LNRD-062 ArkRI ArkR Period 2 Zinc, Dissolved 3/25/1985 L 2.97 mg/L [ 132690 960 0.296 0.532 2.424 LNRD-006 ArkRI ArkR Period 2 Zinc, Dissolved 11/19/1986 L mg/L j 385147 960 0.296J 0.532 2.424 LNRD-031 ArkRI ArkR Period 2 Zinc, Dissolved 5/26/1987, H 2.43 mg/L j 132641 960 0.296 0.532 2.424 LNRO-006 ArkRI ArkR Period 2 Zinc, Total 5/8/1991 H 8.624 mg/L 394199 1132 0.574 1.735 7.514, LNRD-010 ArkRI ArkR Period 2 Zinc. Total 6/27/1991 H 20.7 mg/L ! 168017 1132 0.574 1.735 7.514 J.NRp-011 ArkRI ArkR 1Period 2 Zinc, Total 9/11/1991 L 37.9 mg/L 144079 1132 0.5741 1.735 7.514 LNRD-006 1 1 ArkRI ArkR Period 2 Zinc, Total 9/12/1991 L 15.3 mg/L J 44085 1132 0.574 1.735 7.514 LNRD-006 ArkRI ArkR _, Periods Cadmium, Dissolved 5/6/1993 H 0.03 mg/L 149774 947 0.002 0.004 0.018 LNRD-01 1 ArkRI ArkR Period 3 Cadmium. Dissolved 5/17/1993 H 0.029 mg/L 149841 947 0.002 0.004 0.018 LNRD-011 ArkRI ArkR Period 3 Cadmium, Dissolved 5/22/1993 H 0~017 mg/L 149868 0.002 0.004 0.018 LNRD-011 ArkRI ArkR Period 3 Cadmium, Dissolved 5/24/1993 H 0.017 mg/L 149885 947 0.002 0.004 0.018 LNRD-011 ArkRI ArkR Period 3 Cadmium, Dissolved 5/6/1998 H 0.056 mg/L 394326 947 0.002 0.004 0.018 LNRD-010 ArkRI ArkR Period 3 Cadmium, Dissolved 5/4/2000 H 0.054 mg/L 722707 947 0.002 0.004 0.018 LNRD-060 1 ArkRI ArkR Periods Cadmium, Dissolved 5/11/2000 H , 6.027 mg/L 722659 947 0.002 6.004 0.018 LNRD-060 1 ArkRI ArkR Period 3 Cadmium, Total 5/6/1998 H 0.056 mg/L 394327 1086 0.003 0.01 0.043 LNRD-010 ArkRI ArkR Period 3 Cadmium, Total 5/4/2000 H 0.061 mg/L 722708 1086 0.003 0.01 0.043 LNRD-060 ArkRI ArkR J Period 3 Copper, Dissolved 5/6/1893 j H 0.068 mg/L ri49776 913 0.005 0.008 0.033] LNRD-01 1 ArkRI ArkR Period 3 Copper, Dissolved 5/17/1993 H ' 6.067 mg/L 149843 913 6.005 0.008 0.037 LNRD-01 1 ^kR1 ArkR Periods Copper, Total 5/6/1993 H 0.156 mg/L 149777 1033 0.012 0.032 0.14 LNRD-01 1 B(R1 ArkR Periods Copper, Total 5/11/1993 H 0.155 mg/L 149809 1033 0.012 0.032 0.14 LNRD-01 1 RrkR1 ArkR Period 3 Copper, Total 5/15/1993 H i 0.145 mg/L 149831 1033 0.012 0.032 0.14 LNRD-011 ArkRI ArkR Period 3 Hardness 5/6/1993 H 414 mg/L 149788 r 845 88.374 45.144 268.95 LNRD-011 ArkRI ArkR Period 3 Hardness | 9/17/1996 L 276 mg/L 465199 845 88.374 45.144 268ll5 LNRD-015 ArkRI ArkR Period 3 Hardness 11/20/1998 L 334 mg/L 465341 845 88.374 45.144 268.95 LNRD-01 S ArkRI ArkR Periods Hardness 2/10/1999 L 292.8 mg/L 465579 845 88.374 45.144 268.95 LNRO-015 ArkRI ArkR Periods Lead, Dissolved 5/11/2000 H 0.78 mg/L . 722667 837 0.004 0.034 0.14 LNRD-060 ArkRI ArkR Period 3 Lead, Total 5/15/1993 H 0.347 mg/L 149834 934 0.022 0.077 0.33 LNRD-011 ArkRI ArkR Period 3 Lead, Total 5/11/2000 H 0.59 mg/L 722668 934 0.022F 0.077 0.33 LNRD-060 ArkRI ArkR ,Period3 Zinc, Dissolved 5/1/1993 H 4.9 mg/L 149772 960 0.296 0.532 2.424 LNRD-01 1 ArkRI ArkR Period 3 Tine, Dissolved 5/6/1993 H 7.45 mg/L 149789 960 0.296 0.532 2.424 LNRD-011 ArkRI ArkR Periods Zinc, Dissolved 5/9/1993 H 3.45 mg/L 149806 960 0.296 0.532 2.424 LNRD-011 ArkRI Ark R iPeriod 3 Zinc, Dissolved 5/17/1993 H I 4.76 mg/L 149855 960 0.296, 0.532 2.424 LNRD-011 ArkRI ArkR Period 3 Zinc, Dissolved 5/22/1993 H 3.05 mg/L 149883 960 0.296 0.532 2.424 LNRD-01 1 ArkRI ArkR Period 3 Zinc, Dissolved 5/24/1993 j H 2.77 mg/L 149900 960 6.296 0.532 2.424 LNRD-011 ArkRI ArkR Period 3 Zinc, Dissolved 5/8/1996 H 2.71 mg/L ' 394297 960 0.296 0.532 2.424 LNRD-010 ArkRI ArkR Period 3 Zinc, Dissolved 3/13/1997j L 2.58 mg/L 150672 960 0.296 0.532 2.424 LNRD-01 1

ArkRI ArkR Period 3 Zinc, Dissolved 4/1/1997 t L 2.85 mg_/L , 150689 960 0.296 0.532 2.424 LNRD-011 ArkRI ArkR Periods Zinc, Dissolved 4/22/19971 L 2.51 mg/L 150706 960 0.296I 0.532 2.424I LNRD-011 ArkRI ArkR IPeriod 3 Zinc, Total 5/6/1993 H 7.8 mg/L 149790 1132 0.574' 1.735 7.514 LNRD-011 ArkR2 ArkR Period 1 Hardness 5/18/1966 H 476.05883 mg/L ^226799 845 88.374 45.144 268.95 LNRD-031 ArkR2 ArkR jPeriod 1 Hardness 9/13/1966 L ! 421. 64868 mg/L 226810 845 88.374J 45.144 268.95 LNRD-031 ArkR2 ArkR Period 1 Hardness 1/18/1967 L {300.08178 mg/L 226821 845 88.3741 45.144 268.95 LNRD-031 Ark R2 jArkR Period 2 Cadmium, Total 9/11/1991 L 0.0964 mg/L 125305, 1086 0.003! 0.01 0.043 LNRD-006 ArkR2 ArkR Period 2 Cadmium. Total 9/11/1991 i L 0.0587 mg/L 125311 1086 0.003] 0.01 0.043 LNRD-006 ArkR2 ArkR Period 2 {Copper, Total 9/11/1991^ L i 0.254 mg/L 125307 1033 0.012] 0.032 0.14 LNRD-006 ArkR2 ArkR~ 'Period 2 Copper, Total 9/11/1991 L 6.213' mg/L f 1253 13 1033 6.0121 6.032 0.14 LNRD-006 ArkR2 |ArkR Period 2 Lead, Total 9/11/1991 L 0.813 mg/L 125308 934 0.022J 0.077 0.331 LNRO-006 ArkR2 ArkR Period 2 Lead, Total 9/11/1991 L 0.452 mg/L 125314 934 0.022 0.077 0.33 LNRD-006 ArkR2 ArkR Period 2 Zinc, Total 9/11/1991 L 23.4 mg/L 125310 1132 0.5741 1.735 7.514J LNRD-006

ArkR2 ArkR Period 2 Zinc, Total 9/11/1991 L 11.7 mg/L 125316 1132 0.574 1.735 7.5_t4J LNRD-006 ArkR2 ArkR Period 3 Copper, Dissolved 8/30/1995! L 0.078 mg/L 125340 913 0.005 0.008 0.037 LNRD-006 ArkR2 _j ArkR Period 3 Hardness 4/8/1999 j L 314 mg/L 466106 845 88.374 45.144 268.95, LNRD-015 ArkR3 j ArkR Periods Cadmium, Dissolved 5/6/1 998 _{ H_ 0.03 mg/L 394497 947 0.002 0.004 0.018 LNRD-010 Urk Riv nr Cal Gul (AR2) ArkR Period 3 ICadmium, Dissolved "5/lT/2o66"i"H 0.026 mg/L | 722609 947 0.0021 0.004 0.018 LNRD-060 Irk Riv nr Cal Gul (AR2) [ArkR Period 3 Lead. Dissolved 5/1 1/2000 | H ^ 0.57 mg/L JJ22617 837 0.004 0.034 0.14 LNRD-060 Wrk Riv nr Cal Gul (AR2) !Ark R Period 3 Lead, Total 5/1 1/2000 I H 0.65 mg/L | 722618 934 0.022! 0.077 0.33 LNRD-060 |Ark Riv nr Cal Gul (AR2) JArk R Period 3 iZlnc. Total 6/21/1998! L 7.654 mg/L ! 464917 1132 0.574: 1.735 7.514 LNRD-015 Table C,-2 J:\010004\Task 3-SCR\Appendices\App_C1_Tbl_2o3_outliers.xls Page I of 2 California Gulch Outliers for Surface Water

L : 1 "' •- ' . "* '• ,'• ', O^l'^y: •,".'. .1 ..;; * • ' ' O .'; / /-'f'' . -•f : V f .. - .' •••• : -.» '• :'.f., .'•'. x>: ':!£•':;••; • •'•• •' . •' . • j- .3 ,. .::..' : mm 'at. V y'.-'.u:V'!',-' |-|,; ;-'-. '-' -.,•;>! .^'. ,.'.pls> .!•'§./: ; ••' : ''••$-$* >vl *. . "fa •!'•" V :i '',. co''. ''.- '". •••>!••? ;r>'*y|>-':ft.f :'-nt : -. (^ : '.'s v' Cal Gulch Oregon Gl Period 2 Zinc, Dissolved 6/12/1991 H 644 mg/L 137765 835J 29.08 90.1 1| 389.52 LNRO-006 1 Cal Gulch Oregon Gl [Period 2 Zinc, Total 5/2/1991 H 1110 mg/L 13B019 822 32.421 96.319L 417.697 LNRD-006 Cal Gulch Oregon Gl Period 2 Zinc, Total 6/12/1991 H 634 mg/L 137766 822 "32.421 96.319 417.697 LNRD-006 Cal Gulch Oregon Gl Period 2 Zinc. Total 7/24/1991 H 559 mg/L 1377751 822 32.421 96.3191 417.697 LNRD-006 Cal Gulch Cal Gulch Periods Cadmium, Dissolved 5/8/1996 H 37.9 mg/L 1269381 834 0.149 1.321J 5.433 LNRD-006 Cal Gulch Nugget Gl Period 3 Cadmium, Total 6/15/1995" H 4 mg/L 6822251 8071 0.115 0.2231 1.007 LNRD-051 Cal Gulch Runoff Period 3 Cadmium, Total 6/16/1995 H 1.2 mg/L 6504031 807 0.115 0.223I 1.007 LNRD-051 Cal Gulch Runoff Period 3 Cadmium, Total 5/15/1997 H 1.D2 mg/L 682882 807 0.115 0.223L 1.007 LNRD-051 Cal Gulch jOregon Gl , Period 3 Cadmium. Total 8/29/1997 L 1.1 mg/L 137961 807 0.115 0.223 1.007 LNRD-006 Cal Gulch Oregon Gl [Period 3" Cadmium, Total 9/30/1997 L 1.3 mg/L i 137971 807 0.115 0.223 1.007 LNRD-006 Cal Gulch Parshall Flume lPenod3 Cadmium, Total 5/1 1/2000 H 1.06 mg/L 725728, 807 0.115 0.223! 1.007 LNRD-060 Cal Gulch Stray Horse Gl Period 3 Cadmium, Total 5/1 1/2000 H 1.21 mg/L 725678 807 0.115 0.223 1.007 LNRD-060 Cal Gulch Parshall Flume Period 3 Cadmium, Total 5/11/2000 H i 1.07 mg/L 725778^ 807 0.115 0.223, 1.007 LNRD-060 P Cal Gulch Nugget Gl Period 3 Copper, Dissolved 6/15/1995 H 12 mg/L 682231 844 0.743 2.532j 10.871 LNRD-051 Cal Gulch Nugget Gl Period 3 Copper, Dissolved 6/26/1995 H 29 mg/L 681664 844 0.743 2.532 10.871 LNRD-051 Cal Gulch Nugget Gl Periods Copper, Dissolved 6/6/1996 H 19.5 mg/L 681793 844 0.743 2.532 10.871 LNRD-051 Cal Gulch Nugget Gl Period 3 Copper, Dissolved 5/15/1997 H 11.1 mg/L 6823171 844 0.743 2.532 10.871 LNRD-051 Cal Gulch Runoff feriod 3 Copper, Dissolved 5/15/1997 H 42.5 mg/L 683457 844 0.743 2.5321 10.871 LNRD-051 Cal Gulch Runoff Period 3 Copper, Dissolved 6/3/1997 H 21.5 mg/L 683504 844 0.743 2.532! 10.871 LNRD-051 Cal Gulch ^Nugget Gl Period 3 Copper, Dissolved 6/3/1997 H 16 mg/L 6819731 844 0.743 2.532 10.871 LNRD-051 Cal Gulch Nugget Gl Period 3 Copper, Dissolved 6/3/1 997_ H 15.5 mg/L 682364 844 0.743 2.532 10.871 LNRD-051 Cal Gulch Nugget Gl Period 3 Copper, Dissolved 6/4/1997 H isT " mg/L 682016 844 0.743 ~ ~'2.532 ~ 10.871 LNRD-051 Cal Gulch Nugget Gl Period 3 Copper, Total 6/15/1995 H 12.8 jmg/L 682232 822 0.83 2.508 10.862 LNRD-051 Cal Gulch Nugget Gl Period 3 Copper, Total 6/26/1995 H 28 mg/L 681665 822 0.83 2.508 10.862 LNRD-051 Cal Gulch Nugget Gl Period 3 Copper, Total 6/6/1996 H 18.7 mg/L 681794 622 0.83 2.508 10.862 LNRD-051 Cal Gulch Nugget Gl Period 3 Copper, Total 5/15/1997 H 11.1 mg/L 682318 822 0.83 2.508 10.862 LNRD-051 Cal Gulch Runoff Period 3 Copper, Total 5/15/1997 H 38.7 mg/L 683458 822 0.83 2.508 10.862 LNRD-051 Cal Gulch Runoff Periods Copper, Total 6/3/1997 H 20.3 mg/L 683505 822 0.83 2.508 10.862 LNRD-051 Cal Gulch Nugget Gl Period 3 Copper, Total 6/3/1997 H 16.6 mg/L i 682365 822 0.83 2.508 10.862 LNRD-051 Cal Gulch Nugget Gl Period 3 Copper, Total 6/3/1997 H 16.7 mg/L 681974 822 0.83 2.508 10.862 LNRD-051 Cal Gulch Nugget Gl Period 3 Copper, Total 6M/1997 H 17.8 mg/L 682017 822 0.83 2.508J 10.862 LNRD-051 Cal Gulch Oregon Gl Period 3 Hardness 5/4/1995 H 9620 mg/L as CaCOS 685543 619 594.1 1272.36| 5683.547 LNRD-051 fel Gulch Oregon Gl Period 3 Hardness 7/26/1995 H 8610 mg/L as CaCOS 685844 619 594.1 1272.36! 5683.547 LNRD-051 m\ Gulch Oregon Gl Period 3 Hardness _7/n/1996_ H 6420 mg/L as CaCOS 6860591 619 r 594.1 1 272.36] "5683.547 LNRD-051 Eal Gulch Oregon Gl Period 3 Hardness 7/30/1997" L 7130 mg/L as CaCOS 6861021 619 594.1 1272.36 5683.547 LNRD-051 Cal Gulch Oregon Gl Period 3 Hardness 6/26/1997 H 12400 mg/L as CaCOS 686278 619 594.1 1272.36 5683.547 LNRD-051 Cal Gulch Oregon Gl _ Periods Hardness 8/29/1997 L .-II4..00 . mg/L as CaCOS 686321 619 594.1 1272.36 5683.547 J-NRD-qSJ Cal Gulch Oregon Gl Period 3 Hardness 9/30/1997 L ""12006"" mg/L as CaCOS "686364 ""619 ~" 594."l 1272.36 5683.547 INRD^OSI Cal Gulch Oregon Gl Period 3 Hardness 5/28/1998 H 7960 mg/L as CaCOS 686406 619 594.1 1272.36 5683.547 LNRD-051 Cal Gulch Oregon Gl Period 3 Hardness 9/23/1998 L 14000 mg/L as CaCOS 686449 619 594.1 1272.36 5683.547 LNRD-051 Cal Gulch Oregon Gl Period 3 Lead, Dissolved 6/6/1996 H 697 mg/L 137893, 799 1.995 34.31 139.235 LNRD-006 Cal Gulch Cal Gulch Period 3 Lead, Dissolved 4/30/1997 L 670 mg/L 128965 799 1.995 34.31 139.235 LNRD-006 Cal Gulch Oregon Gl Period 3 Lead. Total 6/6/1996 H 709 mg/L 137895 807 2.927 35.471 144.811 LNRD-006 Cal Gulch Cal Gulch Period 3 Lead, Total 4/30/1997 L 700 mg/L 128967 807 2.927 35.471 144.811 LNRD-006 Cal Gulch Oregon Gl Period 3 Zinc, Dissolved 5/4/1995 H 712 mg/L 137784| 835 29.08 90.11 389.52 LNRD-006 Cal Gulch Oregon Gl Period 3 Zinc, Dissolved 7/26/1995 H 596 mg/L 137854 835 29.08 90.11 3B9.52 LNRD-006 Cal Gulch Oregon Gl Period 3 Zinc, Dissolved 7/11/1996 H 438 mg/L 137908 835 29.08 90.11 389.52 LNRD-006 Cal Gulch Oregon Gl Period 3 Zinc, Dissolved 4/30/1997 L 542 mg/L 137918, 835 29.08 90.11 389.52 LNRD-006 Cal Gulch Oregon Gl Period 3 Zinc, Dissolved 6/26/1997 H 920 mg/L 137958. 835 29.08 90.11 389.52 LNRD-006 Cal Gulch Oregon Gl Periods Zinc, Dissolved 8/29/1997 L 917 mg/L 13796* 835 29.08 90.11 3B9.52 LNRD-006 Cal Gulch Oregon Gl Period 3 Zinc, Dissolved 9/30/1997 L 951 mg/L 137978! 835 29.08 90.11 389.52 LNRD-006 Cal Gulch Oregon Gl Period 3 Zinc, Dissolved J/28/1998 H 638 mg/L 137998 835 29.08 90.11 389.52 LNRD-006 Cal Gulch Oregon Gl Period 3 Zinc, Dissolved 9/23/1998 L 1170 mg/L 138008 835 29.08 90.11 389.52 LNRD-006 Cal Gulch Oregon Gl Periods Zinc. Total 5/4/1995 H 717 mg/L 137785 822 32.421 96.319 417.697 LNRD-006 Cal Gulch Oregon Gl Periods Zinc, Total 7/26/1995 H 590 mg/L 137855 822 32.421 96.3 19J 417.697 LNRD-006 Cal Gulch Oregon Gl Periods Zinc, Total 7/11/1996 H 482 mg/L 137909! 822 32.421 96.3191 417.697 LNRD-006 Cal Gulch Oregon Gl Periods Zinc, Total 4/30/1997 L 504 mg/L 137919J 822 32.421 96.319! 417.697 j-NRD-poe Cal Gulch Oregon Gl Period 3 Zinc, Total 6/26/1997 H 850 mg/L 137959 822 32.421 96.319] 417.697 LNRD-006 Cal Gulch Oregon Gl Period 3 Zinc, Total 8/29/1997 L ~ 817 mg/L T379691 822 32.421 96.319! 417.697 LNRD-006 Cal Gulch 'Oregon Gl Period 3 Zinc, Total 9/30/1997 L 901 mg/L 137979 822 32.421 96.319! 417.697 LNRD-006 Cal Gulch [Oregon Gl Periods Zinc, Total 5/28/1998 H 612 mg/L 137999! 822 32.421 96.319! 417.697 LNRD-006 Cal Gulch Oregon Gl Period 3 Zinc. Total 9/23/1998 L 1100 mg/L 138009 822 32.421 96.319 417.697 LNRD-006 Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv (Cal Gulch Period 2 Cadmium, Total 9/11/1991 ~L """1.53 mg/L 130911 "807] ""b"."iis 0.223 ! 1.007 LNRD-006

Table C,-2 J:\010004\Task 3 • SCR\Appendices\App_C1_Tbl_2o3_oulliers.xls Page 2 of 2 for LNRD.Db 'September 06,2001

WeOName WellDtameter kirfeoeSevabon TOCBevatton TDWdLBTOC lesuftlD IDBor.BGS OB fopSan BGS 3otSan_BGS ^ "arameterCode -rydroUnH Value ropSnd BGS aampllngAgency LabQuaffier BctSnd.BGS OtherQuallner t— MFGStattonName lampllngEvent OwnerName &NameCode rypeCode DwnerCo SampleMeola Jmft OwnerAddress JmitType OriglnalSfteName Date OwneOty *)tes OriglnalAfias nme IFGQuaDty 3wnerSt description DepthNn 3wner2Ip IFGQuaDner OthoOriglnalData wOnvnents DupBcateHag MFGComment DepthUnlt 3ata Source LTTME 'lotes UTMN r'SourctRef OrtglnaLX Origmal_Y GoordlnatESystem CoonlnatePredslon Elevation BevatlonUnlt ParameterCode Bevatlon^edslon StendardAnalyte IJEM_MTR StandardUnlt DWUnft Muttjplier DeiPredskxi Group DataStelD TypeCode Matrix Region TypeCodeSource OriglnalAnalyte Drainage flWatertxxlyCode OrighalCode Waterbody WBCodeSource OrigtnalUnlt SummaryZone SouiceRef LabOifieW SubZone S»a_Buf_ID AnatyUcalMethod Sta_Dup_ID Notes

JourtEOtgantatton Tftte LongTitte Author Contact PubOshDate FDeName DateEntered ContribAgendes OtaoonNo

J:\OI0004\Tnsfc 3 - SCR\Appcndiccs\App_CI.TbL3o3_rclalionship.doc Table C,-3 APPENDIX C2 Biological Data Other Electronic Datasets Biological Data (Other Electronic Datasets)

1) Chadwick and Associates, Inc. 1998. Leadville Aquatic Biological Data. (UARB-00466) CDROM. Worksheets/spreadsheets.

2) Clements, Will. 2000. Tables and Figures, CDOW Fish Data 1994-1999. CDROM. Spreadsheet.

3) Keammerer (via Redente). 2000. 1986/1987 Soil and Vegetation Metals Data. (LNRD-016) CDROM. Spreadsheet.

4) Archuleta,A. 2001. USFWS Dipper Data.

5) Archuleta, A. 2001. USFWS; Small mammal data compiled by USFWS from SM Stoller Corporation 1996 Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessment, Operable Unit No. 4; and Woodward Clyde 1993 Terrestrial Ecosystem Evaluation Report.

J:\OI0004\TASK 3 - SCR\APPENDICES\APP_C2_BIO.DOC C2" 1 APPENDIX C3 Station Lists of Sampling Locations Station Lists Groundwater sampling locations C?» •^iVj ;iv/n;,^j.::^V. tf&£& $,'•'& a ;'':';' 0-, ':;''b'.;, Ilpit!;;'ll liP Vi'-.a'. .S3'' $;§>?_ $*?: "• 1to m^ ;*n-: (/) ,;.rf.N, •;:.:-..;£.;, ,?..,K.*-. •K-g-":. •••' 55 • GW ArkRO LNRD-031 si3914551062114s0 SC00908020DCB 249 616 GW ArkRO LNRD-031 39150110619500 SC00908021CAA 249 558 Sample from a well on undeveloped land bordering the east side of the Arkansas River GW ArkRO LNRD-062 GW205 approximately .5 miles south of the East Fork confluence. 2219 452 GW ArkR1 LNRD-068 133100-001 Lake Fork MHP, Blend Tank 2229 1664 GW ArkR1 LNRD-068 133400-001 Mt Elbert TP, Well #1 2230 178( GW ArkR1 LNRD-031 39124010620270 SC01008004BCD 247 176C GW ArkR1 LNRD-031 391257106203800 SC00908033CCD 247 17K GW ArkR1 LNRD-031 391310106211700 SC00908032DAC 247 165E GW ArkR1 LNRO-064 39131310621100 22264 1635 GW ArkR1 LNRD-006 NW-14 Arkansas River at trailer park 55 1655 GW ArkR1 LNRO-039 NW-14 2034 1668 GW ArkR1 LNRD-051 NW-14 Groundwater monitoring well 2046 1655 GW ArkR1 LNRD-021 UMW01 19954 1767 GW ArkR1 LNRD-023 UMW01 1996 1767 GW ArkR1 LNRD-058 UMW01 2066 1767 GW ArkR1 LNRD-021 UMW02 1995 180C GW ArkR1 LNRD-023 UMW02 1996{ 180C GW ArkR1 LNRD-058 UMW02 2066 1800 GW ArkR1 LNRD-021 UMW03 1995 1831 GW ArkR1 LNRD-023 UMW03 1996 1831 GW ArkR1 LNRD-058 UMW03 2066 1831 GW ArkR1 LNRD-021 UMW04 1995 1844 GW ArkR1 LNRD-023 UMW04 19971 184. GW ArkR1 LNRD-058 UMW04 2066 1844 GW ArkR1 LNRD-021 UMW05 19958 184 GW ArkR1 LNRD-023 UMW05 19971 184 GW ArkR1 LNRD-058 UMW05 20669 184( GW ArkR1 LNRD-023 UMW13 19979 1793 GW ArkR1 LNRD-058 UMW13 20677 1793 GW ArkR1 LNRD-023 UMW14A 19980 1832 GW ArkR1 LNRD-058 UMW14A 20678 1832 GW ArkR1 LNRD-023 UMW14B 19981 183: GW ArkR1 LNRD-058 UMW14B 20679 1832 GW ArkR1 LNRD-023 UMW15A 19982 1355 GW ArkR1 LNRD-058 UMW15A 20680 185E GW ArkR1 LNRD-023 UMW15B 19983 185! GW ArkR1 LNRD-058 UMW15B 20681 185! GW ArkR2 LNRD-064 91137106210102 22263 192? GW ArkR2 LNRD-031 91136106210500 SC01008008ADC 2472 192! GW ArkR2 NRD-031 91153106201200 SC01008C09ABC 2473 1911 Sample collected from a spring pool north of a ranch on County Road 44. south of GW ArkRZ NRD-062 GW201 eadville. 22189 1928 ample collected from a spring pool north of a ranch on County Road 44, south of GW ArkR2 NRD-062 GW202 eadville. 22190 1930 GW ArkR2 NRD-062 GW203 ample from the kitchen tap in a residence, on County Road 44, south of Leadville. 22191 192J GW ArkR2 NRD-065 T1GW 22266 192S GW ArkR2 LNRD-021 MW06 19959 1877 GW ArkR2 NRD-023 MW06 19972 1877 GW ArkR2 NRD-058 MW06 20670 1877 GW ArkR2 NRD-021 MW07 19960 1878 GW ArkR2 NRD-023 MW07 19973 187{ GW ArkR2 NRD-056 MW07 20671 187t GW ArkR2 NRD-021 MW08 19961 1887 GW ArkR2 NRD-023 MW08 19974 1887 GW ArkR2 NRD-058 MW08 20672 1887 GW ArkR2 NRD-021 MW09 19962 189C GW ArkR2 NRD-023 MW09 19975 189C GW ArkR2 NRD-058 MW09 20673 189C GW ArkR3 NRD-031 90746106190200 C01008034DCC 2468 223( GW ArkR3 NRD-064 90746106190200 22262 2240 GW ArkRS NRD-031 90908106174400 C01008026BCD 2470 213C GW ArkR3 NRD-050 WT1-1 20581 2120 GW ArkR3 NRD-050 WT1-2 20582 21-16 GW ArkR3 LNRD-050 WT1-3 20583 21 1£ GW ArkR3 NRD-050 WT1-4 20584 2112 GW ArkR3 NRD-050 WT2-1 20585 2113 GW ArkR3 NRO-050 WT2-2 20586 2111 GW ArkR3 NRD-050 WT2-3 20587 2108 GW ftrkRS NRD-050 WT2-4 20588 107 GW ArkR3 NRD-050 WT2-5 20589 102 GW ftrkR3 NRD-050 WT3-1 20590 106 GW ArkR3 NRD-050 WT3-2 20591 103 GW ArkR3 NRD-050 WT3-3 20592 101 GW &. Moi1'. ."/^t^s.^-y* '".-•s^ •.i-i; .-••*• j- V i'^y^g^&fe *.«> .&:-;<"'Q ,'•"•.;? w 1m^w^^'Xti ^.Si f IV: . .: CD 1: ^ ;ffi ^$&¥? &£•)$••&••&£ •ISlilf .r Q- -''55 * GW ArkR3 LNRD-050 AWT3-6 2059 208! GW A/*R3 LNRD-050 AW74-1 2059 2097 GW ArkR3 LNRD-050 AWT4-2 2059 2095 GW ArkRS LNRD-050 AWT4-3 2059 209C GW ArkR3 UNRD-050 AWT4-4 2059. _208£ GW ArkR3 LNRD-050 AWT4-5 2060 208C UW ArkR3 -NRD-062 GW204 Sample from a dug well behind a residence on South highway 24, Leadville. 2219 225E GW ArkR3 LNRD-021 UMW10 1996 204£ GW ArkR3 .NRD-023 UMW10 1997 204S GW ArkR3 -NRD-058 JMW10 2067 204S GW ArkR3 .NRD-021 UMW11 1996 2053 GW ArkR3 .NRD-023 JMW11 1997 2053 GW ArkR3 LNRD-058 UMW11 2067 2053 GW ArkR3 .NRD-021 JMW12 1996 205£ GW ArkR3 LNRD-023 UMW12 1997 2059 GW ArkR3 .NRD-058 JMW12 2067 2059 GW ArkR3 .NRD-023 JMW16 1998 2084 GW ArkR3 .NRD-058 UMW16 2068 2084] GW ArfcRS .NRO-023 UMW17A 1998 2110] GW ArkR3 .NRD-058 UMW17A 2068 21 id GW ArkR3 .NRD-023 UMW17B 1998 21 10j GW ArkR3 LNRD-058 UMW17B 2068 21 id GW ArkRS LNRD-023 UMW18 1998 21 2J GW ArkRS LNRD-058 UMW18 2068 2123 GW ArkRS LNRD-068 108050-001 Pinon Pines MHP, Well #1 2226 3008 GW ArkR6 .NRD-068 08100-001 Snowy Peaks RV & MHP, Well #1 - Irrigation only 2226 299E GW ArkR6 .NRD-068 08100-002 Snowy Peaks RV & MHP, Well #2 2226 299E GW ArkRS .NRD-068 08100-004 Snowy Peaks RV & MHP, Well #4 (aka NEW WELL) 2227 3007 GW ArkR6 .NRD-068 08100-005 Snowy Peaks RV & MHP, Pipeline for Wells #2 & #4 2227 3014 GW ArkR6 LNRD-068 08350-001 . Buena Vista Correctional Fac., Cistern 2227 3207 GW ArkRS .NRD-068 08450-001 Colleqiate Valley MV. Block Well 2228 3276 GW ArkRS .NRD-068 08550-001 Mt Princeton MHP & RVP, Well #1 2228 3017 GW ArkRS LNRD-068 08800-001 Shangri La TC, Well #1 22291 3761 , GW ArkRS LNRD-068 08950-001 Valley MHP. Blend Tank #1 222S 2993 ' GW ArkRS LNRD-068 208200-001 Chateau Chaparrel CG, Well #1 22306 ^753 GW ArkRS LNRO-068 208200-002 Chateau Chaparral CG. Wall #2 22307 377M GW ArkRS LNRD-064 384445106044801 22256 3746] GW ArkRS NRD-064 384815106084000 22257 3362J GW ArkRS NRD-064 84907106052600 22258 3237 GW ArkRS NRD-031 385154106081700 C01407805BAD 2359 2995 GW ArkRS .NRD-031 85246106093400 C01307831BDB 2364 2934 GW ArkR6 .NRD-064 8524610609340C 22259 2933 GW ArkRS .NRD-064 85747106121201 22260 260C GW ArkRS .NRD-031 90239106155400 C01107931CDA 2442 2389 GW ArkR7 NRD-068 08400-001 esslers MHP. Well #1 / West 22274 5064 GW ArkR7 LNRD-068 08400-003 esslers MHP, Wells #1 and #2 22275 5094 GW ArkR7 NRD-064 83233105594201 22247 501 f GW ArkR7 NRD-031 83240106002100 PIRAL COLD SPRING 1920 4995 GW ArkR7 NRD-064 83246106004601 22248 497! GW ArkR7 NRD-031 83254106010200 A05000931BAB 1924 495( GW ArkR7 .NRD-064 83300106023501 22249 494: GW ArkR7 .NRD-031 83327106022500 A05000825BCC 1936 489< GW ArkR7 NRD-064 383340106040201 22250 4357 GW ArkR7 .NRD-064 83350105594601 22251 484C GW ArkR7 LNRD-031 83417106035100 A05000822DAB 1950 479C GW ArkR7 NRD-031 383439106045900 A05000821AAC 1955 4735 GW ArkR7 NRD-064 83439106045900 22252 4734 GW ArkR7 NRD-064 83451106025901 22253 4706 GW ArkR7 NRD-064 83804106045101 22254 4333 GW ArkR7 NRD-064 84141106061800 22255 4026 GW ArkR8 NRD-068 08200-001 ig Springs TP, Big Spring 22272 517! GW ArkRS NRD-068 08600-001 ountain Vista Villaqe, Pump House Tank 22286 519: GW ArkRS .NRD-031 J2215105412000 A04801231BBD 1766 579£ GW ArkR8 NRD-064 82220105412201 -22236 578: GW ArkRB NRD-031 82310105460800 A04801129ACC 1772 573f GW ArkRB .NRD-064 82414105364501 22237 568! GW ArkRS NRD-064 82504105121901 22240 5633 GW ArkRS NRD-064 82550105494801 22241 5564 GW ArkRS NRD-031 82557105154600 ANON CITY HOT SPRING 1825 556£ GW ArkRS NRD-064 82700105523201 2242 487 GW ArkRS NRD-031 82842105534100 A49-10-20CDO 1842 395 | GW ArkRS MRD-031 52843105534300 A49-10-20CDC 1843 394 " GW ArkRS NRD-031 82849105532500 WISSVALE WARM SPRING A 1844 389 GW ArkRS NRD-031 82849105532800 WISSVALE WARM SPRING F 1845 38E GW ArkRS NRD-031 82849105533300 WISSVALE COLD SPRING 1846 387 GW ArkRS LNRD-031 82907105543600 ELLSVILLE WARM SPRING 1847 355 App_C3_Station Lists.xls Page 2 of 3 10/29/2002 Station Lists Groundwater sampling locations *|-:E K- o 4,:itiM^; S -%$& ^ «^&/'w^ •rU-WV m?W:'::: ';•'. V ft/ $&•$&«£ ^>m %t yt*&$££ *.;i $$ ; i ! v'-*!,:;:; ;>'; ;'W: •- -•'••>.,- t"\"l'; !••.;. "^rMW/S1 - :->:V^ -"•.",,. :, :.'• f^,^'. ^ -"'W-'. • |Pv '•^•/Y-'*^ ,.;';iv •"-.••' v?:!"W^ S&S- \T'^^'\+ ••.:;• ;--^: Si- ^!^0t ^ ; -IS 1 $if '; ,, g £S ,;-.

GW Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv LNRD-062 GW210 Sampled from a tap from the well in a Leadville residence, on Highway 300, Leadville. 22198 1550 GW Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv LNRD-062 GW218 Sampled from a kitchen tap in a Leadville residence, on Highway 300. Leadville. 22206 1555 GW Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv LNRD-023 UMW19 19988 161C GW Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv LNRD-058 UMW19 20686 161C GW EFArkR LNRD-068 133150-001 Mountain View Village West, Tank - no longer in use 22296 123 GW EFArkR LNRD-068 133150-002 Mountain View Village West, Well #1 22297 123 GW EFArkR LNRD-068 133150-004 Mountain View Village West. Common Pipline 22298 123 GW EFArkR LNRD-068 133300-001 Village at East Fork, Well #1 22299 17S GW EFArkR LNRD-068 133600-001 Mountain View Village East, Well #1 22303 132 GW EFArkR LNRD-068 133600-003 Mountain View Village East, Chlorination Facility 22304 129 GW EF Ark R LNRD-068 133800-001 Old Pines, Well #1 22305 121 GW EFArkR LNRD-031 391658106164400 SC00908012ACA 2499 109 GW EFArkR LNRD-031 391756106160000 SC09-79-06BDB 2510 74 GW EFArkR LNRD-031 391802106155000 SC00907906BAD 2511 72 GW EFArkR LNRD-031 391833106142500 SC00807932DBD 2513 57 GW EF Ark R LNRD-031 392144106114800 SC00807910DDD 2516 e Collected sample from a kitchen tap at a Molly Brown Trailer Park residence, north of GW EF Ark R LNRD-062 GW208 Leadville. 22196 163 collected sampled from a tap near the well in a wellhouse after a storage tank in San GW EFArkR LNRD-062 GW214 sabel Trailer Park, Leadville. 22202 148

App_C3_Station Lists.xls Page 3 of 3 10/29/2002 Station Lists Sediment sampling locations 1 .^^fs-;. ^-?-;';^': : ; ; : " ;> |v?t '' '^£'? '•';' ••'«!'•: ; !'.'v-~i:- §!i!IK #M «3 • *'.'J~:'.z;X:Vi :•.(•'• -\ "M J$$!*i&jj •'i.o'-: •'f'Cll'* m^ ••''•^V-:&B-fter!'<'; ,.'•, £ r 1 i : 1 ^i^l^-V: '.•'>,m . • ::'3; v .'•'.;SV•.••. :;;K.^.. . ^|8-<^ ";.-s: sw. •:& .f*-;y£; : w2 -.'-

SampieMediay - ;? ... -•.«.-, v .«'• • ••-• _l •>VJ>^WSvfr. ••-:?•-.• ••- V-.Y'ii~-.-t:>':. :'o >•.••-•.>•' •-"' )*:V'V;.«W$ "ftivfe- rg.. OJ : ;.;>=:^s'^.i":. SD ArkRO LNRD-024 116427 933 36C SO ArkRO LNRD-044 93LV100 2061 1452 Gauging station on Arkansas River immdiately downstream from confluence of East SD ArkRO LNRD-063 AR-1 Fork and Tennessee Creek 2222 338 SD ArkR1 LNRO-063 AR-3 150 m downstream from CG 2222 1637

SD ArkR1 LNRD-051 AR-3A Arkansas River approximately 0.5 miles downstream of confluence with California Gulc 2036 173S SD ArkR1 LNRD-054 AR-B-b Arkansas @Cal Gulch 2210 1616 SD ArkRI LNRD-054 AR-B-b Hatchery Rd. - below Cal Gulch 2210 1616 SD ArkR1 LNRD-041 km-25AR Arkansas River -Below California Gulch 2113 167C SD ArkR2 LNRD-044 93LV102 2061 186E SD ArkR2 LNRD-044 93LV103 2061 1925 SD ArkR2 LNRD-044 93LV121 2063 1993 SD ArkR2 LNRD-054 AR-F Highway 24 Bridge 2210 1985 SD ArkR2 LNRD-054 AR-K Smith Bridge 2211 1922 SD ArkR2 LNRD-041 km-32 Arkansas River -Near Malta 2114 1943 SD ArkR3 LNRD-024 117665 1053 2216 SD ArkR3 LNRD-063 AR-5 At County Road 55 near Kobe 2222 2253 SD ArkR3 LNRD-054 AR-E Old Highway 24 Bridge 2210 203£ SD ArkR3 LNRD-054 AR-I County Road 55 Bridge 2211 223! SD ArkR3 LNRD-030 C0013M ARKANSAS RIVER 2034 2244 SD ArkR4 LNRD-044 93LV120 2063 226C SD ArkRS LNRD-044 93LV119 2063 2316 SD ArkRS LNRD-063 AR-6 2222 2317 SD ArkRS LNRD-054 AR-X-a Ark above Lake Ck. Conn. 2211 232C SD ArkR6 LNRD-024 15844 878 2854 SD Ark R6 LNRD-024 484870 1322 254C SD ArkRS LNRD-024 484871 1322 252C SD ArkR6 LNRD-024 484877 1323 264! SD ArkR6 LNRD-024 484881 13231 277C SD ArkRS NRD-024 484S82 1323 2712 SD ArkRS NRD-024 84883 1324 2744 SD ArkRS NRD-024 85680 1353 2S5E SD ArkRS NRD-044 4ARK105 2063 3621 SD ArkRS NRD-044 4ARK106 20639 3062 SD ArkRS NRD-044 4ARK107 2064 254( SD ArkRS NRD-044 94ARK108 2064 240( SD ArkRS NRD-063 AR-7 Granite 2222 2331 SD ArkRS NRD-063 AR-7b pproximately 3 km downstream from Granite 22226 242; SD ArkRS NRD-063 AR-8 uena Vista 22227 310; SD ArkRS NRD-054 AR-A Granite Bridge 22100 2397 SD ArkRS NRD-054 AR-D RR Bridge ffl Balltown 22106 233C SD ArkRS NRD-054 R-G Juena Vista Ballfield 22109 3087 SD ArkRS NRD-054 R-X-b Ark below Lake Ck. Confl. 22113 2333 SD ArkRB NRD-041 km-46 Arkansas River -At Granite 21144 2393 SD ArkRS LNRD-041 km-71 Arkansas River -At Buena Vista 21145 307; SD ArkRS NRD-041 m-96 Arkansas River -Near Nathrop 21148 374f SD ArkR7 NRD-024 15877 8814 498E SD ArkR7 NRD-024 484251 12615 4624 SD ArkR7 NRD-024 484519 12883 498: SD ArkR7 NRD-024 484775 13136 415( SD ArkR7 NRD-024 35651 13505 3777 SD ArkR7 NRD-044 4ARK102 20635 499: SD ArkR7 NRD-044 4ARK104 20637 3904 SD ArkR7 NRD-041 km-111 Arkansas River -At Salida 21120 497; SD ArkR7 NRD-054 vlA-M piral Drive 22127 4996 SD ArkR7 NRD-054 A-Z rowns Canyon 22130 423C SD rkR8 NRD-024 04529 5956 5807 SD ArkRS NRD-024 05012 638! 541 f SD ArkRS NRD-024 05034 641C 580f SD ArkR8 NRD-044 MARK101 20634 5398 SD ArkRB NRD-044 4ARK202 20644 5548 SD ArkR8 NRD-044 J4ARK203 20645 5382 SD ArkR8 NRD-044 4ARK204 20646 5791 SD ArkRS NRD-044 4ARK205 20647 5682 SD ArkRB NRD-041 (m-120 Vrkansas River -Near Wellsville 21122 5381 SD ArkR8 NRD-041 cm-150 Vrkansas River -At Cotopaxi 21126 5793 SD ArkRS NRD-041 tm-183 Arkansas River -At Parkdale 21129 5364 SD AfkR8 NRD-041 un-194 Kansas River -At Canon City 21132 5536 SD ArkRB NRD-054 A-A eedlot Bridge 22118 5251 SD ArkRB NRD-054 HA-B portsmans Bridge 22119 5330 SD ArkRS NRO-054 A-C allie Bridge 22120 5724 SD ArkRS NRD-054 A-D reens House 22121 5742 SD ArkRB NRD-054 dA-E oaldale Bridge 22122 5804 3 ArkRS NRD-054 A-F otopaxi Bridge 22123 792 D ArkRS NRD-054 ulA-G ad Spot in Road 22124 411 App_C3_Station Lists.xls Page 1 of 2 10/29/2002 Station Lists Sediment sampling locations 1 .:;J • .' •*-. 1". ".£..,•! ./WvVffl '-^'.- •••:£-:W&,%V:-!: C-.',' ; ••;^am^::K<^^ ::$*:$&&;,*"•>&;•"••'.f • •••*?..••:• : ;E.\W.< •'"£ m '.:.-v\i;iJ!-y:1 § •:;."•/:• . V :"§ . •fVrt- .-' N'.'-:,. . .: .•'..' '§afi? w•;i&:- m ,1 ••^tit&#r$&iv •'*;:V;tl:^ &?Sii '|D .V-^M^EV'fe. •'•:•;. " -^S'1 v •'.••:•;:•':;••' 35- •.',&.<'-. -f en'- ^ ^V/^VKEY-V;..:'''- :.- •.I'.ir .."-. Ws; V: OJ ; '•;•„.!• i •!..!. ••= :"!»; ... 2. • • • .' • -••:'. > ' CO ••.•-.-• . • '_! s*e5> '<^ .;^iif SD ArkRS LNRD-054 MA-H Mile Post 232 2212 5435 SD ArkRS LNRD-054 MA-I Pleasant Valley Bridge 2212 ^5565 SD ArkRS LNRD-054 MA-Y Parkdale 2212 536S SD ArkR9 LNRD-024 104460 589 5795 SD ArkR9 LNRD-024 104462 589 5695 SD ArkR9 LNRD-024 104463 589 5731 SO ArkRS LNRD-031 381645104480300 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 4A 173 6051 SD ArkR9 LNRD-031 381647104475300 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 48 1734 6046 SO ArkR9 LNRD-031 381651104474301 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 4C 173 6045 SD ArkR9 LNRD-031 381705104494200 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE T3T 173 603S SD ArkR9 LNRD-031 331722104494600 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 3A 173 6023 SD ArkR9 LNRD-031 381725104494401 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 38 173 6021 SD ArkR9 LNRD-031 38 17291 04494 10( 'UEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 3C 174 60K SD ArkR9 LNRD-031 38173510449400( 'UEBLO RESERVOIR SITE T3T 174 603E SD ArkR9 LNRO-031 381747104504000 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 2A 174 6007 SD ArkR9 LNRO-031 38175410450400( 'UEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 2B 174 6003 SD ArkR9 LNRD-031 381802104504000 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 2C 174 599C SD ArkR9 LNRD-044 94ARK200 2064 5733 SD ArkR9 LNRD-044 94ARK201 20643 559! SD ArkR9 LNRD-041 km-215 Arkansas River -At Portland 21135 5734 SO ArkR9 LNRO-054 MA-X Portland 22128 5738 SO ArkRIO LNRD-031 381523104442000 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE T7T 1514 618! SD ArkRIO LNRD-031 381525104454300 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE T6T1 1527 618! SD ArkRIO LNRD-031 381528104453200 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 6A 1540 61 7( SD ArkRIO LNRD-031 381533104435100 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 7A 1582 616: SD ArkRIO LNRO-031 381533104471600 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE T5T 1583 614! SD ArkRIO LNRD-031 381544104471200 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE T5T 1620 614! SD ArkRIO LNRD-031 81546104470100 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 5A 1621 6147 SD ArkRIO LNRD-031 38154810445330C PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 6C 1640 6146 SD ArkRIO LNRD-031 38155910446550C PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 5C 1673 61 2J SD ArkRIO LNRD-031 38160210443520C 'UEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 7B 1700 611! SD ArkRIO LNRD-031 8160610445340C 'UEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 6E 1713 6101 SD ArkRIO LNRD-031 81610104464900 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 5E 1720 609: SD ArkRIO NRD-031 81618104454600 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE T6T2 1724 6081 SD ArkRIO NRD-031 381631104435300 UEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 7C 1730 605f SD ArkRIO NRD-044 94PUBCOR 20648 612C SD Ark Riv nr Cal Cut (AR2) NRD-041 km-24 rkansas River -Above California Gulch 21137 1514 SD Ark Riv nr Cal Gul (AR2) NRD-063 AR-2 mmediately upstream from California Gulch 22221 1553 SD Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv .NRD-054 AR-B-a atcherv Rd. - above Cal Gulch 22101 1574 SD Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv NRD-054 R-B-a atchery Road Bridge 22102 1574 SO Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv NRD-051 6-6 alifomia Gulch immediately upstream of confluence with Arkansas River 20403 159( SD Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv .NRD-041 km-25CG alifomia Gulch 2113! 156: SD FArkR NRD-024 16423 9335 19C SD EFArkR NRO-024 16429 9341 10: SO FArkR NRD-024 17698 10567 6f SO FArkR NRD-024 17699 10568 7; SD FArkR LNRD-024 17700 10569 53 SO FArkR NRD-024 17701 10570 41 SD FArkR NRD-024 17707 10576 61 SO FArkR NRD-024 17708 10577 5! SO FArkR NRD-024 17709 1057J 3( SD FArkR NRD-024 17710 10579 Z SD FArkR NRD-024 17711 10580 7 SD FArkR NRD-024 17712 10581 24 SO FArkR NRD-044 3LV108 20624 101 SD FArkR NRO-044 3LV109 20625 1: D FArkR NRD-044 3LV110 20626 27 SD FArkR NRD-044 3LV111 20627 6C SO FArkR NRD-044 3LV112 20628 52 SO FArkR NRD-054 R-C ast Fork @ Tenn. Creek 22105 30E SD FArkR NRD-063 F5 ast Fork of the Arkansas River at the crossing of Highway 24 22228 17E SD FArkR NRO-063 F6 ast Fork of the Arkansas River immediately upstream from Tennessee Creek 22229 303 SO FArkR NRD-054 F-D ast Fork @ Cabins 22114 4C SO FArkR NRD-054 F-F pper East Fork 22115 12 SD FArkR NRD-041 un-20 Vkansas River -Near Leadville 21133 191

App_C3_Station Lists.xls Page 2 of 2 10/29/2002 Station Lists Soil sampling locations (excluding airshed samples) , ; /;pv '.££& y^f^v^- m&f ;p|pfi> •$$ V;5'<^fo--:^p ^,:,'^iS*;-:-g-'A^V^ $$>v ;V':t £ £^ ' I5f " VV»J^;-. • '?$&! &>$&!3£*$&&> •SillS 1 .wMfe^f-^1;^, '&&& tf>&?j#<%& •'^••:>,.,:.!.,.., CO •-•'••• •'•*-• I-''- 'K §- V ? .'>?., ':.1.5 ' -C' •'•>> SarnpleMedI a fSji 55* SL ArkRO LNRD-057 BLM285 Seppi Property 2079 1493 SL ArkRO LNRD-057 BLM286 Seppi Property 2079 1494 SL ArkRO LNRD-057 BLM287 Seppi Property 2079 1495 SL ArkRO LNRD-057 BLM288 Seppi Property 2079 1500 SL ArkRO LNRD-057 BLM289 Seppi Property 2079 1503 SL ArkRO LNRD-057 BLM319 Scott Field (End) 2105 1515 SL ArkRO LNRD-057 BLM320 Scott Reid 2105 1517 SL ArkRO LNRD-057 BLM321 Scott Field 2105 1529 SL ArkRO LNRD-057 3LM322 Scott Field 2105 1533 SL ArkRO LNRD-057 8LM323 Scott Field 2105 1535 SL ArkRO LNRD-057 BLM324 Scott Field 2106 153f SL ArkRO LNRD-057 BLM325 Scott Field (begin) 2106 1541 SL ArkRO LNRD-057 BLM332 Scott Field 2 (begin) 2106 1108 SL ArkRO LNRD-057 BLM333 Scott Field 2106 1111 SL ArkRO LNRD-057 3LM334 Scott Field 2106 1123 SL ArkRO LNRD-057 BLM335 Scott Field 2106 1137 SL ArkRO LNRD-057 3LM336 Scott Field 2 (end) 2106 115C SL ArkRO LNRD-057 IF278 Hocket Poperty - Irrigation Field 2072 1355 SL ArkRO LNRD-057 IF279 Hocket Poperty - Irrigation Field 2072 1373 SL ArkRO LNRD-057 IF280 Hocket Poperty - Irrigation Field 2072 1384 SL ArkRO LNRD-057 IF281 Hocket Poperty - Irrigation Field 2072 1395 SL ArkRO LNRD-057 IF282 Hocket Poperty - Irrigation Field 2073 140£ SL ArkRO LNRD-057 IF283 Hocket Poperty - Irrigation Field 2073 1414 SL ArkRO LNRO-057 IF284 Hocket Poperty - Irrigation Field 2073 1421 SL ArkRO LNRD-016 LV06 275 1508 SL ArkRO LNRD-016 LV07 275 1446 SL ArkRO LNRD-016 LV08 275 1388 SL ArkRO LNRD-016 .V09 2753 1274 SL ArkRO LNRD-016 LV10 2754 1087 SL ArkRO LNRD-016 LV24 2768 1534 SL ArkRO LNRD-016 LV25 2769 1232 SL ArkRO LNRD-016 LV26 2770 110S SL ArkRO LNRD-016 LV38 2782 184 SL ArkRO LNRD-057 OB326 Outward Bound (begin) 21050 155« SL ArkRO LNRD-057 OB327 Outward Bound 21051 156f SL ArkRO LNRD-057 OB328 Outward Bound 21052 1591 SL ArkRO LNRD-057 OB329 Outward Bound 21053 1604 SL ArkRO LNRD-057 OB330 Outward Bound (End) 21054 161! SL ArkRt LNRD-038 20265 1697 SL ArkR1 LNRD-038 0 20266 1737 SL ArkR1 LNRD-03B 1 20267 1744 SL ArkR1 LNRD-038 2 20268 174C SL ArkR1 LNRD-038 3 20269 175: SL ArkR1 LNRD-038 4 20270 175< SL ArkR1 LNRD-038 5 20271 1757 SL ArkR1 LNRD-038 6 20272 175f SL ArkR1 LNRD-038 7 20273 1763 SL ArkR1 LNRD-038 8 20274 1766 SL ArkR1 LNRD-038 9 20275 1771 SL ArkR1 LNRD-038 20276 1702 SL ArkR1 LNRD-038 0 20277 177; SL ArkR1 LNRD-038 1 20278 177S SL ArkR1 LNRD-038 2 2027! 1784 SL ArkR1 LNRD-038 3 20280 1797 SL ArkR1 LNRD-038 4 20281 1811 SL ArkR1 LNRD-038 5 20282 182C SL ArkR1 LNRD-038 20283 1713 SL ArkR1 LNRD-038 20284 1719 SL ArkR1 LNRD-038 20285 1716 SL ArkR1 LNRD-038 20286 1720 SL ArkR1 LNRD-038 20287 1725 SL ArkR1 LNRD-038 20288 17291 SL ArkR1 LNRD-038 20289 7301 SL ArkR1 LNRD-044 3LV101 20617 BOH SL ftrkRI LNRD-033 1 20290 7243 SL ftrkRI LNRD-057 LM290 inton Field 1 (north) (begin) 21027 608 SL ftrkRI LNRD-057 LM291 'nton Field 1 21028 614 SL ftrkRI LNRO-057 LM292 inton Field 1 21029 617 SL ftrkRI LNRD-057 LM293 nton Field 1 21030 61 = SL ftrkRI LNRD-057 LM294 nton Reid 1 21031 623 SL ftrkRI LNRD-057 LM295 nton Field 1 21032 627 SL ftrkRI LNRD-057 LM296 nton Field 1 21033 632 SL ftrkRI LNRD-057 LM297 nton Field 1 (north) (End) 21034 639 L ftrkRI LNRD-057 LM298 eck Field 21021 654 L ftrkRI LNRD-057 LM299 eck Field 21022 658 L ftrkRI LNRD-057 LM300 eck Field 21023 663 App_C3_Station Lists.xls Page 1 of 4 10/29/2002 Station Lists Soil sampling locations (excluding airshed samples)

: JtfWeSSr'' HI • •^^|^£l;^£t iiPiil m- iirfI $K $&$ 111m• 3^'' •;.*••.'. rfSM-w f ill• ^Jfitf';' •"'tfQ".i-sfB'-i". Sarri'pleMedi a .ff e •I£M •••in-: SL ArkR1 LNRD-OS7 BLM301 Beck Field 2102 t 1665 SL ArkRl LNRD-057 BLM302 Beck Field 2102 5 1675 SL ArkR1 LNRD-057 BLM303 Beck Field 2102 1687 SL ArkR1 LNRO-057 BLM304 Hinton Field 2 2103 1691 SL ArkRl LNRD-057 BLM305 Hinton Field 2 2103 169( SL ArkR1 LNRD-057 SLM306 Hinton Field 2 2103 1701 SL ArkRl LNRD-057 BLM307 Hinton Field 2 21031 1705 SL AfkR1 LNRD-057 6LM30S Hinton Field 2 2103 171! SL ArkR1 LNRD-057 BLM309 Hinton field 3 (south) (beqin) 2104C 1721 SL ArkR1 LNRD-057 BLM310 Hinton field 3 2104 1724 SL ArkR1 LNRD-057 BLM311 •linton field 3 21042 1726 SL ArkR1 LNRD-057 BLM312 Hinton Held 3 2104C 1727 SL ArkR1 LNRD-057 BLM313 Hinton field 3 (south) (end! 21044 1736 SL ArkR1 LNRD-057 BLM314 Leadbetter Field (begin) 2104£ 1741 SL ArkR1 LNRD-057 BLM315 Leadbetter Field 2104€ 1743 SL ArkR1 LNRD-057 BLM316 .eadbetter Field 21047 1747 SL ArkR1 LNRD-057 BLM317 Leadbetter Field 21046 175( SL ArkR1 LNRD-057 BLM31B Leadbetter Reid (End) 21049 1753 SL ArkR1 LNRD-033 01 20291 1751 SL ArkRl .NRD-033 32 20292 1754 SL ArkR1 LNRD-033 D3 20293 1755 SL ArkRl .NRD-033 :1 20294 175! SL ArkR1 LNRD-033 F2 20295 1761 SL ArkRl LNRD-033 F3 20296 1764 SL ArkRl LNRD-033 H1 20297 176! SL ArkRl LNRD-033 H2 20298 1772 SL ArkRl LNRO-033 H3 20299 1774 SL ArkRl LNRD-033 K1 20300 1782 SL ArkRl LNRD-033 K2 20301 178f SL ArkRl LNRD-033 K3 20302 178< SL ArkRl LNRD-033 K4 20303 178S SL ArkRl LNRD-033 K5 20304 1794 SL ArkRl LNRD-033 1 20305 179! SL ArkRl LNRD-033 L2 20306 1801 SL ArkRl NRD-033 3 20307 1804 SL ArkRl NRD-033 4 20308 1807 SL ArkRl NRD-033 .5 20309 181C SL ArkRl NRD-033 6 20310 1812 SL ArkRl LNRD-033 .7 20311 1815 SL ArkRl NRD-016 V22 2766 1861 SL ArkRl NRD-016 V23 2767 1843 SL ArkRl NRD-016 V28 2772 166C SL ArkRl NRD-016 V29 2773 1762 SL ArkRl NRD-016 V30 2774 1791 SL ArkRl NRD-016 V34 2778 1597 SL ArkRl NRD-016 V35 2779 1723 SL ArkRl NRD-033 M1 20312 1809 SL ArkRl NRD-033 M10 20313 1837 SL ArkRl NRD-033 2 20314 1813 SL ArkRl NRD-033 M3 20315 1817 SL ArkRl NRD-033 M4 20316 181E SL ArkRl NRD-033 5 20317 1821 SL ArkRl NRD-033 6 20318 1825 SL ArkRl NRO-033 7 20319 1827 SL ArkR1 NRO-033 8 20320 183< SL ArkRl LNRD-033 9 20321 1832 SL

.•VyV^c-^'^w 1 : : V.-'&i: •K v='-^;$ iW&£ 3$$?$. ->^g'^ •/-S: ^K'A^&^'K "$£. • •••1'i'-lA,r-> "•.A'i--'-.'-"'-^----"^"^-"-' • . 'o:J I••^K^^fs-^.-: mi ^P^'ff fev J3 >^;v!"$&s c : •£«!•• . j«-% •:.;r^f:^|.^J»»- ..•-.. ijiv-.-w >iv$i •'':;«>:*S '4*te ^ ••^fe-^.l-i^wS&J: mm'&:&••{.. $8>.. m '.'« " V'H'f f'-i-i'-.-a-'',:; -•!.'• '. •?.<•• >';••', .z ::?.: w&&$$ w ••.-..'•'.- ..•'-.7i.:'-; en ' ',..'.•• ' '.•"i"''^" •'.'•^••T'-'" ' '• %$'• -W SL ArkR3 LNRD-016 LV13 275 7 2187 SL ArkR3 LNRD-016 LV14 275 3 2184 SL ArkR3 LNRD-016 LV15 275 3 2162 SL ArkR3 LNRD-016 LV16 276( ) 2122 SL ArkR3 LNRD-016 LV17 276 2047 SL ArkR3 LNRD-016 LV18 276; > 2077 SL ArkR3 LNRD-050 TYS10 2060 219; SL ArkR3 LNRD-050 TYS11 2060: 2204 SL ArkR3 LNRD-050 TYS133 2060C 2232 SL ArkR3 LNRD-050 TYS14 20601 2223 SL ArkR3 LNRD-050 TYS1a 20605 2065 SL ArkR3 LNRD-050 TYS2 20606 204C SL ArkR3 .NRD-050 TYS3 20607 2075 SL ArkRS LNRD-050 TYS4 20606 2091 SL ArkR3 LNRD-050 nrss 20609 212! SL ArkR3 LNRD-050 FYS6 20610 214f SL ArkR3 LNRD-050 TYS7 20611 216f SL ArkR3 LNRD-050 TYS8 20612 216( SL_j ArkR3 LNRD-050 TYS9 20613 21 8f SL ArkR6 LNRD-057 CCT1A Clear Creek 20705 242! SL ArkR6 LNRD-057 CCT1A Clear Creek 20706 242! SL ArkR6 LNRD-057 CCT1B Clear Creek 20707 242E SL ArkR6 LNRD-057 CCT1B Clear Creek 20708 242f SL ArkR6 .NRD-057 CCT1C Clear Creek 20709 2427 SL ArkR6 LNRD-057 CCT1E Clear Creek 20710 242£ SL ArkR6 LNRD-057 CHT1A Champion State Wildlife Area 20711 342E SL ArkRB LNRD-057 CHT1B Champion State Wildlife Area 20712 3427 SL ArkR6 LNRD-057 CHT1C Champion State Wildlife Area 20713 3426 SL ArkRB LNRD-057 CHT1D Champion State Wildlife Area 20714 3425 SL ArkR6 .NRD-057 CHT1E Champion State Wildlife Area 20715 3424 SL ArkRT .NRD-057 3BT1A liq Bend Recreation Site 20700 4767 SL ArkR7 .NRD-057 )BT1B iig Bend Recreation Sits 20701 476S SL ArkR7 LNRD-057 BBT1C Biq Bend Recreation Site 20702 477C SL ArkR7 LNRD-057 BBT1D Biq Bend Recreation Site 20703 4771 SL ArkR7 .NRD-057 1BT1E Biq Bend Recreation Site 20704 477: SL ArkRS LNRD-057 FPT1A loodplain 20716 546( SL ArkRS LNRD-057 FPT1A loodplain 20717 546! SL ArkRS LNRD-057 FPT1B loodplain 20718 5467 SL ArkRS .NRD-057 FPT1C loodplain 207 1S 546( SL ArkRS .NRD-057 PT1E loodplain 20720 547( SL ArkRS .NRD-057 GCT1A Grape Creek 20721 556< SL ArkRS LNRD-057 GCT1B Grape Creek 20722 556! SL ArkRS LNRD-057 GCT1B Grape Creek 20723 556! SL ArkRS NRD-057 GCT1C Grape Creek 20724 557( SL ArkRS NRD-057 GCT1D Grape Creek 20725 5571 SL ArkRS .NRD-057 'BT1A arkdale Bridge 20759 537! SL ArkRS NRD-057 BT1B arkdale Bridge 20760 537f SL ArkRS NRD-057 BT1C arkdale Bridge 20761 537f SL ArkRS NRD-057 BT1C arkdale Bridae 20762 537f SL ArkRS NRD-057 BT1D arkdale Bridae 20763 5375 SL A/kRS NRD-057 DT1A arkdale Recreation Site 20764 536S SL ArkRB NRD-057 DT1B arkdale Recreation Site 20765 537C SL ArkRS NRD-057 DT1C arkdale Recreation Site 20766 5371 SL ArkRS NRD-057 iRoTIA innacle Rock 20767 5492 SL ArkRB NRD-057 iRoTIB innacla Rock 20768 5493 SL ArkRS .NRD-057 IROT1C innacle Rock 20769 5494 SL ArkRB .NRD-057 BT1A pike Buck 20791 545S SL ArkRS .NRD-057 LT1A alt Lick Recreation Site 20797 5475 SL ArkRS .NRO-057 LT1A alt Lick Recreation Site 20798 5475 SL ArkRS NRD-057 LT1B all Lick Recreation Site 20799 547E SL ArkRB NRD-057 LT1C alt Lick Recreation Site 20800 5477 SL ArkRS NRD-057 LT1D alt Lick Recreation Site 20801 547£ SL ArkRS NRD-057 LT1E alt Lick Recreation Site 20802 548C SL ArkRB NRD-057 BP1A B 21067 5715 SL ArkR9 NRD-057 'R11T2A ueblo Reservoir 0770 596S SL ArkR9 NRD-057 R11T2B ueblo Reservoir 0771 5970 SL ArkR9 NRD-057 R11T2C ueblo Reservoir 0772 5971 SL ArkR9 NRD-057 R11T2D ueblo Reservoir 0773 5973 SL ArkR9 NRD-057 R11T2E ueblo Reservoir 0774 59731 SL ArkR9 NRD-057 R11T2F ueblo Reservoir 0775 59741 SL ArkR9 NRD-057 R11T2G ueblo Reservoir 0776 5976 SL ArkR9 NRD-057 R11T2H ueblo Reservoir 0777 5977 SL ArkR9 NRD-057 R12T1A ueblo Reservoir 0778 5976 SL ArkR9 NRO-057 R12T1B ueblo Reservoir 0779 597E SL *rkR9 .NRO-057 R12T1C ueblo Reservoir 0780 598C SL ftrkR9 .NRD-057 R12T1D ueblo Reservoir 0781 5981 App_C3_Station Lists.xls Page 3 of 4 10/29/2002 ArkRg LNRD-057 PR5B1A Pueblo Reservoir 20783 5935 ArkR9 LNRD-057 PR6T1A Pueblo Reservoir 20784 594 ArkR9 LNRD-057 PR7B Pueblo Reservoir 20785 5945 ArkR9 LNRD-057 PR7B Pueblo Reservoir 20786 5945 ArkR9 LNRD-057 PR9T1A Pueblo Reservoir 20787 5950 ArkR9 LNRD-057 PR9T1B 'ueblo Reservoir 20788 5952 ArkR9 LNRD-057 'R9T1C =ueblo Reservoir 20789 5953 ArkR9 LNRD-057 PR9T1D 3ueblo Reservoir 20790 595; EFArkR LNRD-057 LMDTPT1 Additional point off transect. - Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel 20737 140 EFArkR LNRD-057 LMDTT1A Leadville Mine Drainage Tunnel 20738 134 EFArkR LNRD-057 LMDTT1B .eadville Mine Drainage Tunnel 20739 136 EFArkR LNRD-057 LMDTT1C .eadville Mine Drainage Tunnel 20740 13 EF Ark R LNRD-057 LMDTT1D .eadville Mine Drainage Tunnel 20741 131 EFArkR LNRD-057 LMDTT1E .eadville Mine Drainage Tunnel 2074; 139 EFArkR LNRD-057 LMDTT1F .eadville Mine Drainage Tunnel 20743 14" EFArkR LNRD-057 LMDTT1G .eadville Mine Drainage Tunnel 20744 J4f EFArkR LNRD-057 MB258 :asl end of transect • Molly Brown Trailler Park 20745 154 EFArkR LNRD-057 MB259 Molly Brown Trailler Park 20746 156 EFArkR LNRD-057 MB260 dolly Bfown Trailler Park 20747 157 EFArkR LNRD-057 MB261 /lolly Brown Trailler Park 20748 159 EFArkR LNRD-OS7 MB262 /lolly Brown Trailler Park 20749 J60 EFArkR LNRD-057 MB263 dolly Brown Trailler Park 20750 Ji EFArkR LNRD-057 MB264 >tolly Brown Traillar Park 20751 164 EFArkR LNRD-057 MB265 .Holly Brown Trailler Park 20752 166 EFArkR LNRD-057 MB266 West end of transect • Molly Brown Trailler Park 20753 168 EFArkR LNRD-057 UB273 iasl end of transect - Upper Bench 20808 142 EFArkR LNRD-057 UB274 Upper Bench 20809 143 EFArkR LNRD-057 UB275 Upper Bench 20810 145 EFArkR LNRD-057 UB276 /est end of transect - Upper Bench 20811 146

App_C3_Station Lists.xls Page 4 of 4 10/29/2002 Station Lists Surface water sampling locations :T~"?B|peNe|diJiiB S ill III!

•'.01 .!• II |1 •:'55'' SW ArkRO LNRD-031 000009 ARKANSAS R. BELOW LEAOVILLE. COL 95 348 SW ArkRO LNRD-025 07081200 Arkansas River near Leadville CO. 2033 347 SW ArkRO LNRD-031 07081200 ARKANSAS RIVER NEAR LEADVILLE, CO. 98 34f SW ArkRO LNRD-031 39141510620510< 1 ARKANSAS RIVER NEAR LEADVILLE, CO. 249 1094 Arkansas River upstream of confluence with California Gulch, approximately 0.25 miles SW ArkRO LNRD-006 AR-1 downstream of confluence with Tennessee Creek (ARCS') 78 377 Gauging station on Arkansas River immdiately downstream from confluence of East SW ArkRO LNRD-010 AR-1 Fork and Tennessee Creek 278 338 Gauging station on Arkansas River immdiately downstream from confluence of East SW ArkRO LNRD-010 AR-1 Fork and Tennessee Creek 1994 338 Gauging station on Arkansas River immdiately downstream from confluence of East SW ArkRO LNRD-015 AR-1 Fork and Tennessee Creek 1993 338 Arkansas River at USGS gaging station immediately downstream from the confluence SW ArkRO LNRD-049 AR-1 with Tennessee Creek and East Fork Arkansas River 2101 338 Arkansas River upstream of confluence with California Gulch, approximately 0.25 miles SW ArkRO LNRD-051 AR-1 downstream of the confluence with Tennessee Creek 2036 350 SW ArkRO LNRO-055 AR-1 Arkansas River at Leadville (at USGS Gage) 2214 33E

SW ArkRO LNRD-051 AR-1 2 Arkansas River upstream of confluence with California Gulch, between AR-1 and AR-2 2036 620 SW ArkRO LNRD-006 F8UP :LUVIAL TAILINGS SURFACE WATER 44 157E SAMPLE FROM YH£ ARKANSAS RIVER, OFF^ THE EAST BANK, AT A U.S.G.S. GAGING STATION ON THE RIVER, APPX .25 Ml SOUTHWEST OF LEAOVILLE SW ArkRO LNRD-006 SW105 JUNCTION. 67 345 Sample from the Arkansas River, off the east bank, at a USGS gaging station on the SW ArkRO LNRD-062 SW105 river, aooroximatelv.25 miles southwest of Leadville Junction. 2221 361 SW ArkR1 LNRD-011 25 Below California G 80 1611 SW ArkR1 LNRD-011 150-25 lelow California G/25.020 858 1561 SW ArkR1 LNRO-031 191313106212000 ARKANSAS RIVER BLW CALIFORNIA GULCH 2479 1634 Approximately 0.5 km downstream of California Gulch, after complete mixing occurs with SW ArkR1 LNRD-006 AR-3 the Arkansas River 792 1630 SW ArkR1 LNRD-010 AR-3 50 m downstream from CG 2787 1637 SW ArkR1 LNRD-010 AR-3 50 m downstream from CG 19944 1637 SW ArkR1 LNRD-015 AR-3 50 m downstream from CG 19934 1637 SW ArkR1 NRD-055 AR-3 Arkansas River blw California Gulch (east bank) 22145 1637

SW ArkR1 NRD-006 AR-3A Arkansas River approximately 0.5 miles downstream of confluence with California Gulch 793 1739

SW ArkR1 NRD-051 AR-3A rkansas River approximately 0.5 miles downstream of confluence with California Gulch 20369 1735 /4 mile ds of Cal Gulch on Harry Becks property, just south of the AR3 station on Edith SW ArkR1 NRD-055 AR-3a eppis property 22146 1669

SW ArkR1 NRD-060 AR-3A rkansas River approximately 0.5 miles downstream of confluence with California Gulch 21069 1739 SW ArkR1 NRD-060 AR-3B 21070 174( SW ArkR1 NRD-006 AR-3E East 1/3 Arkansas River in mixing zone with California Gulch (AR3 & AR03') 794 163C SW ArkR1 NRD-006 AR-3W West 2/3 Arkansas River In mixing zone with California Gulch water (AR03*) 795 162( SW ArkR1 NRD-006 CH2-SW-14 OWNSTREAM OF CA. GULCH/ARKANSAS RIVER CONFLUENCE 397 155! SW ArkR1 NRD-006 8DN LUVIAL TAILINGS SURFACE WATER 443 1865 SW ArkR1 NRD-041 im-25AR Arkansas River -Below California Gulch 21131 167C SW ArkR1 NRD-006 B-AR-4 RKANSAS RIVER STATION #4 495 1666 AMP FRM E SIDE OF ARKANSAS RVR APPX .25 Ml S OF THE CONFLUNCE W/ SW ArkR1 NRD-006 W111 AL GULCH JUST S OF STATE HWY 300 681 1595 ample from the east bank of the Arkansas River approximately .25 miles south of the SW ArkR1 NRD-062 W111 Confluence with California Gulch, just south of State Highway 300. 22218 1626 SW ArkR2 NRD-025 7083700 •kansas River near Malta CO. 20337 198? SW ArkR2 NRD-031 7083700 RKANSAS RIVER NEAR MALTA, CO. 988 199C Vkansas River approximately 0.5 miles downstream of confluence with Lake Fork SW ArkR2 NRD-006 R-4 AR02-) 319 1920 SW ArkR2 vJRD-015 R-4 19935 924 Ml: Arkansas River approximately 0.5 miles downstream of confluence with Lake Fork; SW ArkR2 NRD-051 R-t older Arkansas River below confluence with Halfmoon Creek - Lake Fork 20370 920 SW ArkR2 -NRD-055 R-4 Vkansas River blw Lake Fork and Halfmoon Ck 22147 924 SW ArkR2 \|RD-050 R-40 20577 869 SW ArkR2 ^JRD-041

App_C3_Station Lists.xls Page 1 of 5 10/29/2002 Station Lists Surface water sampling locations

: 'li'ik-Vi! *'y-'i.\- ^&*i'$£-y''j$&$&~f. ••••: ":'-. J.' >v*> j.:1' :•.'<:• .../.:• *• '&•!% tfl : » •^'^yi/dci-M':;" - . ••StMwfri'*'.. 0 \-.yy ;'..; •. ' ^m infill ^§:i$£#M'--* H^IP m t» 1VoQv*1 •W£: W^sm^i if •.:••.- fV" ampieMed'la':?r p •Ills •/.•C^.Z •':•:•• : 1|: N "K^ms ^r SW ArkR3 LNRD-010 AR-5 At County Road 55 near Kobe 278 2253 SW ArkR3 LNRD-010 AR-5 At County Road 55 near Kobe 1994 2253 SW ArkR3 LNRD-015 AR-5 At County Road 55 near Kobe 1993 2253 SMI: Arkansas River upstream of confluence with Empire Gulch and approximately 0.2 mites downstream of Highway 24 bridge; Golder.Arkansas River below confluence with SW ArkR3 LNRD-051 AR-5 Empire Gulch 2037 2025 SW ArkR3 -NRD-055 AR-5 Arkansas River at qaqe blw Empire Gulch (near Hwy 24 bridge) 2214 204: SW ArkR3 -NRD-050 AR-65 2057 2041 SW ArkR3 LNRD-050 AR-67 2057 2099 SW ArkR3 LNRD-050 AR-70 2056 2247 SW ArkR3 .NRD-030 C0013M ARKANSAS RIVER 2034 2244 SW ArkR3 LNRD-006 LB-AR-6 ARKANSAS RIVER STATION #6 49 201. SW ArkR3 LNRD-050 PYW12 2061 2056 SW ArkR3 LNRO-050 rvwa 2061 2121 SW ArkR4 LNRO-031 390618106175400 ARKANSAS R AS TWOBIT GULCH NR GRANITE. CO. 2464 2275 SW ArkRS LNRD-015 AR-6 1993 2317 SW ArkRS .NRD-055 AR-6 Arkansas River at Balltown (blw Lake Creek) 2214 2317 SW ArkRS LNRD-055 AR-6a Arkansas River across from Panark Lodqe 2215 2317 SW ArkR6 LNRD-025 07086000 Arkansas Rfver at Granite CO. 2034 239! SW ArkR6 LNRD-031 07086000 ARKANSAS RIVER AT GRANITE, CO. 99 240C SW ArkR6 LNRD-031 07087200 ARKANSAS RIVER AT BUENA VISTA. CO. 99 307C SW ArkR6 LNRD-011 26 Clarks Br 80 3121 SW ArkR6 LNRD-011 26 Marquard Nature Area 80 3121 SW ArkR6 LNRD-011 27 Otero Pump Station 80 260! SW ArkR6 LNRD-011 28 Johnsons Village 80 328! SW ArkR6 LNRD-031 384605106054800 ARKANSAS R 220 360! SW ArkR6 LNRD-031 385838106124800 9 ARKANSAS RIVER NEAR PINE CREEK SCHOOL, CO. 2422 254! SW ArkR6 .NRD-011 48 Granite 92 239( SW ArkR6 LNRD-031 7157 ARKANSAS R. AB. BUENA VISTA 253 3101 SW ArkRS LNRD-010 AR-7 Granite 278 2331 SW ArkR6 LNRD-010 AR-7 Granite 1994 2331 SW ArkR6 LNRD-015 AR-7 Granite 1993 2331 SW ArkR6 LNRD-055 AR-7 Arkansas River at Granite (at USGS gage) 2215 2331 SW ArkR6 LNRD-055 AR-7C Arkansas River 2 miles downstream from AR7 2215 2387 SW ArkR6 LNRO-010 AR-8 Buena Vista 279 3102 SW ArkR6 LNRD-010 AR-8 Buena Vista 19947 310: SW ArkR6 LNRD-015 AR-8 Buena Vista 19940 310: SW ArkR6 LNRD-055 AR-8 Arkansas River at Buena Vista (at USGS gage) 22153 310: SW ArkR6 LNRD-041 km-46 Arkansas River -At Granite 21144 2393 SW ArkR6 LNRD-041 cm-71 Arkansas River -At Buena Vista 21145 307: SW ArkR6 LNRD-041 km-96 Arkansas River -Near Nathrop 21148 374( SW ArkR7 LNRD-031 000008 ARKANSAS RIVER NEAR SALIDA 954 4344 SW ArkR7 NRD-031 7091200 ARKANSAS RIVER NEAR NATHROP, CO. 999 4223 SW ArkR7 .NRD-031 17091500 ARKANSAS RIVER AT SALIDA, CO. 1000 497( SW ArkR7 NRD-011 1 Shavano USGS 820 4991 SW ArkR7 NRD-031 83328106022100 NA49-8-1CBB C P MORGEN 1938 488( SW ArkR7 NRD-031 83341106024400 6 ARKANSAS RIVER NEAR BELLEVIEW. CO. 1940 485: SW ArkR7 NRD-031 83426106044200 ARKANSAS R 1951 4765 SW ArkR7 NRD-031 83644106032000 ARKANSAS RIVER NEAR BROWNS CANYON BRIDGE 1980 444 SW ArkR7 NRD-041 l •te&•&*••- ^S^VSvV. .;-.•: 1 1 M •••» :i"'! m-'i'^:•-., :'-•i 1 C -, •:-.•:.••. : ; •:ii'i!'. .•£.. -.•£•<• .•••o^ix^;^ ;.ib:- . ."-'/'',''••/ : »ip 'A: " " i=it '•'' &AL..S. •'-, o'f- '•^ M^\ •!(.:£$&•*• !.'•;;:••• ;-:.: : .••' •• •tt/'-nK^-is'i.."^^^^*^ 1 ^•V h|H-:- -'. ; /•^JvlV-^Sr'-.'-J^?^^ ,J7:. ?•*';;/'!"; SampleMedi a "•' . ' •'•'••'•ifr' ' •••''« •' •'• ' "' •- •£!•?•; 1• COM SW ArkR9 LNRD-031 38172510449440 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 3B 173 6021 SW ArkR9 LNRD-031 38172910449410 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 3C 174 6016 SW ArkR9 LNRD-031 38173510449400 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE T3T 174 603£ SW ArkRS LNRD-031 381745104514900 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 1A 174 6008 SW ArkR9 LNRD-031 38174710450400( PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 2A 174 6007 SW ArkR9 LNRO-031 381754104504000 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 2B 1744 6003 SW ArkR9 LNRO-031 381754104515100 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 1B 174 6004 SW ArkR9 LNRD-031 381802104504000 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 2C 174 5996 SW ArkR9 LNRD-031 381803104515400 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 1C 174 5994 SW ArkR9 LNRD-031 381840104525700 ARKANSAS RIVER 1.5 Ml UPSTREAM SWALLOWS 175 596! SW ArkR9 LNRD-031 382337105014600 HARDSCRABBLE CREEK AT HWY 120 AT PORTLAND CO. 177 5723 SW ArkR9 LNRD-031 CO-0000671-1 IDEAL CEMENT FLORENCE 258 5741 SW ArkR9 LNRD-031 CO-0000671-3 IDEAL CEMENT FLORENCE 258 5741 SW ArkR9 LNRD-041 km-215 Arkansas River -At Portland 2113 5734 SW ArkRIO LNRD-031 07099400 ARKANSAS RIVER ABOVE PUEBLO. CO. 102 608; SW ArkRIO LNRD-031 381523104442000 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE T7T 151 618! SW ArkRIO LNRD-031 381525104454300 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE T6T1 152 618! SW ArkRIO LNRD-031 381528104453200 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 6A 154 617£ SW ArkRIO LNRD-031 381533104435100 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 7A 158 6163 SW ArkRIO LNRD-031 381533104471600 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE T5T 158 614E SW ArkRIO LNRD-031 381544104414400 2 AM2 ARKANSAS RIVER NEAR GOODNIGHT 161 6148 SW ArkRIO .NRD-031 38154410447120( PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE T5T 162 614E SW ArkRIO LNRD-031 381546104470100 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 5A 162 6147 SW ArkRIO LNRO-031 381548104453300 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 6C 1640 6146 SW ArkRIO LNRD-031 381552104465800 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE SB 1655 6141 SW ArkRIO LNRD-031 381559104465500 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 5C 1673 612! SW ArkRIO LNRD-031 381602104435200 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 7B 1700 611! SW ArkRIO LNRD-031 381604104465200 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 5D 1706 6111 SW ArkRIO LNRD-031 381606104453400 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 6E 1713 6101 SW ArkRIO LNRD-031 381608104433000 PUEBLO RESERVOIR AT DAM 1718 609( SW ArkRIO LNRD-031 381610104464900 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 5E 1720 6092 SW Ark R10 LNRD-031 381618104454600 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE T6T2 1724 6081 SW ArkRIO LNRD-031 381631104435300 PUEBLO RESERVOIR SITE 7C 1730 60 5< SW ArkRIO LNRD-011 449 Nature Center 900 -609( SW ArkRIO LNRD-01 1 450 Nature Center 901 609( SW ArkRIO LNRD-011 474 Nature Center 915 609( SW Ark Riv nr Cal Gul CAR2) LNRD-011 4 Above California G 798 1561 SW Ark Riv nr Cal Gul (AR2) LNRD-011 50-24 Above California G/24.021 857 1561 SW Ark Riv nr Cal Gul (AR2) LNRD-031 91321106211700 ARKANSAS R AT MALTA. CO. 2482 1564 SW Ark Riv nr Cal Gul (AR2) NRD-031 91322106212400 ARKANSAS RIVER ABOVE CALIFORNIA GULCH 2483 154! Arkansas River approximately 300 feet upstream of confluence with California Gulch SW Ark Riv nr Cal Gul (AR2) NRD-006 AR-2 AR04') 791 1579 SW Ark Riv nr Cal Gul (AR2) NRD-010 AR-2 mmediately upstream from California Gulch 2786 1553 SW Ark Riv nr Cal Gul (AR2) NRD-010 AR-2 mmediately upstream from California Gulch 19943 1553 SW Ark Riv nr Cal Gul (AR2) NRD-015 AR-2 mmediately upstream from California Gulch 19933 1553

SW Ark Riv nr Cal Gul (AR2) NRD-051 AR-2 Arkansas River approximately 300 feet upstream of confluence with California Gulch 20367 1571

SW ArkRivnrCalGul(AR2) NRD-055 AR-2 Arkansas River at Hwy 300 (blw bridge), Immediately upstream from California Gulch 22144 1553 Arkansas River approximately 300 feet upstream of confluence with California Gulch SW ArkRivnrCalGul(AR2) NRD-060 R-2 AR04*) 21068 1579 SW ArkRivnrCalGul(AR2) NRD-041 km-24 Arkansas River -Above California Gulch 21137 1514 SW Ark Riv nr Cal Gul (AR2) NRD-006 B-AR-2 RKANSAS RIVER STATION #2 493 154( SW Ark Riv nr Cal Gul (AR2) .NRD-006 B-AR-3 ARKANSAS RIVER STATION #3 494 160; SW ArkRivnrCalGulIAR2) NRD-006 WAR03 RKANSAS ABOVE CAL GULCH 685 154( SW Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv NRD-025 7081800 alifornia Gulch at Malta CO. 20333 1563 SW Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv NRD-031 7081800 ALIFORNIA GULCH AT MALTA, CO. 982 1564 SW Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv NRD-031 91320106211400 CALIFORNIA GULCH AS MOUTH, NEAR MALTA, CO. 2481 1573 SW Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv NRD-010 G 2791 1567 SW Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv NRD-010 G alifomia Gulch at mouth (using Stednick CG4) 19948 567 SW Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv NRD-039 G-1 20345 1593 SW Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv NRD-055 G4 alifornia Gulch at USGS gage 22158 567 SW Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv NRD-006 G-6 California Gulch immediately upstream of confluence with Arkansas River (CG01*) 385 593 SW Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv NRD-051 G-6 alifornia Gulch immediately upstream of confluence with Arkansas River 20403 59C SW al Gulch-At Ark Riv NRD-060 G-6 alifornia Gulch 200 feet above the confluence with the Arkansas River (CG01*) 21076 57! SW al Gulch-At Ark Riv NRD-006 H2-SW-12 ALIFORNIA GULCH ABOVE ARKANSAS RIVER (LOWER FLUME) 396 54E SW al Gulch-At Ark Riv NRD-041 Km-25CG alifornia Gulch 1139 562 SW al Gulch-AI Ark Riv NRD-006 B-CG-5 ALIFORNIA CULCH AND YAK TUNNEL STATION #5 506 552 MPLE FRM CAL GULCH, DIR UNDER THE BRIDGE AT THE STATE HWY 300 SW al Gulch-At Ark Riv NRD-006 W102 ROSSING, IN A WIDE AREA OF RIFFLES 672 565 ample from California Gulch, directly under the bridge at the State Highway 300 SW al Gulch-AI Ark Riv NRD-062 W102 ossing, in a wide area of riffles. 220S 570 SW al Gulch-At Ark Riv JMRD-006 WCG05 OWER CAL GULCH 691 552 SW al Gulch-At Ark Riv .NRD-006 WWL-CG-1 T FLUME ABOVE CONFLUENCE W/ ARKANSAS RIVER 739 56C SW SFArkR NRD-031 7079195 -AST FORK ARKANSAS RIVER AT HWY 91 NR LEADVILLE, 975 102 SW FArkR NRD-025 7079200 eadville Mine Drainage Tunnel al Leadville CO. 0327 150 App_C3_Station Lists.xls Page 3 of 5 10/29/2002 Station Lists Surface water sampling locations

^.^M'.. ': &•.-'!,' ,'^ii '••^'•'•'•'•' t^mw^ft .>•':::::'<:'.!'',• e.t;:"-"V., ••'$;$'1 & ''-'?& : •:f in}; - :•/••?• •'•s£j z::j&.;£ Jo4 »•.:•;. a\ '•'j5-: •V)' w 'Wt€l .; nj ::'•'< '•• -•'••' /vijj'i •.,'.' 5 ;'•. v';- :T'S- •

SMI: East Fork Arkansas River downstream of Evans Gulch approximately 300 feet SW EFArkR NRD-051 F-2 pstream of Highway 24; Golden East Fork below confluence with Evans Gulch 2041 185 SW EF Ark R NRD-055 F3 ast Fork Arkansas River At Hwy 24 jat USGS gage) 22163 17f SW EF Ark R .NRD-049 EF-3 East Fork Arkansas below LMDT 21019 192 SW EFArkR NRD-010 F-5 ast Fork of the Arkansas River at the crossing of Highway 24 2794 17f SW EFArkR NRD-010 F-5 East Fork of the Arkansas River at the crossing of Highway 24 19951 17f SW FArkR NRD-010 F-6 East Fork of the Arkansas River immediately upstream from Tennessee Creek 2795 303 SW FArkR NRD-010 EF-6 East Fork of the Arkansas River immediately upstream from Tennessee Creek 19952 so: SW FArkR NRD-041 km-14 Arkansas River -East Fork, above Leadville Drain 21124 12! SW FArkR NRD-041 km-15 eadville Drain 21125 135 SW FArkR NRD-041 km-18 Arkansas River -East Fork, below Leadville Drain 21128 15f SW FArkR NRD-041 km-20 Arkansas River -Naar Leadville 21133 191 SW FArkR NRD-006 B-EF-1 FORK LEADVILLE DRAIN STATION #1 507 11f SW FArkR NRD-006 B-EF-2 EAST FORK & LEADVILLE DRAIN STATIONS #2 508 175 SW FArkR .NRD-006 3-EF-3 EAST FORK & LEADVILLE DRAIN STATIONS #3 509 131 SW FArkR .NRD-006 3-EF-4 EAST FORK & LEADVILLE DRAIN STATIONS #4 510 167 SW FArkR NRD-006 B-EF-5 EAST FORK & LEADVILLE DRAINAGE STATION #5 511 153 SW FArkR NRD-055 MOT eadville Mine Drainage Tunnel 22178 170 AMPLE FROM THE EAST FORK OF THE ARKANSAS RIVER OFF THE WEST SIDE F A BRIDGE ON AN UNNAMED DIRT ROAD, NORTHWEST OF LEAOVILLE SW FArkR LNRD-006 W106 UNCTION 676 309 ample from the East Fork of the Arkansas River off the west side of a bridge on an SW FArkR NRD-062 W106 nnamed dirt road, northwest of Leadville Junction. 22213 306 AMP FRM THE LEADVLE TNNL DISCHRG, 20 FT DWNSTRM OF A FLUME ITUATED APPRX 40 FT N OF WHERE OISCHRG CROSSES UNDR THE SW FArkR NRO-006 W107 NTRANCE TO MOLLY BRN TRAILR PARK 677 152 ample from the Leadville Tunnel discharge. 20 feet downstream of a flume situated iproximately 40 feet north of where the discharge crosses under the entrance to Molly SW FArkR NRD-062 W107 rown Trailer Park. 22214 147 ample taken from the north bank of the East Fork Arkansas River approximately 3 iles north of Leadville on Route 91, 100 yards downstream of the Lucky Two Motel, SW FArkR NRD-062 W108 .outh of the highway. 22215 70 SW FArkR NRD-006 WAR02 RKANSAS BELOW EVANS 684 177 SW FArkR NRO-006 WE06 VANS GULCH CONFLUENCE 697 165 SW FArkR NRD-006 P03 LOW FROM THE CANTERBURY TUNNEL. 715 117 w HrkRO NRD-001 0 Arkansas R. Below Leadville 1 347 w HrkR1 NRO-001 8032 Arkansas River below Cal Gulch 185 859 r \rkR2 NRO-001 4 Arkansas River Near Malta 88 9B£ w \rkR2 NRO-001 08370 Arkansas River 187 972 w *rkR3 NRD-001 IVR-3A 0 156 014 \rkR5 NRD-001 AR 0 158 292 \rkR6 NRD-001 ' Ear Cr. Res-Fry-Ark Project 154 415 w \rkR6 NRD-001 9 Arkansas River At Granite 198 399 App_C3_Station Lists.xts Page 4 of 5 10/29/2002 Station Lists Surface water sampling locations • \' • ;y* "••• i.'-.i-;.;,."iV.1' •':.':;> : ! : ; 1 1 V« vr i^ ^^X^^^Zi&W&titi •i-rW &K-£i -::-v?; "*&:&£& fi'l'Sfl -.•iSfci :;::''t^,;:-:.:;#...;.":' I,;:-' )/, }%j;^e$$£; ; .?-.^'-«.."i:«i>:r'.i1"i?>: M*v%! f ':nj •,'^.'-f-'.• ^•V3f«$«* 'm .-"'''S'./ -^ i,'^,;. v"^:-.- £j»* ^..-iv '/.'vr-ir 'ti'^rt ••tfi&tt&tik •-&$ M'£'X; fii*A, •'•'•'!. in ''.;•'.,•'- '?•- V.H - ; $sf '!!$.••. :;:•&•:;-•' ••••,;o'--. A;.>r -' •:W;v'.;'!^v?.: iV- sW: : •|: •*s^si-^.:-.;• ;•'-•'••-.-». tn •• •••'^ -• ^M: '•."• •••• • '-'f- '-•' •'•*• " v M•\''Q •• .' W'' W ArkR6 LNRD-001 36 Arkansas River At Buena Vista 235 306£ W ArkRS LNRD-001 708600 Ark at Granite 159 2373 W ArkR7 LNRD-001 37 Arkansas River Near Salida 236 4344 W ArkR7 LNRD-001 39 Arkansas River Near Nathrop 238 4223 W ArkR7 LNRD-001 40 City Of Salida Wwtp 240 5026 W ArkRS LNRD-001 42 Arkansas River Near Wellsville 242 5286 W ArkRS LNRD-001 43 Canon City Metro Sanitary District 243 5522 W Ark R6 LNRD-001 49 Arkansas River At Parkdale 249 536C W ArkR8 LNRD-001 50 Arkansas River At Canon City 251 5561 W ArkR9 LNRD-001 57 Ideal Cement Florence 258 5746 W ArkRIO LNRD-001 119 Arkansas River Above Pueblo 34 60S; W ArkRIO LNRD-001 123 Arkansas R. D Gardner Plant 53 6137 W ArkRIO LNRD-001 3001 Arkansas River Above Pueblo 284 60S: W Cal Gulch-Al Ark Riv LNRD-001 9 California Gulch At Malta 305 1563 W EFArkR LNRD-001 11001 Headwaters East Fork of the Arkansas River 14 44 W EFArkR LNRD-001 11003 ifabvStorke 15 2£ W EFArkR LNRD-001 11008 :f through wetlands 17 i W EFArkR LNRD-001 11009 East Fork of the Ark. River above Delmonica Gulch 18 1( W EFArkR LNRD-001 11014 Chalk Creek abv trib 19 4 W EFArkR LNRD-001 11016 Chalk Creek 20 1f W EFArkR LNRD-001 11019 Ef blw Delmon 21 31 W EFArkR LNRD-001 11031 Upper English Gulch 22 43 W EFArkR LNRD-001 1050 East Fork of the Arkansas River 23 4( W EFArkR LNRD-001 1051 .ow Birdseye 24 6( W EFArkR LNRD-001 1058 last Fork of the Arkansas River 25 56 W EFArkR LNRD-001 8015 :f(S>qauge 173 161 W EFArkR LNRD-001 8017 •ast Fork Arkansas River 175 17! W EFArkR LNRD-001 EF no 26 87 W EFArkR LNRD-001 24 E Fk Ark 2 Rd Mi Blw Stn 7 222 ( W EFArkR LNRD-001 25 : Fk Ark @ Base Fremont Pass 223 16 W EFArkR LNRD-001 26 Drain Dtch From Amax Mill @ Hy91 224 14 W EF Ark R LNRD-001 27 E Fork Arkansas Above Climax 225 ; EFArkR 1 W LNRD-001 E Fork Arkansas Nr Silver Head 230 ^ W EFArkR LNRD-001 EF East Fork Arkansas River Below Leadville Drain 174 16! W EFArkR LNRD-001 07920 eadville Drain 170 14! W EFArkR LNRD-001 08120 Ark near Lead 176 312 W EFArkR NRD-001 EF-1A East Fork Arkansas River 172 122 W EFArkR NRD-001 EF-H East Fork Arkansas River above Storke Portal 16 20

App_C3_Station Lists.xls Page 5 of 5 10/29/2002 APPENDIX D Descriptions of Mine-Waste Deposits from Chapter 2 Descriptions of Mine-Waste Deposits from Chapter 2

Reach 1 Mine-Waste Deposits

Deposit AA is located on the east side of the Arkansas River and directly north of an irrigation return ditch that discharges at the confluence of California Gulch and the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 8,991 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 4,259 ft2, and has an average mine- waste depth of 2.1 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 115 mg/kg; copper, 160 mg/kg; lead, 3,900 mg/kg; and zinc, 1,700 mg/kg. No vegetation was observed on the deposit. Erosion features (rills) and salt deposits were observed on the surface.

Deposit AB is located on the east side of the Arkansas River between an irrigation return ditch and California Gulch. The Eastern portion of the deposit is less than 10 feet from the Arkansas River bank. It contains approximately 32,187 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 16,685 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.9 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 220 mg/kg; copper, 535 mg/kg; lead, 3,900 mg/kg; and zinc 1,650 mg/kg. Signs of erosion and salts were visible on the surface. Grasses were observed in the low area adjacent to California Gulch.

Deposit AC comprises a portion of the east bank of the Arkansas River and is bordered on the north by California Gulch. This deposit contains approximately 20,286 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 31,137 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.7 ft. The deposit consists of cobble and gravel mixed with mine-waste. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium 250 mg/kg; copper 453 mg/kg; lead, 4,883 mg/kg; and zinc, 17,750 mg/kg. Some vegetation was present on the west portion of the deposit, along the Arkansas River. Grasses were observed in the low area adjacent to California Gulch.

Deposit AD is ten feet from the west bank of the Arkansas River across the river from the California Gulch inflow. The 34,977 ft2 area is covered with orange stained and unstained cobbles. Salts were present on the surface in some areas. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 115 mg/kg; copper, 120 mg/kg; lead, 520 mg/kg; and zinc, 1,900 mg/kg. Sparsely scattered clumps of grass were present, however the deposit is primarily non-vegetated.

Deposit AE is located on the west side of Deposit AD, west of the Arkansas River, approximately 100 feet from the riverbank. It contains approximately 146,313 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 103,280 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.4 ft. Samples from this deposit had

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_D_Ch2MWD.doc D-l average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 414 mg/kg; copper, 698 mg/kg; lead, 8,402 mg/kg; and zinc, 26,433 mg/kg. The deposit had sparse grass and signs of dead grass and willows. There was a thick layer of salt over most of the deposit.

Deposit AG is located on the east side of the Arkansas River adjacent to the river, and, at the northern tip, is in contact with the riverbank. Orange stained cobble separates mine-waste material from the river. Deposit AG has an average mine-waste depth of 0.5 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 105 mg/kg; copper, 857 mg/kg; lead, 5,400 mg/kg; and zinc, 16,600 mg/kg. Some grass and willows were observed on the deposit and some willows were dead. Active erosion of the area along the riverbank was noted.

Deposit AH is located on the east side of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the bank. It contains approximately 12,893 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 14,066 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.9 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 95 mg/kg; copper, 290 mg/kg; lead, 3,400 mg/kg; and zinc, 2,000 mg/kg. Healthy vegetation was observed in the east portion of the deposit and dead vegetation was noted on the west portion of the deposit. Some salts were observed on the surface.

Deposit AI is located on the east side of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the bank. It contains approximately 29,167 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 25,455 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.1 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 208 mg/kg; copper, 88 mg/kg; lead, 2,095 mg/kg; and zinc, 3,900 mg/kg. Vegetation was noted over most of the deposit, but there were some dead willows.

Deposit AJ is located east of the Arkansas River under power lines and away from the river. It contains approximately 6,786 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 9,580 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.7 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 95 mg/kg; copper, 1,200 mg/kg; lead, 6,500 mg/kg; and zinc, 2,500 mg/kg. There are some salts on the surface. The deposit was mostly barren, but several clumps of grass were seen. There were no visible signs of erosion. The deposit appeared to be impacted by livestock.

Deposit BB is located on the west side of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the bank. It contains approximately 9,517 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 11,714 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.8 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 85 mg/kg; copper, 228 mg/kg; lead, 5,350 mg/kg; and zinc, 1,135 mg/kg. Vegetation was noted in low-lying areas of the deposit. Signs of erosion were observed.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_D_Ch2MWD.doc D-2 Deposit CA is located on the east side of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the bank. It contains approximately 28,123 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 38,204 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.7 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 115 mg/kg; copper, 55 mg/kg; lead, 5,800 mg/kg; and zinc, 3, 100 mg/kg. A cut bank, approximately 3.5 to 4 feet, showed erosion of mine-waste material into the river. Erosion channels in the deposit were an indication of erosional activity. Dead willows and limited grass were noted on the deposit.

Deposit CC is located on the west side of the Arkansas River and is approximately 100 feet back from the riverbank. It contains approximately 16,792 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 16,792 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.0 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 85 mg/kg; copper, 1,100 mg/kg; lead, 4,800 mg/kg; and zinc, 4,400 mg/kg. Dead vegetation was noted on the deposit.

Deposit CD is located on the east side of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the bank. It contains approximately 71,571 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 71,571 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.0 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 517 mg/kg; copper, 867 mg/kg; lead, 9,080 mg/kg; and zinc, 41,000 mg/kg. A two- to three-foot eroding cut bank was observed adjacent to the river. The deposit contained little vegetation, but some grass was present in the low areas, and willows surround the deposit.

Deposit CE is located on the west side of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the bank. Mine-waste material continues into a heavily vegetated deposit, which was sampled but not included in the calculation of mine-waste volume. Within the heavily vegetated area is a small, unvegetated area that was included in Deposit CE. It contains approximately 19,756 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 24,146 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.8 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 232 mg/kg; copper, 282 mg/kg; lead, 3,251 mg/kg; and zinc, 2,621 mg/kg. Grasses were noted in low areas and willows surrounded the deposit, but most of the deposit was not vegetated. A cut bank was observed along tributaries on the north, east, and south boundaries of the deposit.

Deposit CF is located west of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 2,665 ft3 of mine- waste over an area of approximately 5,329 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.5 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 120 mg/kg; copper, 300 mg/kg; lead, 8,500 mg/kg; and zinc, 980 mg/kg.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_D_Ch2MWD.doc D-3 Deposit CG is located west of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 6,480 ft3 of mine- waste over an area of approximately 12,959 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.5 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 115 mg/kg; copper, 55 mg/kg; lead, 2,700 mg/kg; and zinc, 440 mg/kg. The deposit consists of sand and cobbles mixed with mine-waste.

Deposit CJ is located east of the Arkansas River directly south of die drainage ditch on the south end of Deposit CD. It contains approximately 20,947 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 20,947 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.0 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 338 mg/kg; copper, 178 mg/kg; lead, 8,015 mg/kg; and zinc, 6,615 mg/kg. Mine-waste material is layered over pyrite in this deposit. Dead vegetation was noted.

Deposit CK is located east of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the bank. It contains approximately 28,927 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 13,351 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 2.2 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 100 mg/kg; copper, 60 mg/kg; lead, 1,075 mg/kg; and zinc, 200 mg/kg. Dead vegetation was noted on the deposit.

Deposit CL is located east of the Arkansas River, and the northern tip is in contact with the river. It contains approximately 154,281 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 106,026 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.5 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 175 mg/kg; copper, 917 mg/kg; lead, 3,108 mg/kg; and zinc, 16,105 mg/kg. Most of the deposit was not vegetated and dead willows and grass were noted. Low areas contained grasses and some willows. Erosion channels and a 1.5- to 3-foot cut bank were observed as signs of erosion.

Deposit CN is located on the east side of the Arkansas River and is actually a part of Deposit CO. It was studied separately from deposit CO because it is on property of a different landowner. Deposit CN contains approximately 29,024 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 17,415 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.7 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 85 mg/kg; copper, 185 mg/kg; lead, 1,776 mg/kg; and zinc, 1,670 mg/kg. There was a two-foot cut bank observed adjacent to standing water on the northern boundary. The deposit was not vegetated and was covered with salts.

J:\OI0004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendiccs\App_D_Ch2MWD.doc D-4 Deposit CO is located on the east side of the Arkansas River adjacent to the river. It contains approximately 83,464 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 102,011 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.8 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 244 mg/kg; copper, 956 mg/kg; lead, 1,936 mg/kg; and zinc, 6,227 mg/kg. The visible signs of erosion included cut banks and erosion channels. The deposit was not vegetated except for small amounts of grass along a tributary north of the site. Dead vegetation was noted throughout the deposit and salts were observed on the surface.

Deposit CP is a small deposit located on the west bank of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 712 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 5,698 ft2, and has an average mine- waste depth of 0.1 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 100 mg/kg; copper, 293 mg/kg; lead, 2,533 mg/kg; and zinc, 1,210 mg/kg. There are finger- like deposits extending into the vegetation. The deposit had some vegetation noted on both sides of the ditch. The mine-wastes are sandy and salts were visible on the surface.

Deposit CR is located on the east side of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 36,876 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 39,091 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.9 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 111 mg/kg; copper, 391 mg/kg; lead, 1,622 mg/kg; and zinc, 4,383 mg/kg. The deposit had both live and dead vegetation. Willows were observed growing in shallow mine-waste material and salts were observed on the surface.

Deposit CS is located on the east side of the Arkansas River at the confluence with Lake Fork Creek. Mine-waste material is separated from the river by a retaining wall. Deposit CS contains approximately 60,386 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 38,414 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.6 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 208 mg/kg; copper, 431 mg/kg; lead, 2,926 mg/kg; and zinc, 9,990 mg/kg. The deposit had abundant vegetation in the southwest corner. Dead willows were noted, but some dead willow clumps contained new growth. Grasses were observed at the edges of the deposit.

Reach 2 Mine-Waste Deposits

Deposit FA is located on the east side of the Arkansas River approximately 200 feet back from the river, just south of the confluence with Lake Fork Creek. It contains approximately 13,507 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 50,873 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.3 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 133 mg/kg;

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appcndices\App_D_Ch2MWD.doc D-5 copper, 676 mg/kg; Lead, 3,245 mg/kg; and zinc, 6,413 mg/kg. Heavy surface salts were observed. The deposit was primarily non-vegetated, but there were live willows surrounding the deposit.

Deposit FB is located on the east side of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the bank of the river. It contains approximately 33,329 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 107,628 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.3 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 88 mg/kg; copper, 848 mg/kg; lead, 4,062 mg/kg; and zinc, 6,020 mg/kg. The deposit was primarily non-vegetated and dead willows were observed, but the south end of the deposit contained live grasses and willows. Heavy salts were observed on the surface.

Deposit FC is located on the east side of the Arkansas River adjacent to the river. It contains approximately 3,750 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 12,693 ft2, and has an average mine- waste depth of 0.3 ft. This deposit was not sampled. There were many isolated mine-wastes in thick willows.

Deposit FD is located on the east side of the Arkansas River adjacent to the river. It contains approximately 659 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 1,759 ft2, and has an average mine- waste depth of 0.4 ft. This deposit was not sampled. The deposit has cobbles and grass surrounding mine-waste.

Deposit FE is located on the east side of the Arkansas River, comprises a portion of the bank of the river, and curves to the southeast. It contains approximately 239 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 957 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.3 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 95 mg/kg; copper, 55 mg/kg; lead, 85 mg/kg; and zinc, 460 mg/kg. The mine-waste is under approximately 2.5 feet of soil and was only observable on the cut bank.

Deposit FF is located on the east side of the Arkansas River, comprises a portion of the bank of the river, and is adjacent to an irrigation ditch. The mine-waste appears to have been deposited from the irrigation ditch rather than from the river. It contains approximately 4,285 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 18,698 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.2 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 305 mg/kg; copper, 165 mg/kg; lead, 2,725 mg/kg; and zinc, 955 mg/kg. The center of deposit FF had dead vegetation, and salts were present. The edges of the deposit were heavily vegetated with willows and grasses.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_D_Ch2MWD.doc D-6 Deposit FG is on an island with abundant vegetation. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 95 mg/kg; copper, 55 mg/kg; lead, 2,300 mg/kg; and zinc, 1,000 mg/kg. The mine-waste material has an average mine-waste depth of 0.1 feet.

Deposit FH is located on the west side of the Arkansas River, adjacent to the river. It contains approximately 89 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 533 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.2 ft. Samples were not collected from deposit FH because of the small area.

Deposit FI is located on the east side of the Arkansas River on the riverbank. Mine-waste material was observed in the cut bank under four inches of organic material. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 95 mg/kg; copper, 55 mg/kg; lead, 680 mg/kg; and zinc, 955 mg/kg.

Deposit FJ is located on the west side of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the bank of the river. It contains approximately 7,918 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 14,152 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.6 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 230 mg/kg; copper, 220 mg/kg; lead, 9,700 mg/kg; and zinc, 3,200 mg/kg. Grasses and willows were observed on the west edge of the deposit. The deposit had a one-foot cut bank. Salts were visible in non-vegetated areas.

Deposit FL is on an island in the Arkansas River. This deposit is well vegetated and the vegetation has good root development. It contains approximately 590 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 884 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.7 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 190 mg/kg; copper, 190 mg/kg; lead, 2,700 mg/kg; and zinc, 1,500 mg/kg.

Deposit FM is located on the west side of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the bank of the river. It contains approximately 12,965 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 27,726 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.5 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 270 mg/kg; copper, 231 mg/kg; lead, 10,000 mg/kg; and zinc, 9,350 mg/kg. The deposit was not vegetated and had signs of heavy cattle trampling. There was a cut bank by the river.

Deposit FN is located on the east side of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the bank of the river. It contains approximately 5,516 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 5,928 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.9 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of

J:\OI0004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_D_Ch2MWD.doc D-7 the following metals: cadmium, 95 mg/kg; copper, 140 mg/kg; lead, 1,400 mg/kg; and zinc, 900 mg/kg. There were grasses on the stream bank and a few willows on the edges of the deposit. There was a one- foot cut bank.

Deposit FO is located on the east side of the Arkansas River. It contains unknown depths of mine-waste mixed with cobble over an area of approximately 5,279 ft2. Deposit FO was not sampled because of the large amount of cobbles.

Deposit GA is located on the west side of the Arkansas River twenty feet from the river. It contains approximately 7900 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 2,032 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.4 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 95 mg/kg; copper, 285 mg/kg; lead, 3,133 mg/kg; and zinc, 6,767 mg/kg. Deposit GA is surrounded by an irrigation ditch. This deposit was well vegetated with some bare zones. Cattle have trampled portions of area.

Deposit GB is located on the east side of the Arkansas River adjacent to the river, and consists of a one-foot-thick band of mine-waste along a 2.5-foot cut bank. It contains approximately 554 ft3 of mine- waste over an area of approximately 391 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.4 ft. There are no analytical data characterizing the metal concentrations associated with the mine-waste in deposit GB. The deposit had good vegetation cover. The visible signs of erosion included a cut bank susceptible to erosion during high flow events.

Deposit GC is located on the west side of the Arkansas River 25 feet from the riverbank. It covers approximately 1,754 ft2. The deposit contains piles of dredged cobble mixed with mine-waste. Mine-waste was also evident eight inches below ground surface in the river cut. There were no analytical data characterizing the metal concentrations associated with the mine-waste deposit.

Deposit GE is located on the east side of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the bank of the river. It contains approximately 4,111 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 3,523 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.2 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 95 mg/kg; copper, 210 mg/kg; lead, 2,700 mg/kg; and zinc, 1,000 mg/kg. The deposit has minimal grassy vegetation. There was visible erosion of a two-foot cut bank.

Deposit GH is located on the west side of the Arkansas River 10 feet from the riverbank. It contains approximately 2,110 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 3,014 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.7 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the

J:\OI0004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_D_Ch2MWD.doc D-8 following metals: cadmium, 95 mg/kg; copper, 55 mg/kg; lead, 350 mg/kg; and zinc, 310 mg/kg. The deposit had visible signs of erosion, including a drainage that runs along the east bank of the deposit. There were signs of cattle trampling through the deposit.

Deposit GI is located on the east side of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the bank of the river. It contains approximately 5,491 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 9,414 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.6 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 95 mg/kg; copper, 55 mg/kg; lead, 1,600 mg/kg; and zinc, 840 mg/kg. The deposit was surrounded by good vegetation cover, but there were signs of cattle trampling that may have reduced plant cover.

Deposit GJ is located on the west side of the Arkansas River. This deposit consists of an intermittent series of mine-waste deposits along a cut bank on the western side of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 74 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 588 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.1 ft. There are no analytical data that characterize the metals concentrations contained within this mine-waste deposit. The deposit had good vegetation cover.

Deposit GK is the downstream end of an island located near the west side of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 994 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 1,884 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.5 ft. There are no analytical results for this deposit. The deposit had dead vegetation and there were salts visible on the surface. Erosion was observed in the deposit.

Deposit GL is located on the west side of the Arkansas River 60 feet from the riverbank. It contains approximately 2,590 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 3,532 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.7 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 203 mg/kg; copper, 153 mg/kg; lead, 6,300 mg/kg; and zinc, 9,600 mg/kg. The deposit had some salt deposits present on the surface.

Deposit GM is located on the east side of the Arkansas River, comprises a portion of the bank of the river, and consists of a band of mine-waste occupying the cut bank adjacent to the river. It contains approximately 652 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 2,609 ft2, and has an average mine- waste depth of 0.3 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 260 mg/kg; copper, 370 mg/kg; lead, 9,200 mg/kg; and zinc, 9,800 mg/kg. The deposit had abundant vegetation on the surface. The visible signs of erosion included a cut bank.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_D_Ch2MWD.doc D-9 Deposit GN is located in the center of an island in the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 497 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 1,988 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.3 ft. There are no analytical data characterizing the metals concentrations of the mine-waste materials in this deposit. The deposit had some vegetation, and the mine-waste were well mixed with river sands. Some salts were observed on the surface vegetation.

Deposit HA is located on the west side of the Arkansas River approximately 40 feet from the riverbank. Deposit HA contains approximately 9,297 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 12,873 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.7 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 95 mg/kg; copper, 55 mg/kg; lead, 3,400 mg/kg; and zinc, 2,900 mg/kg. The deposit had sparse vegetation cover with no visible sign of current erosion in this deposit.

Deposit HB is located on an island occupying the middle of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 244 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 1,099 ft2, and has an average mine- waste depth of 0.2 ft. The mine-waste is a four-inch deposit under approximately five inches of topsoil. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 78 mg/kg; copper, 120 mg/kg; lead, 1,350 mg/kg; and zinc, 800 mg/kg. The deposit had some grass and willows present.

Deposit HD is located on the east side of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the bank of the river. It contains approximately 1,182 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 2,703 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.4 ft. There was an eight-inch layer of mine-waste over river gravel at the cut bank. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 95 mg/kg; copper, 120 mg/kg; lead, 2,500 mg/kg; and zinc, 1,300 mg/kg. The deposit had poor vegetation cover. The visible signs of erosion include a cut bank and material eroding into a field adjacent to the deposit.

Deposit HE is located on the west side of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the bank of the river. It contains approximately 1,818 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 6,981 ft2. The mine-wastes are well mixed with river gravels to a depth of approximately 0.3 feet. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 95 mg/kg; copper, 130 mg/kg; lead, 1,100 mg/kg; and zinc, 510 mg/kg. The deposit was vegetated with grass and willows and showed signs of cattle trampling. There was little evidence of erosion.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_D_Ch2MWD.doc D-10 Deposit HI is located on the west side of the Arkansas River adjacent to the river. It contains approximately 21,931 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 21,338 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.0 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 240 mg/kg; copper, 130 mg/kg; and zinc, 13,000 mg/kg. The deposit is sparsely vegetated. Deposit HI is located on the inside of a river bend and did not show evidence of active erosion. The deposit had sparse grasses and contained many cobbles on the surface.

Deposit HK is located on the west side of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the bank of the river. It contains approximately 11,647 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 13,439 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.9 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 95 mg/kg; copper, 300 mg/kg; lead, 1,600 mg/kg; and zinc, 2,200 mg/kg. The deposit is poorly vegetated. The visible signs of erosion included an actively eroding one-foot cut bank.

Deposit LA is located on the east side of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the bank of the river. It contains approximately 5,713 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 6,634 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.9 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 210 mg/kg; copper, 55 mg/kg; lead, 3,800 mg/kg; and zinc, 750 mg/kg. The deposit had little vegetation. The visible signs of erosion included a one-foot cut bank.

Deposit 1C is located on the west side of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the bank of the river, but is separated from the river by cobble and vegetation. It contains approximately 14,493 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 13,378 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.1 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 95 mg/kg; copper, 130 mg/kg; lead, 1,000 mg/kg; and zinc, 680 mg/kg. The deposit had no vegetation cover.

Deposit KK is located on the west side of the Arkansas River 10 feet from the river channel, and comprises a portion of the bank of the river. It contains approximately 1,886 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 9,052 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.2 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 148mg/kg; copper, 185 mg/kg; lead, 2,350 mg/kg; and zinc, 1,250 mg/kg. The deposit had sparse vegetation cover.

Deposit KL is located on the banks of a drainage ditch located on the west side of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 56,909 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 37,250 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.5 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 228 mg/kg; copper, 218 mg/kg; lead, 4,783 mg/kg; and zinc, 4,360 mg/kg.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_D_Ch2MWD.doc D-l 1 The deposit had sparse vegetation cover. The visible signs of erosion included a two-foot cut bank along the drainage ditch. Evidence of cattle trampling was observed.

Reach 3 Mine-Waste Deposits

Deposit LA is located approximately 100 feet east of the Arkansas River at the base of the Highway 24 overpass. It contains approximately 3,626 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 6,217 ft2 and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.6 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 260; copper, 260; lead, 5,600 mg/kg and zinc, 12,000 mg/kg. Little vegetation was observed on the deposit. Mine-wastes were visible at the south end of the deposit, while stained sand and cobble dominated the north end of the deposit.

Deposit LB is located on the east side of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the riverbank at the base of the Highway 24 overpass. It contains approximately 11,019 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 12,796 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.9 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 275; copper, 210; lead, 3,300 mg/kg and zinc, 10,450 mg/kg. No vegetation was observed on the deposit, but grasses surrounded the area. Salts were observed on the surface. The deposit has a cut bank up to five feet high. Portions of the cut bank contained mine-waste.

Deposit LC is located on the west bank of the Arkansas River at the base of the Highway 24 overpass. It is separated from the river by a narrow strip of grass, willows, and cobble. It contains approximately 24,275 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 44,388 ft2 and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.5 ft. Samples from this deposit had concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 374 mg/kg; copper, 434 mg/kg; lead, 4,680 mg/kg; and zinc, 48,320 mg/kg. Thick salts were present on the surface. Some grasses were observed in sections of the deposit without surface salts. Grasses and willows were present adjacent to the deposit and between the deposit and the Arkansas River. Samples collected from deposit LC showed soil pH from 1.8 to 5.0.

Deposit LD is located on the west side of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the riverbank. It contains approximately 8,419 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 21,649 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.4 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 74 mg/kg; copper, 226 mg/kg; lead, 1,856 mg/kg; and zinc, 2,792 mg/kg. The deposit consists primarily of stained cobble and gravel mixed with mine-waste, but has mine-waste in thicker amounts around the edges. The deposit is surrounded by a dense grassy area. There were dead

J:\Ol0004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_D_Ch2MVVD.doc D-12 willows and salts on the surface of the deposit. Samples collected from deposit LD showed soil pH from 3.5 to 5.6.

Deposit LG is located south of an orange stained cobble and sand deposit east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 235 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 352 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.7 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 190 mg/kg; copper, 200 mg/kg; lead, 5,300 mg/kg; and zinc, 7,700 mg/kg. The deposit was barren, and some salts were present on the adjacent cobble and sand. One sample from deposit LG showed a soil pH of 1.5.

Deposit LH is located east of the Arkansas River. The deposit is separated from the small stream by a low grassy area. It contains approximately 3,619 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 16,287 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.2 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 48 mg/kg; copper, 480 mg/kg; lead, 3,500 mg/kg; and zinc, 7,700 mg/kg. Salts were present on drier sections of the deposit. There were signs of cattle trampling present. One sample from deposit LH showed a soil pH of 5.3.

Deposit LI is located along the east bank of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the riverbank. It contains approximately 11,401 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 11,214 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.0 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 269 mg/kg; copper, 345 mg/kg; lead, 2,500 mg/kg; and zinc, 11,400 mg/kg. There were indications of heavy cattle use, including a well-worn cattle path. Salts were present on the surface, and dead willow clumps were present. A one- to two-foot cut bank on the Arkansas River is located over part of the west edge of the deposit. Samples collected from deposit LI showed soil pH from 4.0 to 5.2.

Deposit LK is located on the west side of the Arkansas River and is partly in contact with the river by an area of grass and willows. It contains approximately 7,649 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 17,765 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.4 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 84 mg/kg; copper, 643 mg/kg; lead, 2,433 mg/kg; and zinc, 3,133 mg/kg. The deposit contained stained cobble and gravel in the center of the deposit, but mine-waste are on the surface around the cobble and gravel. The deposit is surrounded by grasses and willows. Dead willows and light salts were observed on the surface. Samples collected from deposit LK showed soil pH from 2.5 to 4.1.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appcndices\App_D_Ch2MWD.doc D-13 Deposit LL is located to the west of the Arkansas River. The center of the deposit is primarily stained cobble, willows, and grasses. Mine-wastes are located on the north and south ends of the cobbled area. It contains approximately 3,483 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 5,224 ft and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.7 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 74 mg/kg; copper, 287 mg/kg; lead, 3,767 mg/kg; and zinc, 830 mg/kg. Some salts were present on the cobbled area near willows and grass. The stream bank was stabilized with grasses. The area is surrounded by dense grass and willows. Samples collected from deposit LL showed soil pH from 2.7 to 3.3.

Deposit LM is located along the east bank of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 20,744 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 16,377 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.3 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 152 mg/kg; copper 425 mg/kg; lead, 7,300 mg/kg; and zinc, 5,273 mg/kg. Clumps of grasses were growing on the southern most section of the deposit, but the rest of the deposit was non-vegetated. Salts were observed on the surface. The deposit has a cut bank on the Arkansas River. Samples collected from deposit LM showed soil pH from 3.2 to 5.3.

Deposit LN is located to the east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 41,880 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 45,985 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.9 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 575 mg/kg; copper, 455 mg/kg; lead, 11,525 mg/kg; and zinc, 34,973 mg/kg. The center of the deposit is primarily stained cobble and sand with mine-waste along the edges. Grasses have encroached on the mine-waste along the eastern edge of the deposit. Sporadic grass clumps were observed in a small section near the western boundary of the deposit, and a grass area defined the western edge of the deposit. There were signs of cattle trampling on the deposit. Samples collected from deposit LB showed soil pH from 2.2 to 4.9.

Deposit LO is located to the east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 23,498 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 20,349 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.2 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 128 mg/kg; copper, 487 mg/kg; lead, 3,133 mg/kg; and zinc, 6,200 mg/kg. The deposit has stained cobble and sand in the center, with mine-waste at the north and east ends. Some grasses were observed on the deposit. The creek bank was stabilized with grasses except for a cattle-crossing area at the north end. There were signs of surface erosion. Samples collected from deposit LO showed soil pH from 3.4 to 4.8.

J:\OI0004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_D_Ch2MVVD.doc D-14 Deposit LP is located east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 8,390 ft3 of mine- waste over an area of approximately 15,794 ft2 and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.5 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 119 mg/kg; copper, 280 mg/kg; lead, 1,950 mg/kg and zinc, 14,800 mg/kg. The stream bank was vegetated with grasses. The eastern section of the deposit had mine-waste at the surface. The area had signs of extensive cattle activity. Salts were observed on the surface. Samples collected from deposit LP showed soil pH from 2.9 to 4.7.

Deposit LQ is located east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 6,152 ft3 of mine- waste over an area of approximately 5,906 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.0 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 99 mg/kg; copper, 377 mg/kg; lead, 4,125 mg/kg; and zinc, 6,525 mg/kg. There is a 1.5-foot cut bank along the stream bank; some of the stream bank is stabilized with grasses. Cattle tracks and salts were observed on the surface. Samples collected from deposit LQ showed soil pH from 2.7 to 5.0.

Deposit LR is a small deposit located east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 1,444 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 1,155 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.3 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 48 mg/kg; copper, 470 mg/kg; lead, 9,900 mg/kg and zinc, 1,800 mg/kg. The creek bank is stabilized with grasses. Several dead willows were observed on the deposit. Grasses surround the deposit. One sample from deposit LR showed a soil pH of 3.8.

Deposit LS is located to the east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 57,181 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 43,272 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.3 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 185 mg/kg; copper, 345 mg/kg; lead, 4,121 mg/kg; and zinc, 3,664 mg/kg. The deposit was primarily non-vegetated. Cattle tracks and salts were observed on the surface. Samples collected from deposit LS showed soil pH from 2.4 to 5.1.

Deposit LT is located east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 1,931 ft3 of mine- waste over an area of approximately 2,970 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.7 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 48 mg/kg; copper, 70 mg/kg; lead, 370 mg/kg; and zinc, 1,200 mg/kg. There is some grass cover throughout the site. Abundant grass was observed on the stream bank. One sample from deposit LT showed a soil pH of 4.0.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_D_Ch2MWD.doc D-l 5 Deposit LU is a small deposit located to the west of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 336 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 504 ft2, and has an average mine- waste depth of 0.7 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 48 mg/kg; copper, 210 mg/kg; lead, 1,500 mg/kg and zinc, 590 mg/kg. Cattle tracks were observed on the deposit. One sample from deposit LU showed a soil pH of 2.4.

Deposit LV is located to the east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 16,299 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 11,041 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.5 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 301 mg/kg; copper, 533 mg/kg; lead, 2,673 mg/kg; and zinc, 16,728 mg/kg. Grass cover was observed on the stream bank, except for the western most portion, which has a 1.5- to 2-foot cut bank. Mine-wastes were observed on the cut bank. The eastern section is primarily cobble in the center, surrounded by mine- waste. Cattle tracks were observed in the area. Surface salts were observed on the northern most portion of the deposit. Samples collected from deposit LV showed soil pH from 2.1 to 5.5.

Deposit MA is located on the east bank of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 1,312 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 1,049 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.5 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 85 mg/kg; copper, 140 mg/kg; lead, 1,000 mg/kg and zinc, 3,000 mg/kg. The visible signs of erosion included an eight-inch cut bank. The deposit had no vegetation, but was surrounded by grasses.

Deposit MB is located to the east of the Arkansas River, comprises a portion of the riverbank, and extends 250 feet back from the riverbank. It contains approximately 85,765 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 31,728 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.1 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 123 mg/kg; copper, 242 mg/kg; lead, 2,075 mg/kg; and zinc, 6,518 mg/kg. The deposit had no vegetation present. The visible signs of erosion included a three-foot cut bank. There were some salts observed on the surface.

Deposit ME is located to the east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 22,399 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 38,398 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.6 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 75 mg/kg; copper, 120 mg/kg; lead, 3,200 mg/kg and zinc, 880 mg/kg. The deposit had no vegetation present. The visible signs of erosion included a 1.5-foot cut bank, but in most of the area the tributary bank is stabilized with grasses.

JAO10004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_D_Ch2MWD.doc D-16 Deposit MF is located on the east side of the Arkansas River adjacent to the river. It contains approximately 1,632 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 1,130 ft2, and has an average mine- waste depth of 1.4 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 228 mg/kg; copper, 140 mg/kg; lead, 1,203 mg/kg; and zinc, 11,800. Vegetation in the area included both live and dead willows, and very little grass. The visible signs of erosion included a 3.5-foot cut bank. Cattle activity was observed in the area.

Deposit MG is located to the east of the Arkansas River approximately 120 feet from the riverbank. It contains approximately 9,172 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 22,661 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.4 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 300 mg/kg; copper, 170 mg/kg; lead, 3,300 mg/kg and zinc, 930 mg/kg. The deposit had sparse vegetation.

Deposit MH is located to the east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 4,329 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 6,835 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.6 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 92 mg/kg; copper, 188 mg/kg; lead, 4,233 mg/kg and zinc, 2,557 mg/kg. The deposit was surrounded by vegetation and had a well-vegetated cut bank. Signs of extensive cattle activity were observed.

Deposit MI is located to the east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 14,529 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 10,170 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.4 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 85 mg/kg; copper, 65 mg/kg; lead, 1,600 mg/kg and zinc, 380 mg/kg. The deposit contained dead willows and sparse clumps of grass. There were signs of extensive cattle activity. Salts were observed on the surface.

Deposit MJ is located to the east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 2,262 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 9,048 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.3 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 80 mg/kg; copper, 79 mg/kg; lead, 4,150 mg/kg and zinc, 2,350. The deposit contained many cobbles on the surface. Salts were observed in places and cattle activity was evident.

Deposit MK is located to the east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 5,137 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 9,943 ft", and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.5 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 75 mg/kg; copper, 170 mg/kg; lead, 6,900 mg/kg and zinc, 2,900 mg/kg. The deposit had grass cover and showed signs of cattle use.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_D_Ch2MWD.doc D-l 7 Deposit ML is located to the east of the Arkansas River adjacent to the river. It contains approximately 2,149 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 3,223 ft2, and has an average mine- waste depth of 0.7 ft. No samples were collected from this deposit. The deposit had dead grass, and salts were present. A three-foot cut bank showed signs of active erosion.

Deposit MM is located to the east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 11,533 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 11,533 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.0 ft. The deposit had some grass cover, but was primarily stained cobble surrounded by sand mixed with mine- waste over cobble. The deposit was not sampled because of the cobble.

Deposit MN is located to the east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 1,296 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 5,183 ft2 of organic soil, and has an average depth of 0.3 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 75 mg/kg; copper, 46 mg/kg; lead, 1,600 mg/kg and zinc, 15,000 mg/kg. The deposit was well vegetated, except where trampled by cattle. The mine-waste material is a one-inch lens under about 18 inches of soil.

Deposit MP is located on the west bank of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 8,000 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 4,800 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.7 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 89 mg/kg; copper, 170 mg/kg; lead, 1,160 mg/kg and zinc, 1,677 mg/kg. The deposit has a three-foot cut bank on the river. Samples collected from deposit MP showed soil pH from 3.2 to 4.5.

Deposit MQ is located on the west bank of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 85,765 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 40,307 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 2.1 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 101 mg/kg; copper, 313 mg/kg; lead, 1,458 mg/kg; and zinc, 5,798 mg/kg. The deposit is surrounded by standing water, except for the easternmost boundary, which is the Arkansas River. The northern section of the oxbow has mine-waste at the surface. Salts and cattle tracks were observed on the surface. The deposit was primarily non-vegetated, but some grass and willows were observed; the willows showed some new growth. Cut banks are located on the river and the oxbow channel. Samples collected from deposit MQ showed soil pH from 3.6 to 5.5.

Deposit NA is located on an inside bend of the west bank of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 8,919 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 4,039 ft2, and has an average mine- waste depth of 2.2 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals:

J:\010004\Task3 -SCR\Appendices\App_D_Ch2MWD.doc D-18 cadmium, 169 mg/kg; copper, 225 mg/kg; lead, 950 mg/kg and zinc, 3,765 mg/kg. Salts, cattle tracks, and dead willows were observed on the surface. A two- to three-foot cut bank was present along the Arkansas River. Samples collected from deposit LB showed soil pH from 2.6 to 4.0.

Deposit NB is located to the east of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the riverbank. It contains approximately 25,143 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 35,496 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.7 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 95 mg/kg; copper, 280 mg/kg; lead, 2,500 mg/kg; and zinc, 1,900. The deposit had live and dead vegetation, including grass and willows. The visible signs of erosion included a three-foot cut bank.

Deposit NC is located to the west of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 17,288 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 4,039 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 2.2 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 57 mg/kg; copper, 290 mg/kg; lead, 1,600 mg/kg and zinc, 1,870 mg/kg. Dead willows and salts were observed on the surface. Samples collected from deposit NC showed soil pH from 3.1 to 3.8.

Deposit ND is located to the west of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the riverbank. It contains approximately 45,187 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 21,324 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 2.1 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 120 mg/kg; copper, 170 mg/kg; lead, 1,270 mg/kg and zinc, 640 mg/kg. There is a 3- to 4-foot cut bank on the river. Dead willows, salts, and cattle tracks were observed on the surface. The deposit is primarily non-vegetated, but some grass was observed near the edges of the mine- waste deposit. Samples collected from deposit ND showed soil pH from 3.3 to 3.4.

Deposit NG is located to the east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 62,398 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 44,046 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.4 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 90 mg/kg; copper, 58 mg/kg; lead, 245 mg/kg; and zinc, 1,710 mg/kg. The deposit had grass cover and dead willows present. Good grass cover was observed along low deposits adjacent to the tributary. The visible signs of erosion included a two- to three-foot cut bank.

Deposit NH is located to the east of the Arkansas River. The deposit is a part of the groundwater study area of the USGS. It contains approximately 27,356 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 35,811 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.8 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 172 mg/kg; copper, 180 mg/kg; lead, 2,400

J:\OI0004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_D_Ch2MWD.doc D-l 9 mg/kg; and zinc, 7,740 mg/kg. The deposit had dead willows, but abundant grass along low areas adjacent to the tributary. The visible signs of erosion included a four-foot cut bank.

Deposit NI is located to the east of the Arkansas River. It is part of the USGS groundwater study area. Deposit NI contains approximately 70,057 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 69,734 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.0 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 128 mg/kg; copper, 405 mg/kg; lead, 4,293 mg/kg and zinc, 2,308 mg/kg. The deposit was primarily non-vegetated, and there was evidence of dead willows. Good grass cover was observed by the tributary. The visible signs of erosion included a one- to three-foot cut bank.

Deposit NJ is located to the east of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the riverbank. It contains approximately 1,618 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 4,088 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.4 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 115 mg/kg; copper, 55 mg/kg; lead, 760 mg/kg; and zinc, 410 mg/kg. The deposit had sparse grass cover, and was surrounded by grass and some willows. Light salts were observed on the surface. The visible signs of erosion included a one-foot cut bank.

Deposit NL is located to the east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 21,722 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 14,145 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.5 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 115 mg/kg; copper, 55 mg/kg; lead, 1,250 mg/kg and zinc, 415 mg/kg. The deposit was mostly non-vegetated, but grass cover was observed in the low-lying area adjacent to the deposit.

Deposit NN is located to the east of the Arkansas River and the southern tip of the deposit comprises a portion of the riverbank. It contained approximately 9,291 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 28,835 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.3 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 80 mg/kg; copper, 108 mg/kg; lead, 4,300 mg/kg and zinc, 2,200 mg/kg. The surface contained a few clumps of grass. The visible signs of erosion included a small cut bank. Light salts were observed on the surface.

Deposit NO is located to the east of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the riverbank. It contains approximately 14,147 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 6,757 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 2.1 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 85 mg/kg; copper, 330 mg/kg; lead, 3,000 mg/kg and zinc, 1,500 mg/kg. The deposit had some vegetation, but was primarily bare. The visible signs of erosion included a 1.5-foot cut bank.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_D_Ch2MWD.doc D-20 Deposit NP is located to the east of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the riverbank. It contains approximately 5,060 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 10,469 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.5 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 128 mg/kg; copper, 180 mg/kg; lead, 1,950 mg/kg and zinc, 1,250 mg/kg. No vegetation was present, possibly due to heavy cattle use. The visible signs of erosion included a 17- inch cut bank with signs of current erosion.

Deposit NR is located to the west of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 46,265 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 28,071 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.6 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 48 mg/kg; copper, 480 mg/kg; lead, 2,275 mg/kg; and zinc, 1,825 mg/kg. Cattle tracks, salts, and dead willows were observed on the surface. Grass was growing in low areas next to the deposit. Samples collected from deposit NR showed soil pH from 3.6 to 4.0.

Deposit NT is located along the west bank of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 5,900 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 14,900 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.4 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 94 mg/kg; copper, 235 mg/kg; lead, 1,950 mg/kg and zinc, 2,900 mg/kg. There was a cut bank along the river, but the bank was primarily cobbles. Salts were observed on the surface. Samples collected from deposit NT showed soil pH from 3.8 to 5.5.

Deposit NU is located to the west of the Arkansas River near a small creek, and a small portion comprises a portion of the riverbank. It contains approximately 15,495 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 16,169 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.0 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 79 mg/kg; copper, 195 mg/kg; lead, 2,250 mg/kg; and zinc, 820 mg/kg. An erosional ditch runs through the deposit. The deposit is surrounded by grasses and shrubs, with willows observed southwest of the deposit. The deposit is separated from the river by a grassy area. Salts, dead willows, and livestock tracks were observed on the surface. Samples collected from deposit NU showed soil pH from 2.1 to 3.0.

Deposit OA is located to the west of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the riverbank. It contains approximately 55,257 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 46,416 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.2 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 57 mg/kg; copper, 455 mg/kg; lead, 3,150 mg/kg; and zinc, 2,700 mg/kg.

J:\OI0004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_D_Ch2MVVD.doc D-2 1 There is a cut bank and cobbles along the river. Dead willows, salts, and livestock tracks were observed on the surface. Samples collected from deposit OA showed soil pH from 2.1 to 3.8.

Deposit OB is located to the east of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the riverbank. It contains approximately 47,141 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 34,155 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.4 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 85 mg/kg; copper, 65 mg/kg; lead, 813 mg/kg and zinc, 868 mg/kg. The deposit had uneven plant cover. The visible signs of erosion included a three-foot cut bank.

Deposit OC is located to the west of the Arkansas River. It consists of three ellipsoid deposits in the midst of a large cobble deposit. It contains approximately 6,989 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 19,865 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.4 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 65 mg/kg; copper, 230 mg/kg; lead, 4,000 mg/kg; and zinc, 3,900 mg/kg. Cattle tracks were observed on the surface. Samples collected from deposit OC showed soil pH from 3.9 to 4.6.

Deposit OD is located to the west of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 7,048 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 8,601 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.8 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 124 mg/kg; copper, 300 mg/kg; lead, 3,100 mg/kg; and zinc, 1,145 mg/kg. Light salts and livestock tracks were observed on the surface. The deposit is primarily non-vegetated with grasses growing in the low area between the two sections. Samples collected from deposit OD showed soil pH from 2.3 to 4.1.

Deposit OE is located to the west of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the riverbank. It contains approximately 37,689 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 31,890 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.2 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 221 mg/kg; copper, 268 mg/kg; lead, 3,513 mg/kg; and zinc, 6,912 mg/kg. Salts, livestock tracks, and dead willows were observed on the surface. Erosion channels were present. Samples collected from deposit OE showed soil pH from 3.9 to 5.3.

Deposit OF is located to the east of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the riverbank. It contains approximately 9,754 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 15,103 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.6 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 85 mg/kg; copper, 65 mg/kg; lead, 340 mg/kg and zinc, 660 mg/kg. Dead willows were observed and most of the area was non-vegetated. Salt was observed on the surface. A two-foot cut bank adjacent to the river showed signs of erosion.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_D_Ch2MWD.doc D-22 Deposit OG is a finger of mine-wastes on the west side of the Arkansas River, which continues into a densely vegetated area. It contains approximately 19,164 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 11,498 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.7 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 97 mg/kg; copper, 70 mg/kg; lead, 100 mg/kg; and zinc, 970 mg/kg. The deposit is non-vegetated. Dead willows and livestock tracks were observed on the surface. One sample from deposit OG showed a soil pH of 5.5.

Deposit OH is located on the west bank of the Arkansas River. It consists of two mine-waste deposits over cobble. It contains approximately 4,017 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 3,708 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.1 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 48 mg/kg; copper, 160 mg/kg; lead, 2,150 mg/kg; and zinc, 1,675 mg/kg. Samples collected from deposit OH showed soil pH from 2.5 to 5.0.

Deposit OI consists of mine-waste along the west side of the Arkansas River. One section of the deposit is surrounded by grasses. The deposit contains approximately 3,301 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 3,301 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.0 ft. One section consists of mine-waste placed in a manmade cobble wall. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 250 mg/kg; copper, 690 mg/kg; lead, 1,950 mg/kg; and zinc, 17,100 mg/kg. Salts were observed on the surface. Samples collected from deposit OI showed soil pH from 3.8 to 4.9.

Deposit OJ consists of three small deposits along the west side of the Arkansas River. The irrigation inlet is located just north of these deposits. It contains approximately 2,281 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 3,802 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.6 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 272 mg/kg; copper, 414 mg/kg; lead, 6,360 mg/kg; and zinc, 9,567 mg/kg. Salts were observed on the south western most deposit. Samples collected from deposit OJ showed soil pH from 1.3 to 5.3.

Deposit OK is located to the west of the Arkansas River. It is primarily fine sand, but has shallow lenses of gray and orange mine-waste. Some salts were observed on the surface. It contains approximately 1,500 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 4,154 ft3, and has an average mine- waste depth of 0.4 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 65 mg/kg; copper, 330 mg/kg; lead, 3,200 mg/kg; and zinc, 1,100 mg/kg. One sample from deposit OK showed a soil pH of 3.2.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_D_Ch2MWD.doc D-23 Deposit PA is located to the east of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the riverbank. The north edge of the deposit is adjacent to the river. It contains approximately 32,113 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 20,972 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.5 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 95 mg/kg; copper, 330 mg/kg; lead, 4,050 mg/kg; and zinc, 1,900 mg/kg. The deposit had little vegetation but was surrounded by grasses and cobble. The northern edge of deposit PA showed current signs of erosion into the river.

Deposit PC is located approximately 250 feet east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 17,980 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 17,831 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.0 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 85 mg/kg; copper, 65 mg/kg; lead, 2,100 mg/kg and zinc, 625 mg/kg. The deposit was sparsely vegetated with grasses. Dead willows were observed on the deposit.

Deposit PD is located on the east side of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the riverbank. It contains approximately 9,434 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 6,011 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.6 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 85 mg/kg; copper, 103 mg/kg; lead, 5,500 mg/kg and zinc, 455 mg/kg. The deposit was bare in some spots and well vegetated in others. The visible signs of erosion included a small cut bank.

Deposit PE is located to the west of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 6,868 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 5,720 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.2 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 65 mg/kg; copper, 760 mg/kg; lead, 10,000 mg/kg; and zinc, 3,700 mg/kg. The deposit was surrounded by grasses. Dead willows and salts were observed on the surface. Some new growth was evident in the willows. One sample from deposit PE showed a soil pH of 4.7.

Deposit PF is located along the west bank of the Arkansas River. There is a one-foot cut bank along the river. It contains approximately 795 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 1,908 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.4 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 48 mg/kg; copper, 70 mg/kg; lead, 100 mg/kg; and zinc, 1,000 mg/kg. One sample from deposit PF showed a soil pH of 4.7.

Deposit PG is located to the west of the Arkansas River. It consists primarily of cobbles, gravel, and sand, but has mine-wastes mixed throughout. The deposit is located on the inside bend of a channel with standing water. It contains approximately 51,527 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_D_Ch2MWD.doc D-24 61,832 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.8 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 94 mg/kg; copper 170 mg/kg; lead, 2,395 mg/kg and zinc, 4,800 mg/kg. Samples collected from deposit PG showed soil pH from 2.5 to 4.6.

Deposit PJ is located approximately 300 feet east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 17,937 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 16,063 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.1 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 87 mg/kg; copper, 337 mg/kg; lead, 2,900 mg/kg; and zinc, 8,467 mg/kg. The deposit was surrounded by grasses and willows.

Deposit PM is located to the east of the Arkansas River approximately 100 feet from the riverbank. It contains approximately 446 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 1,114 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.4 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 75 mg/kg; copper, 46 mg/kg; lead, 830 mg/kg and zinc, 780 mg/kg. The deposit was non-vegetated, but vegetation along the small drainage on the western pile perimeter was preventing erosion.

Deposit PN is located to the east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 7,087 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 5,390 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.3 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 85 mg/kg; copper, 65 mg/kg; lead, 93 mg/kg; and zinc, 2,400 mg/kg. Dead willows were present within the mine- waste deposit and in the surrounding areas. The deposit is primarily bare, but has some grasses present.

Deposit PP is located to the east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 15,704 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 16,506 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.0 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 93 mg/kg; copper, 65 mg/kg; lead, 4,050 mg/kg and zinc, 1,785 mg/kg. The deposit had dead willows and was surrounded by grasses. A two- to three-foot cut bank was noted adjacent to a tributary.

Deposit PX is located approximately 300 feet east of the Arkansas River just south of deposit PJ. It contains approximately 24,816 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 24,276 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.0 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 145 mg/kg; copper, 505 mg/kg; lead, 6,150 mg/kg; and zinc, 5,100 mg/kg. Mine-waste is concentrated in small deposits over cobbles and organic soil.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_D_Ch2MWD.doc D-25 Deposit QA is located to the east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 7,549 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 10,065 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.8 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 105 mg/kg; copper, 123 mg/kg; lead, 1,570 mg/kg and zinc, 655 mg/kg. The deposit had vegetation in low-lying areas adjacent to the tributary. Visible signs of erosion included a 1.5-foot cut bank.

Deposit QD is located to the east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 46,183 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 51,794 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.9 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 147 mg/kg; copper, 93 mg/kg; lead, 2,117 mg/kg and zinc, 2,197 mg/kg. The visible signs of erosion included surface rills.

Deposit QF is located to the east of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the riverbank. It contains approximately 71,910 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 99,367 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.7 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 160 mg/kg; copper, 114 mg/kg; lead, 2,431 mg/kg; and zinc, 698 mg/kg. The deposit was partially vegetated with grasses. A low area contained dense grass cover. Dead willows were present on the site, but new growth was observed. The visible signs of erosion included surface rills and cattle paths.

Deposit QG is located to the east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 18,165 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 18,165 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.0 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 105 mg/kg; copper, 290 mg/kg; lead, 2,450 mg/kg; and zinc, 1,585 mg/kg. Dead willows were present on the mine- waste deposit. The deposit was surrounded by grasses and some willows. The visible signs of erosion included a small cut bank adjacent to the tributary.

Deposit QH is located to the east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 14,830 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 14,237 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.0 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 138 mg/kg; copper, 215 mg/kg; lead, 3,600 mg/kg and zinc, 1,850 mg/kg. Dead willows were present on the mine- waste deposit.

Deposit QI is located to the east of the Arkansas River and is in contact with the riverbank. It contains approximately 12,686 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 20,075 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.6 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_D_Ch2MWD.doc D-26 following metals: cadmium, 115 mg/kg; copper, 370 mg/kg; lead, 3,100 mg/kg; and zinc, 2,400 mg/kg. The deposit had some grasses present and evidence of dead willows. The visible signs of erosion included a one-foot cut bank.

Deposit QJ is located to the east of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the riverbank. It contains approximately 1,235 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 1,289 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.0 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 115 mg/kg; copper, 190 mg/kg; lead, 1,600 mg/kg and zinc, 2,700 mg/kg. Dead grass was observed on the area. Live vegetation was observed in spots and included grasses and willows. Cattle paths were also observed. The visible signs of erosion included a one-foot cut bank.

Deposit QK is located to the east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 7,752 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 7,344 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.1 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 115 mg/kg; copper, 280 mg/kg; lead, 2,400 mg/kg and zinc, 780 mg/kg. The deposit had no vegetation except in a low-lying area adjacent to the tributary.

Deposit QM is located to the east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 7,960 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 4,094 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.9 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 75 mg/kg; copper, 210 mg/kg; lead, 1,200 mg/kg and zinc, 960 mg/kg. The deposit had dead willows and was surrounded by grasses and willows.

Deposit QN is located to the east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 55,041 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 45,672 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 1.2 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 201 mg/kg; copper, 330 mg/kg; lead, 1,638 mg/kg; and zinc, 3,763 mg/kg. The deposit had dead willows with some new growth observed. A heavy layer of salt was present on the surface. The visible signs of erosion included a two-to three-foot cut bank and surface channels.

Deposit QO is located on the east side of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 13,096 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 31,962 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.4 ft. Samples from this deposit had concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 85 mg/kg; copper, 65 mg/kg; lead, 3,000 mg/kg and zinc, 1,400 mg/kg. Visible signs of erosion included a cut bank used by cattle. However, most of the cut bank was stabilized with grasses.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_D_Ch2MWD.doc D-27 Deposit QP is located to the east of the Arkansas River and comprises a portion of the riverbank. It contains approximately 9,122 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 17,283 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.5 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 80 mg/kg; copper, 535 mg/kg; lead, 1,900 mg/kg; and zinc, 3,450 mg/kg. The deposit had isolated spots of grasses and willows. Salts were observed on the surface. The visible signs of erosion included a 2.5-foot cut bank.

Deposit QQ is located to the east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 4,019 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 4,385 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.9 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 75 mg/kg; copper, 46 mg/kg; lead, 2,000 mg/kg; and zinc, 940 mg/kg. The deposit was well vegetated. The visible signs of erosion included a small cut bank.

Deposit QR is located to the east of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 8,606 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 9,954 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.9 ft. Samples from the deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 115 mg/kg; copper, 55 mg/kg; lead, 4,700 mg/kg and zinc, 950 mg/kg. There were areas with grass cover within the deposit.

Deposit QT is located to the east of the Arkansas River adjacent to the river. It contains approximately 7,243 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 7,009 ft2, and has an average mine- waste depth of 1.0 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 75 mg/kg; copper, 300 mg/kg; lead, 1,300 mg/kg; and zinc, 1,200 mg/kg. The deposit had dead willows and no vegetation except some grasses along the river. The visible signs of erosion included a one-foot cut bank.

Deposit QV is located to the west of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 10,415 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 4,933 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 2.1 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 174 mg/kg; copper, 227 mg/kg; lead, 4,733 mg/kg; and zinc, 12,667 mg/kg. Salts were observed on the surface. Samples collected from deposit QV showed soil pH from 3.9 to 5.1.

Deposit QW is located to the west of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 3,916 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 1,698 ft" and has an average mine-waste depth of 2.3 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 128 mg/kg; copper, 293 mg/kg; lead, 1,240 mg/kg; and zinc, 6,000 mg/kg. Salts and livestock tracks were observed

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_D_Ch2MWD.doc D-28 on the surface. Grass is invading along the edges of the deposit. Some grass clumps were observed in the center of the deposit. Samples collected from deposit QW showed soil pH from 4.0 to 4.9.

Deposit QX is located on the west bank of the Arkansas River. It has an actively eroding three- foot cut bank on the river. Dead willows, salts, and cattle tracks were observed on the surface. It contains approximately 8,098 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 3,786 ft2, and has an average mine- waste depth of 2.1 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 65 mg/kg; copper, 670 mg/kg; lead, 6,400 mg/kg; and zinc, 2,300 mg/kg. One sample from deposit QX showed a soil pH of 3.4.

Deposit QY is adjacent to a cobble deposit by a small stream to the west of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 1,658 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 3,510 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.5 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 48 mg/kg; copper, 430 mg/kg; lead, 7,600 mg/kg and zinc, 5,900 mg/kg. Salts and cattle tracks were observed on the surface. One sample from deposit QY showed a soil pH of 4.7.

Deposit QZ is located to the west of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 492 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 1,687 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.3 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 190 mg/kg; copper, 270 mg/kg; lead, 7,200 mg/kg and zinc, 3,400 mg/kg. Animal tracks and a small amount of salts were observed on the surface. One sample from deposit QZ showed a soil pH of 1.5.

Deposit RA is located to the west of the Arkansas River just south of County Road 55. It contains approximately 33,319 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 45,263 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.7 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 412 mg/kg; copper, 513 mg/kg; lead, 2,200 mg/kg; and zinc, 29,667 mg/kg. Erosional ditches, salts, and cattle tracks were observed on the surface. Samples collected from deposit RA showed soil pH from 3.0 to 4. 1.

Deposit RB is located on the west bank of the Arkansas River just south of County Road 55. It contains approximately 15,856 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 27,182 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.6 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 65 mg/kg; copper, 240 mg/kg; lead, 3,000 mg/kg and zinc, 1,000 mg/kg. Some salts were observed on the surface. One sample from deposit RB showed a soil pH of 2.8.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_D_Ch2iMWD.doc D-29 Deposit RC is located on the west bank of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 1,984 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 3,662 ft2, and has an average mine-waste depth of 0.5 ft. Samples from this deposit had average concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 65 mg/kg; copper, 300 mg/kg; lead, 1,700 mg/kg and zinc, 1,100 mg/kg. There was a cut bank that was primarily cobbles. Some salts and dead willows were present on the surface. One sample from deposit RC showed a soil pH of 3.7.

Deposit RF is a small deposit located five feet west of the Arkansas River. It contains approximately 7,287 ft3 of mine-waste over an area of approximately 2,429 ft2, and has an average mine- waste depth of 3.0 ft. Samples from this deposit had concentrations of the following metals: cadmium, 320 mg/kg; copper, 520 mg/kg; lead, 3,100 mg/kg; and zinc, 12,000 mg/kg. The deposit was non- vegetated. One sample from deposit RF showed a soil pH of 5.5.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_D_Ch2MWD.doc D-30 APPENDIX E Water Quality Data Groundwater Data (or River Reaches 0 to 3. Dissolved cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for all data sets, am cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for CDPHE data (LNRD-068). r ** r 1 , \ r I -<• | ) ||r :|» 1 f I 1 Sample bom a *ei on undeveloped land bordering the east side of tie Arkansas Rrvar. appnudmatciy .5 j D.Ark RO.CadmUn. Otssotved Period! 3W205 452! GW 2/17/1983 Cadmsim, Oiseorved GW Tites south of ffw East Fork confkience. 65 SO u LHRO-062 0 SAMPLED FROU WELL ON UNDEVELOPED LAND BORDERING E SIDE OF ARKANSAS RIVER. S OArt RO Coppw. Oissatved Period 2 3WZOS 452 GW 2/17/1983 Copper. Dissorvad 0007 1 ! 1.3 0 134895 ECOLOGY AND ENV GW Ml S OF E FORK CONFLUENC 6.5 50 : u LNRD406 1 ] Sampto bom a w«l on undeveloped land bordering the east tide of ha Arkansas River, approxknalaty .5 i 1 0 Ark RO Lead. Dissolved Period! GW205 452 GW 2/17/1983 Lead. DUsoNed 0015! < 0.015 | 0 746750 Ecology 6 Envfrormenu Inc. GW mtkts south ol ha Ea» Fork confluence. 6.5 50 LNRD-062 I Sample from a wal on undeveloped land bordering the east tide of Via Arkanus Rtver. appraximalaty .S . O.Art RO ZJnc. Dissolved Period 2 CW20S 4S2 GW j 2/17/1963 Zhc. Dissolved 002 1 5 0 746756 Ecotogy * Environment. Inc. GW miles south of tie East Forh confsjence. 65 50 LNRD-062 0

D A* Rl.Cadnejm. Dissolved ] Period 2 OW211 1621 GW I 2/18/1983 Cedmkim. DttsoNed 00025 O.OOS 0 _L_ 746819 Ecology ft Environment. Inc. GW Sampted bom a Up oil a ilorege tank In he wel house for Lake Fork Trafler Park, west of LeadvBe. LNRD-062 ; 0 "larfSST ^ NW-14 1667 GW 0003 1 0005 0 L 630634 WWL ' JGW Afkansn River ai rUer park 50 LNRD-039 1 0 0 Ark Hi Cadmium. Dkssdved j Period 2 11/13/1069 Cadmium. Owotved .._. so : io Art Hl.Cudnyum. tola Period 2 '33100-001 1663 GW 7/31/1984 CadmatraTota " " owi? •OOM" T H 749139 PubHc Water Systems GW ^ke Fork UHP. Blend Tank : LNRD-068 D D.AARlCadrraufn.Tate Period 2 33100-001 1663J GW 5716/1088 Zaomkmx Tote 0.00006 0005 0 H 749141 Public Water Systems CW M» Fork UHP. Blend Tank .NRO-068 0 .AikRl.Cedmkim.Tota ~Penod3 133100-001 1003 UW 3/12/1900 ^drrsurruTote 00005 < 0005 0 L 749151 Pubic water Systems GWlLake Fork MHP. Btend Tank LNRD-068 0 Ark Rl.Codmhvn, Tout Period3 133100-001 i 1063 GW" 0/29/2000 :admbm.Tate 00006 fyooosi 0 L 749167 PubHc Water Systems GW Lake Fork MHP. Bkmd Tank jjRD-oaa 0

: SAMPLED FROU A TAP OFF A STORAGE TANK IN THE WELL HOUSE FOR LAKE FORK TRAILER ] 1621 GW 1 0 0 Ark Rl.Copper. Oiurvod Period 2 GW211 -_. 2/18/1983 Copper. CUssarved 0.01 .3 L 134919 ECOLOGY AND ENV GW iPARK. W OF LEADVO.LE LHRCWJ06 1 (.Art Hi Coppei. Otisorved Period 2 NW-14 -raw 657/1983 Coppor. Dtstorved 00025 .3 0 H 137536 WATER.WASTE AND GW {Arkansas River at Mar park soTTo so TLNRCMOS j o NW-14 1667 GW ; 11/13/1989Capper. Dlssaived 0.0025, < .3 0 L 630640 WWL "1 i Ark R 1 .Copper. Dissolved Period 2 GW Arkansas Rnrer ai frailer park —50 ,i -1 0 , 50 LNRD-039 0 1 Ark Rl. Capper. Tota Period3 133100-001 1663 GW~j 6/30/1994 Capper. Tote i 0.35 1 .3 0 L 749145 Pubic W«ta Systems j555" .ake Fork MHP. Btend T«nk ' LNRD-060 0 (Art Rl. Capper. ToU Period3 (133100-001 1883! GW 3/12/1998 Copper. Tote 0006 1 .3 1) L 749153 Pubflc Water Systems GW rLaka Fork MHP. Bland Tank •LNRD-060 1 0 .__. lArh Hi. Copper. Tota Penod 3 1 133400401 "1779JGW 5/26/1097 Copper. Tota 0.023 H "74920" Public Water Systems Gw'utEtiertTP.Weltl 02 1 SAMPLED FROU A TAP OFF A STORAGE TANK tN THE WELL HOUSE FOR LAKE FORK TRAILER O.Art Rl Lead. Dissolved P.TW2 GW211 1621JGW 2/18/1983 Lead. Otssotved _0r L 134920 COLOGYAHDENV ! GW PARK. W OF LEAOVILLE •LNRO-006 lArkRI.Laad. Dissolved "PeriodY NW-14 10541 GW 6/27/198; Lead. Dissolved Q0025i < "0:675" H 137537 WATEH.WASTE AND I GW i Arkansas River at friler park sol to 50 [LKRD-OOe""1"F D Art Rl Lead. Dissolved Period 2 NW-14 {16871 GW 11/13/1989 Lead. Dissolved "^ 0.0025: <1 0015 0 L WWL 1 CW •Arkansas River at Mar park SO ltKRD-039 0 ).AAR|. Lead. Tola Period 21 7/31/1064 Lead. Tota 0024L 1 H 749140 •ubllc Water System ! GW ILaka Fork UHP. Blend Tank ~b~ D.ArkR1.L»ad. Tola '"Periods 33100-001 1063! CW 3/12/1098 Lead, tola 00005- < 0015 0 L 749156 Pubuc Water Systems GW Laka Fork MHP. Blend Tank LNRD466 0 ) Arh Rl Lead. ToU Period 2 33400-001 ' Lead, Tola 0009 rTo'ois 0 H 749253 Public Water Systems GW Ut Efcert TP. Wai f 1 •«" ! Y 0 DArk Rl. Load. ToU Period §1 33400-001 5/2B7l997 ead. Tola 0001 1 ! 0.015 0 H 749263 Public Water Systems MtEbadTP.WeBtl si- Y LNRD468~ 0 - D.Art Rl.Zinc. Dkisotved Period 2 GW2II 1621 GW 2/10/1983 BY; Oisvitverl 0063 „0_ L 746828 ccJogyl Environment. Inc. GW Sampkid from a lap ofl a storage tank In ffie wal house lor Lake Fork Trailer Park west of Loadvllte. -^ i Y LNRD-062 0 OArt Rl.ZkV. Otssotwd W-14 1654 GW 6/27/1969 Zinc. Ohsorved 0.63 -T-H- H 137S39~ WATERWASTEAND GW Arkansas Rrvei at tamer pork sot 10 ; so Y LNRO-OOfl 0 rArk Rl Zinc. Dissolved j Period 2 W-14 11/13/1989 inc. Dissolved 1.1 1 i t 10 L 630604 WWL GW [Arkansas River el feeler park SO 10 SO Y LHRD439 0 OArt RZ.Cedmkjm, OiuoNed > Period 2 GW203 1026 GW 2/15/1003 Cadmajm, DktsoNed _, 00025; « 0005 : o L 746723 Ecokw* Environment, Inc GW ISampb tarn the kitchen tap hi a nuklance. on County Road 44. soutt of Leadv) 32 20 32 o"

) Arii R2 Capper, aiiaJved jj>eriod 2 GW2O3 1928 GW 2/15/1083 Capper. Dissolved 00025; < 1.3 i 0 L 746725 Ecology* Environment, Inc GW 1 Sample from tha kitchen tap hi a residence, on County Road 44. south ol Leadvi — i"si~rs" •yTLNRooea" ~r D Ark R2 Copper. Dissolved Penad3 GW203 1928 GW 5/7/2001 Copper. DtssoNed 0.002 •< 1.3 ! 0 H 746393 URS/EPA GW -Sample from a we! at a residence, on County Road 44. souOi of LaadvQ 32 j 20 i 32 Y LNRD-065 j 0 1 0 Ark R2 Lead. Dissolved Period 2 GW203 j 1928 GW 2/1 5/1 BW ead. Dtssotved 0015! < 0.015 1 0 L 746728 Ea^aErrrfronmenlinc GW Sample from the kfcchen tap In a residence, on County Road 44, south of Leadvi 32 rzo" 32 Y TNRD-062 }~1

0 Arh R2 Zlrc. Distorted Penal 2 GW203 19201 GW 2/15/1983 Zfr£ Dissolved "" 0.383 i L 7413732 "1Ecology i Environment IK CW Swnpkt from the Ufchen tap si a teikience. on County Road 44. tout) of Leadvi s-j-6- 32 -iir 32 Y LNRD-062 j 0 D.Ark H3 Cadcnkm. Dlsiotved Period 2 GW2O4 2254JGW 2/15/1983 Cadmtm. DissoNed 00025 O.OM ; o L 746735 Ecology t Environment, me GW Sampto from a dug wet behind a residence on SouA highway 24. Leadvi 60 ™ ™~ Y LNRD-062 j 0

DArk R3 Copper. DbsoNed Period 2 GW204 2254 GW 2/1 571983 Copper. Dtsaorved o.«H< 1.3 ; 0 L 134691 ECOLOGY AND ENV ! GWSAMPLED FROU A DUG WELL BEHIND A RESIDENCE ON SOUTH HIGHWAY 24. LEAOVILLE 00 Y LNRD406 1 , O.Art R3Lead. Olssotved Period! GW7O4 22S4! GW 2/15/1063 Lead, Dissolved o.oi si < 0.015 ! 0 L 134692 ECOLOGY AND ENV GW SAMPLED FROM A DUG WELL BEHIND A RESIDENCE ON SOUTH HIGHWAY 24 LEAOVILLE 60 i Y !LNRD-OOe D Arh Rl Zinc. Dtssotved 'Period 1 3.00746EM4 2238JGW 6/30/1072 ZkK, DIssoTvod 0.13 1 ' S I 0 L 385009" I12WRO GW SC01008034DCC " " " " " " 49 U LNRO-031 0 D Ark R3 Zinc. Dissolved Period 2 GW204 2254J GW 2/15/1983 Zhc, DtssoNed 0032 1 ! 3 | 0 L 746744 Ecotogy S Environment Inc GW Scmpte from a dug we! behind e residence on Souti highway 24. LeadvH 60 Y LNRD-062 0 D.Col Gulcn-Al Ark Rhr.Coditeum. Dissolved Period 2 GW210 15501 GW 2/18/1963 Cadmkim. Otncived 00025 « t 0005 1 0 Ecolona&ivtrOTmenUne GW Sampted from a lap bom the wal in a Lendvflto raddence. on Highway 300. Leadvt 7 39 i 27 39 Y LNRD-062~1 0 ).Cnl Gukh-Al Ark Rrv.Cedmkun. Dissolved Period 2 GW21B 155S| GW 2/21/1983 Cadmkim. Otuolvod O.OOaSjjt i O.OOS 0 L 746901 Ecology & environment. Inc GW Sampled from a kitten tap in a LaaxMOa raddence. on Highway 300. Leadvi Y LNRD-062 0 b.Cni Guich-AI Ark~Riir.Capper. Dissolved "PeViod7 GW210 [ 1550J GW 2/18/1083 Copper. Olssorved 0 L 746609" EuJouv * Eitvkuiiment me CW Sampled from e tap from the wri hi a UadvUe residence, on Highway 300. Leadvi 7 39 j 27 39 Y LNRD-062

OCa Gufch-At Aft Rrv.Copper. Dissolved Period 2 GW216 1555 GW 2/21/1983 Copper, Observed D033J 1 1.3 0 L 134947 ECOLOGY AND ENV GW SAMPLED FROU A KITCHEN TAP IN A LEAOVILLE RESIDENCE. ON HIGHWAY 300. LEAOVILLE Y LNRO-006 i 1

D.Cat Guich-Ai Art Rrv Lead, brssotved 'Period 2 GW210 1550[ GW 2/1 8/1 oa: Lead. Otseorved 0.0-15! - W5~ ~0~ 746610 Ecotogy A Errvtronment Inc GW Sampled from a top from the wel tn a Laedvda residence, on Highway 300. Laadvl 7 39 + 2Tl 39 Y 1NRD462 { f

"Period 2 W210 | 1550 IGW 2/16/1963 Zsic. Dissolved 0.0691 1 T- L 746816 Sampted from a taplram the wet In a Lesdvite residence, on Highway 300. Leadvi 7 39 j 27 • 39 Y LNR0462' 0~ D Col Cufch-Al Ark Rlv.Zkic. DtsMtved Period 2 GW218 i 155iG! W ' 2/2 1/1 M: 1.89i 1 L 746910 •cotogy 6 Envkvvnent. Inc GW Sampted from • klutan tap tn a LtadvUe residence, on Highway 300, Laadvl Y LNRD-062 > 0 O.Arh R2.Codmum. Observed Period 2 GW201 ! 1927 ' SP 2/1 5/1 98: Cedmian, OtesoNed j 0.0025 « 0005 0 L "MSB5T Ecotogy A EmfconmenL Inc GW Sampte CQlectad from a spring pool north of a ranch on County Road 44. south ol Laadvl U 1LNRD463 O.Art R2 Cadmium, Dissolved Period 2 GW202 , I92»J_SP 2/15/1663 Cadmium. Dtttorved 0009; 1 robos" 1 L 746711 Ecology & Environment, Inc ! GW {Sampto collected from a spring pool north of a ranch on County Road 44, south of Laadvl "U JLNRD462 4 — *-v- O.Art R£ Capper. OtTsaNed Period! GW202 t 1920; SP | 2/15/1883Copper, Dissolved 000251 < j 1.3 0 L 746713 Ecotogy & Environment Inc GW i3*rnpto cosected trom a spring pool north of ranch on County Road 44. sou B» of Leadvi i U LNRD-062 I 0 O.Art R2 Lead. Dissolved Period 2 GW202 I929J SP 2/15MB63 Lead. Dissolved O.OI$i~<~fboi5 0 L 746714 Ecology « Erunronmard. Inc GW : Sample coDedad from a spring pool north of ranch on County Road 44. soutti of Loadvd H U :LNRD-062 j 0 O.Arh R2.Zlnc. Dissolved Period 2 GW202 1929; SP 2/15/iea: Ztac, Dissorvad J 0.02! s u L ~74672B E^^^ErrSorSiSrmr GW jsampto cotected from a spring pool north of ranch on County Road 44. Mufti of Laadvl U LNRD-062 ! o S.Arh Hl.Cadmkm. Disserved 'Period! IUWOI | 17U 6/9/1091 Udmum, Dissolved 1 0,000: 0.009 ! 0 H 466637 JOS * USGS lor EPA GW !-OB9a.99 64 hr ]LNRD421 [ o S Ark HI .Cadmium, Dissolved Periods UUW01 r«fa jew 7/14/1091 Cadmkim. DEuotved 00013 o.dcT] o H 468653 UOS&USGSfar£PA GW -0999.99 6.4 | N iLNRD-021 Period 3 JUWOI 1 1761 GW ara/igsi ^dmkim. ObsoNed 0001. 0.005 j 0 L 466869 UOS « USGS tor EPA 1 GW 1-0900.90 "67i : "N iLNRMjT" S Arh Rl.Cadmlum. Disserved Period] JUWOI | 176 GW R L 11/U193I ^rtiuum. Dlsaotved 00015 < ~6oos i enadS UUW02 7/14/19H Cidmlum, Deuotved 0.00791 1 0.005 ~4687lT JOS* USGS kir EPA ' "~GW j-0999.99 "hi ILNR&JMI S Art Rl Cadmium. Oiuolved ll 'Period") UUW02 90/10U Cadmium. Olssorved OOlSfli 1 0005 L 466733 UOS & USGS far EPA GW •999999 - 1T [LNRD-021 S Art Ri.Codmijm. Dtssiitved W Penod3 UMWOI 1 790! GW 11/0/109 Cedmlum, Dissolved 00t84j 1 0005 T L -468749" UOS ft USGS far EPA GW -9099.08 =or N S Ark HI Codrnkm. Ottiotved " TPeriodJ UUW02 " "ireet GW£ vni\9M Cadmium. Observed 0.01731 1 1 0005 1 L 469518 EPAAJRS GW -099099 J IL_ N [LNRD-023 SArk HlTcidmkm. rjTsaalved " " Period: JHW02 17'ogTGM EPWURS S Art Rl.Cadmlum. Dissolved Period : 1799JGW 6/is7ie» Caomhan. Dburved 0011* 1 -" 0.005 1 H 469556 EPAAJRS GW -9999.99 N |LNRiWI23 t 0 S Art R l.Codrrsum. Dissolved Period: UUW02 "" 0005 1 EPAAJR3 8/17/1995 0.0142! 1 L £4B»i5~ Jew T -H- 4- ILNRD-023 i ( App_E_gw_Tbl_1 o3.xls Page 1 of 15 10/22/2002 Groundwater Data for Is River Reaches 0 to 3. Dissolved cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for all data sets, am il cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for CDPHE data (LNRD-068).

•f S ••VrV '" | 1 | Parted MFCSbMwHsme D*fle [• 4SSSB1 •l'^ ' Period! i ^admkini. Observed 0.01761 0.005 1 GW~ 9999.99 II e N LNRD-023 0 S Art Rl.CadrrSum. DtssoNed JUW02 -"T* 10/78/1999 SArt Hl.Codmlum. Dissolved Period 3 iUUWOT 799 GW 6/1 5/2000 iCadmkjm. Dissolved 0.0144! 1 0.005 1 H 704554 URS Operaang SerMcas tar EPA UW •9999.99 6 N ^LNRD-OSO 0 SArt Hi Cudrnkm. Dissolved PeriodS UMW02 7001 GW 0/1 5/2000! Cadmium. Observed 0.0141! 1 D"005' \ 704040 URS ODarsav'Servtes (o7£PA~ GW* 0 11 N !LNRfW»0 S Art R 1 .Cadmhxn. Disserved Period S JUW02 rm GW 8/29/2000 Cadmium. Disserved 0016 1005 1 . 704092 URS Oparatng Services lor EPA GW 8 N {LNRD-OSB T SArt Rl CarJmkm. Disserved 1 Penod 3 UUW02 79! GW 8/29/2000 Cadmsxn. Olssotved "oofse 1005 1 . i 704610 JRS Opening Services for EPA GW 4999.99 I 6 11 TTilNRMSB ! 6" 1 4 9 LNRO-021 ; 0 SArt Rl.Cadmkim. Observed j Periods JUW03 ax GW 6/9/1998 Cadmbrn. Observed 0.007 I.OOS 4 i 468765 ' JOS 4 USGS tor EPA GW ,499999 i -_- N S Ark Rl.Cadmium. Ousorved \ "PertodT UUW03 831 GW 7/14/1990 Cedmkim. Observed " 0.0035] 1 0005 0 H ! 468781 UOS & USGS tor EPA GW -990999 N LNRD421 t 0 S Ark RlCodrrium. Observed [ Periods' JUW03 1831 GW i 9/8/1998 Cadmsjm, Observed 00046! 1 0.005 0 L j *68797_i JOS & USGS far EPA GW -999999 4 0 ! N LNRD-021 0 S Art Rl Cadmium. Dlssarved l Period 3 JUW03 103C GW! 11/9/1998 Cadmium. Oluorved" 0.0034; 1 0.005 0 UOS A USGS far EPA GW j-999999 \ i 4 " 9"7 H LHRM31 0 SArt HI Cadmlurn. Dissolved i Period 3 UMW03 1830 GW 3/23/1099 Cadmium. Disserved 0.0022 1 0.005 0 L j 469693 EPA/URS GW '-4999.99 i 4 9 L H_JLNRD-023 0 SArt Rl.Codirri*n. Dissolved ] Period 3 UUWOS 030 GW 5/18/1909 Cadmun, Obsorved 00091 1 0.005 1 H ; 469712 EPAAJRS GW 1-9999.99 ] { 4 9 | N LNRMT) SArt Rl Codmkm Dissolved I Period 3 Ltuwoa ISC UW 6/15/1999 Cadmium. Obsorved 0.0111 1005 1 H ! 469731. •PAAJRS GW !-9999.99 [ ! 4 1 SArt Rf.CodrreW Disserved j Penod s" JMW03 M CW 0/17/1999 Cedmejm, Dbsotved 00054 1005 1 L |~469750 LPA/URS Gw" -9999.99 -- ! 4 9 JN LNRD-023 0 UUWOS 1131 CW Cadmkm. Dosorved 00041 1 1.005 0 L i 4097C9 EPA/URS GW 999999 ! 4 9 ) N iLNRD-023 0 Art Rt.CadmSm. Disserved J 10/28/1999 i J iArt Rl.Cadmium, Dlssarved -SSi uuwos 1 131 GW 6/15/2000 Cedmkun. Dbsorved 0.0047 1.005 9 H~ j 704720 * JRS Operalng Services for EPA iw 099999 ! 1 4 o" S Ark Rl.Cadrnkm. Dissolved Period S uuwos 131 GW 0/29/2000 Cadmium, absolved 0.0033; 0005 0 L 704702 URS Operetta^ Services for EPA CW 9990.99 ; ! ,_< ! 9 i H LNRO-050 0 S Art Ri Cadrraun. Dissolved ; Period 3 UUW04 1 MS GW! 8/9/1991 CeArilum. Observed o.ooos! < 0.005 0 H 400029 UOS 1 USGSfa rEP A GW -9999.99 ' 1 3 5 ! 8.5 | NLNRCM331' 1 0 SArt Rl.Cadmium. Disserved [ Period S UUW04 M; GW i 7/1 4/1 9UCadmium. Observed 0.0015: < 1.005 D >i 408045^ JOS & USGS faf EPA jW i-9999.99 j 3.5 O.S • N 0 Art Rl~Cadrrdum Disserved Period 1 UUWO4 M: GWj 9J8/199I Cedmbm. Obsorved 0001 Si 1005 0 L 4O0001 UOS i USGSfa rEP A GWi-8999.99 " i LNRO-021 Art RLCoerrdum. Dissolved ! Period 3 UUW04 M: .5", 11AV199I Cedmsim. Dissolved ooois! < I.OOS 3 L 468877 JOS ft USGS fat EPA >W j-9999.99 i 3.5 ! 0.5 N LNRO-021 i 0 SArk R i.Cedrrtisn. Dissolved Period 3 JUUW04 043 3/23/1999 'CadrnUn. Disserved o.ooos! < 0.005 0 L 469788 ! EPAAJRS GW 499999 j ) i 3!s"i"(L5" N JLNRD-023 i 0

SArt Rl~ Cadneum. Dissolved 1 Penod 3 IUUWO4 843 •££! -r 0.005 0 H 469826 JEPAAJRS GW -0999.99 ! S i 3.st~8.5 i N JLNRD423 0

1 SArt RrCndrr*^.oii*arved Period 3 !uuw04 M: GW iOAO/1999!Cadntom. Observed OOOIOj 1 dobT n T 469872"" EPAAIRS 3W 14999.99 j 1 3.5 ! fl'.S "^ LNRD-023 ; 0 UUW04 GW S-9999.W ___ LNRD-OSO ; 0 SArt Rl.Cadrnrum. Dissolved Penod 3 i M: GW 0/15/2000 Cadmium. Observed 0.0018! 1.005 0 H 704816 URS Ooerttng Services for EPA I .„„.35, OS SArk Rl.Cedrrsum. Dissolved i Period 3 UUW04 H: GW1 0/2A/200C Cadmson. DbsoNed 0002J OD05 0 L 7M072~ URS Operating Services for EPA GW j-0999 99 i I "5.5~ 7 SArk Ri Cadmhm. Dissolved j Period 3 uuwos 047 GW = 6/9J19SH Cadmium. Observed 0.0079! 0005 i H 468893 UOS * USGSfa rEP A GW i-0999.99 _....i 2 „_ N LNRO-021 0 S"Art'Ri.Cadrrs\m. Dissolved i Pert 3 CW 1 7/14/19M ^46a909"~[uOSTuSGS tor EPA [ 3W 1-099699 ' 2 LNRCMJ21 T6~ ! 2 SArt Ri.Cadmkan. Dlssarved • Period 3 ;UMWDS 047 GW i Brt/IBW Cadmium. Obsorved 0.01! 0.005 i L 488925 jUOSft USGS lor EPA GW ;-9099 99 i __._;__7 j N_ LNRO-021 0 SJM Ht.CadWn, Dissolved i Period 3 i UUWOS 847 GW 1 1 1/9/1991 0.0052 0.005 i L j 408941 IUOS i USGSfa rEP A GW I-B999.99 LNRD-021 0 SArt Rl.Cadmtun. Dtssorved Period 3 uuwos 1M7 GW 3/73/199! Cadmsjm, Dissolved 00054 >005 i L i 463091 EPAAIRS GWj-9999.99 7 N LNRO-023 0 1 H SArt Rl.Codn**n. Dissolved "Pernd's" uuwos MT W 5/18/1991 Cadrruum. Observed 0.0117: 0.005 i H I 4fi99lO EPAAJRS •999999 -fl "N LNRD-023 0 Art Rl.CodmUn. Disserved • Periods uuwos M7 JW • 8/15/109! Cadmium. Observed 0.01ie! 1005 i H j 409629 EPAAJRS GW -9999.99 2 J \ H LNRD-023 0 S Ark HiCodrtum. Disserved i Periods UUW05 847 GW 8/17/199! Cadmium. Observed 0.0111J 0.005 t L ; 469948 EPAAJRS GW -8999.99 f 2 i 7 i M LKRO-Q2S 0 S Art Rl.Cadmium. Dissolved j Period 3 uuwos M7 3W i 10/20/199! iCadmlum. Observed OOOfl! }OOS i L 469987 EPA/URS GW -999999 ! 2 7 N LNRO-023 0 S Ark Rl.Cedmhm. Dissolved ! Periods uuwos 1 647 ^wr"a/i5«w Cadmium. Obsorved 0000- 0005 i H 7049QET URS Operalng Services for EPA GW -9999.99 1" "~2 LNRD-OSO 0 SArt HI. Cadmium. Dissolved 1 Periods uuwos M7 GW ifl/29r2000!Cadm*jm .absolve d 0.0126; 0.005 i L 704902 URS Operating Services for EPA GW -999999 i i 2 i 7 N LNRO-058 ..Art Rl Cadmium. Dissolved Penod 3 UUW 13 792 GW ( 3/22/199! Cadmium. Observed 0.0005; 0.005 0 L "470747" EPAAIRS GW -999999 i i 3 1 8 N LNRO-023 ^ 0

S.Ari Rl.Cadmium. dissolved i Period 3 UUW IS 792 GW; 6n5/1999jCadrnJum.Oowirved 00046; 0005 0 H EPAAJRS GW 4999.99 ' !' Ta 0 N LNRCK123 0 S.Art Rl.CadrrJum, Dlssofved Period S UMW13 792 GW1 0/17/199! Cadmium. Dbsorved 0002| £005 0 L 470004 EPAAJRS GW 499999 ! i 3 0 N LNRD-023 0 S.XrtRi.Cednttum.Ortsafved i Periods UUWI3 782 GWj 10/28/1 999 'Cedmsjriv. Dissolved 0.00091 laoos 0 L 470023 EPA/URS GW i-9999.99 i i ! 3 8 N LNR0023 0 ,AA R l Cadmium Dissolved i Period 3 UUW 13 792 3W j 6/I5/2DOI CBdmksn. Disserved ooois; 3005 0 H 705600 URS Operating Services (or EPA GW j-999999 i 0 LNRO-OSO _jJ>... SArkR1.Carirniurn.Dti»arvBd ! Periods UUW 3 792 0/79/7000 Cadmium, Observed OJX14 0.005 0 CT 7"05656 URS Operating Services for EPA GW i-9999.99 - |— i 3" a ~ST LNRD-OSO S Art Rl.Codmun. Dissolved | Periods UUW 4A 131 3/23/1999 Cadmium. DtssoNed o.ooos 0.005 0 LJ 470802 EPAAJRS GW j-9999.99 i 06 80 N LNRO-023 0 1 Art Rl. Cadmium. Orssolved Period S IUUW 4A 631 GWj 5/17/1991 iCodmkim. Dissolved 0.0009 0005 0 H 470901 EPAAJRS GW j-9999.99 00 U8 0^ N iLNRO423 0 [Art Ri Cadmium. Obsorved PeriodS [UUW 4A 031 GW & IS/1999'cadmium, Observed 00031 0005 0 H 470920 EPAAJRS GW i-9999.99 i _.L.._. LNRD-023 0 SArt Rl.Codmkjn. Dissolved ~Penod ~3 iUUW 4A 031 GW 8/17/1999 [Cadmium, Dbsorved "00009*" a oos~ o" EPAAJRS GW i-9999.99 ! Y.I" "o'St'iT ~~rJT SArt RI.CodmMn. DiBiofved Penod 3 'UUW 4A B31 GW 10/20/199! i Cadmium, Observed 0.0009! 0.009 0 L 1 470950 EPA/URS GW i-9999 99 | : ! 6.0 ! 8 8 NLNRD-023 0 SArt Rt.Cadrnhan. Disserved "KSdT JUUW 4A 831 GW fi/l 5/2000 ICedmkim. Olssotved OOOOIj 0005 0 H r705690 URS Opervtng Servlctt'roTEPA GW 1-S999 99 '• le'eTa B' ! N .LNRO-058 0 SArt HI. Cadmium. Disserved Penod 3 IUUW 4A 1831 GW j a/JWOOOjCadrnkm. Disserved 0.00055! 0005 0 703740 URS Operetoifl Services tor EPA GW -9999.99 ! i 06 08 N [LNRD-058 0 iArt HI CadmUm. Dissolved Periods JUUW4B 1831 GW j 3/23/1991 JCtdmion. Obseivod 0.0005= 0005 0 ~ 470977 EPAAJRS GW 499999 1 "T" 12 "N ILNRD-023 0 ! SArt Rl Cadmhm. Dissolved Periods iUUW 4D 1031 GW ; 5/17/1999:Cadrnhjm. Observed 00009 0005 0 H 470996 EPAAJRS GW 4999.99 I i ' j 12 NLNRD-023 0

[.Art Rl Cadmlun. Disserved PerbdS iUUW 4B 1031 GW i 0/1 7/1999! Cadmium. Dissolved 00009 0.005 T L 471031 'EPAAJRS GW 499999 ; ! 7 ; 12 i N ILNR&023 0 S:AA"Ri.Cadrr4urri. Dbsorved PeriodS JUUW 40 1831 GW 1 0/28/1999 jCerjmhim. Dissolved 0.0009! 0005 0 L 471053 EPAAJRS GW 1-9999.99 ! j 7 ; 12 N ;LNRD-023 [0 S Art R 1 Cadrnfcxn, Dissolved •UMW 4B 1831 GW 6/1 5/2000 iCaamlum. Dissolved 0.0001! 0.005 0 H i 703700 URS Operating Services for EPA GW i-9999 99 • H JLKRCMJS8 i 0 f t"-fH~f SArt Rl.Codmkm. Dlssotved "'Penotfif [UUW 48 1831 Gw" 0/29/200 iCtdrnsun. Observed 0.00062! "0005 0 L~) 705836" URS Opening Servtcas tor EPA CW 1^99999 t N ILNRLVOM 0 1 SArt R1.C»dmrum. Observed Period 3 IUUW 5A 1054 GW 3/23/1999JCadrnJum. DbsoNad 00513 0.005 L • 471072 EPAAIRS GW 4999.99 | S [ 5 i N •LNRD-023 0

SArt Rl Cadmium. Dissolved j Period 3 UUW SA ~5sl GW! 6/15/1999'Cadmkm. Observed 0.095S 0.005 1 H 471110 EPAAJRS GW r4999.B9 \ 1 S ! 5 ! N ILNRD-023 0 S Art Rl.Codrrdum. Dissolved i Period 3 tUUW SA 854 GW { 8/17/199S ICadmsm. Dbsorved 00131 0.005 1 L 471129 EPAAIRS GW 4999.99 ! ! I 3 5 N : LNRD-023 0 S.Art Rl Cadmkm. Dissolved ! Penod 3 1UMW SA 854 GW i 10/28/199! ICodrnkim. Dbeorved 0.0303J 0.005 L 471148 'EPA/URS GW 4999.99 j 1 : S N ILNRD423 S.Art Ri.Cadrnrum. Dissolved "T Period 3 JUUW 5A 054 GW J 6f29/200C 0.0014000021 0.003 4- L JUR3 p^eraBryServlces for EPA GW 4B9an 3 nr "N"ILNHMSB •f

SArt Rl.Cadrrium. Dissolved Penod 3 JUUW SB 854 'GW 5/1 9/1099 •Cadrnkm. Observed 0.0044 = 0005 "5" H 1 471186 jEPAAJRS GW 1-9999 99 ^^ 0 N ILMRD-023 0 SArt Rl Codrrtum. OUsobad PerM3 !UUW SB as- GW 6/15/199 ; Cadmium. Observed 0.0034! 0005 0 H ! 471205 ! EPAAJRS GW i-0999.99 j 3 0 N iLNRD-023 a S Art Rl Cedmkvn. Dissolved Periods iUUW SB 854 GW 8/17/1991 iCadmkjm. Oluorved o.oosz! 0005 1 T.1 471224 JEPAAJRS GW -9999.99 ! y~r i e N ILNRD-023 0 SArt Rl Codmrun. Dbsorved Period 3 JUUW 56 85- GW 10/20/1991 rCsdmmjm, Dbsolved 00009 000! 0 L ! 471243 i EPA/URS GW r-9999 99 j 1 3 i 6 N JLKRD-023 0 SArt Hi Codmfaan. Dbsorved ""Period's (UUW SB 054 GW '"evisnooi ICadmsjiTL ObsoNed 0.0030^ 0.005 0 H"J 765964 iURS Operalng Service* lor EPA GW 1-9999.09 = i s 3 i 6 N iLNRD458 1 S Art Hi Cadmium. Disserved JUMW SB 054 CW B/29/20rJOiCadmkim. OissoNad U.U2320000I 0.005 1 L 705980 iURS Operaono Services lor EPA GW 4999.99 [ i i s i a ; N; LNRO-OSO 0 S .Art H 1 .Copper, Dissolved 'Period! JUMW01 7M GW 6V9/I99 i Copper. Obsorved 0.001 1.3 0 H 408041 UOS t USGS br EPA GW"[4999.99 ' ' ~" "" ••• T — ; J 0 4 i 1 1 .4 1 N'LNRD-Oai 0 S Art HI. Copper. Dlssarved Period] 'UUWOI 701 GW 7/14/199 'copper. Obsolved 0.001 " .3 (1 H UOS t USGSfa rEP A GW !-9999.99 ! ! 114 LNRO-021 (1 r HULA S Art Rl.CappM. Disserved PeriodS 1 uuwoi 766 GW 9/8/1991 ! Copper. Dbsorved OOOIj .3 0 L 408073 ^UbS A USGS"far EPA Gwi-9999.99 "" " " " ' A4 jjl.4; N iLNRCWHt ~* Q __! SArt Rl. Capper. Observed PertodS 'uuwoi 76. GW *~sS!S ,. Copper, Dbsorved oociosj 3 0 L I"40B425 EPAAJRS GWj-999999 64 11.4 N" NRD-023 j 0 iUUWOI 70< GW 1 5/17/199-^Copper. Dissotved 0.0021 s! 3 0 H 46D444 EPA/URS GW 1-9999.99 ! 6.4 11.4 N ^NRO-023 c SArt Rl.Coppar. Dissolved Periods i UUWOI 176i GW 1 Bfl57l89> iCopper. Obsorved 0.002 15] J "o ~H* j 409403 EPAAJRS GW j-9999.99 0 4 i 1 1 .4 i NILNRO-O23 c SArt Rl Cappof. Dissolved Penod 3 !UUWOi 1768 GW ! 8/1 7/1 99liCopper" . Dissolved 0.0104! 3 0 LJ 409402 EPAAJRS GW I -9999.99 : 64 it 1.4 1 N ILNRD-023 4-?- SArt R). Capper. Disserved Penad 3 iuUWOI GW [ 10/20/199 9: Copper. Dbsorved 000125 .3 c L [ 409501 i fifi 11.41 N SArt Rl Copper. Dissolved Period S UUWOI ! 671 5/2000 iCoppor. Dissolved S 1761 GW 00011 0 H j 704463 iURS Opening Services for EPA GW 4999.99 . i . L" 11-4 IN 'LNRD-OSO 0 SArt Rl.Capper. Dissolved Period 3 UUWOI I76i GW "oWTOOOiCeppar. Observed" 00012 .3 t L J 704525 lURS Opermtng Services tor EPA GW ! 0.' JiJIN •LNRD-OSO n

r 5 Art HI Copper. Dissoiveci ~^ Period 3 lUMWOZ 179! GW r/WiasBi Copper. Observed 0001 « .3 0 H i~4M721 IDOS * USGSfa rEP A 6w 4909.99 | " - i "• or M r«!LNRf>-021~ t S Art HI Capper. Disserved Period S JUUW02 179 GW 9A/1BS 1 iCepper. Dbsorved 0.001 4 .3 c L { 468737 [UOS A USGS tor EPA CM 499999 1 ;LNRD-02t 0 S Art Rl Copper. Dissolved [ Period 3 IUUWD2 179 CM TlfiVIW ijCopper. Dbserved 0.001 [ < .3 t L ! 4087U tUOSt USGSfa rEP A CM 499999 ! i :LNRD-02I . — — J J !— j^ffi.™- i-^5E^- —~ J ^;—" —1 ~ '. — —J !_^ App_E_gw_Tbl_1 o3.xls Page 2 of 15 10/22/2002 Groundwater Data f< is River Reaches 0 to 3. Dissolved cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for all data sets, I cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for CDPHE data (LNRD-068). . '•'• '-. . ."••: .."•:..•-', .:i .- ". • •• .;. --^:'-j-.-!i;.'.-.,4ri- '•/ ''••"'•'• '•'.:. "• / ' -.I:':! ;":vi;^/^V**V.: i ",Ji'.- '•"• ,': ; -\'f ™ \ir •"•-' "•'..* '.'.'."'f.' : - ^- \ ''•:• V -E' ''•'•'•"-•;. .:, t OT : .••:*•.>•.-' 'Cam U. „'.'•'.'•" 'period :".'.''' • loTO8lo.iiM.nir >X :*": RsfltMO rjeaatobon. •,; ; — i._: • .. -^ . : — ^ i, ••.:. - . :f^ ! fl 1 * I5/1 7/1999 000215J 1.3 0~ H" 469539 EPAAJRS •999999 i 11 i N '•LKRb-023~| 0 S Art Hl.Coppor. Dissolved Penod 3 !UUW02 671 5/1999 i;opper. Obsotved 0.00215* 1.3 u H 409550 EPAAJRS "T"' N LNRD-023 0 S Ark RV Capper. Dissolved Pertod 3 JUUW02 t 9! GW 8/1 7/1999 j^iper. Dissolved 0.0022: 1.3 D L 409577" EPAAJRS -9999.99 ! 0 ' it '. NTLrfRD-073 T 0 SArt Rl Copper. DusorvwJ Pertod 3 JUUW02 ~799 GW t 3 0 L EPAAJRS -B9B9.99 | a !L LNRD-023 0 1 SArt Rt.Coppor. Dissolved i Period 3 1UUW02 99 GW Copper. OocolVod o.ooll .3 0 H TMMr URS Operaoig Services tor EPA 9999.99 1 6 TT N LNRtMSa" 0 S Art Rl.Cappar. OiuorMd } Period 3 :UMWQ2 99 GW 6/15/2000 Capper. Dluahed URS Opormfeng Services lor EPA •4)99999 j LNRD-OS8 SArkRl Coppar. nssahwd : Pertod 3 UUW02 1 9( GW 0/29/2000 00014[ .3 ~0~ "L"1 URS Opermttng Services lor EPA W9Q« 1 B 11 0 5 Ait HI Caooei. assarted i Penod 3 UMWOZ 99 owl 0/29/2000 Copper. Dissolved 00019J "~r 0 t" 704615 URSGpenfcngSorvlcesforEPA •9999.99 I ~5~ " fNRD-05B "o" Art Rt Copper. OlisaNad Portod 3 '.UUW03 83C GW 0/0/1999 Copper. Dissotvwl OOOli .3 0 H 408769 UOS * USGS tor EPA -•9B9.99 ; -S- LNRD-021 0 SArt Rl Coppor. Dttiahad L?*" 3 [UUW03 GW 7/14/1990 Copp...Db»o>v«d 0001 .3 0 TTl 400705 UOS « USGS tor EPA TI 0 Art Ri.Copp-. Otiiatnd Period 3 JUUW03 I3( GW 9A/1998 J3ppof. DtStOtVad 0.001^ 0 L 468801 UOS * USGSto rEP A •9999.99 LNRCMJ31 o~ SArt Rl COOPV. Dissolved Period 3 JUUW03 bW Coopsf. Dtssatvod 0001' TT n UOS A'uSGStor EPA -M99.9B ' 9 i ^K LNHD-021 0 S Art HI Capper Unsolved Penod 3 IUUW03 I3( r,w 3O3/1999 0.0005 1.3 n T- 469695 EPAAJRS 9999.99 '• ! 4 9 : K .NRQ-023 0 S Art Rl.CcppV Dn*rtvnd Ponod 3 1UUWQ3 850 GW 5/10/1999 ^pper. Dbsotved OOOJlt 1.3 0 H 469714" 'EPAAJRS -9999.99 ' ' 4 9 N LNRO-023 T SAifc Rl.Cappar. OiisaWed ! Period 3 UUW03 830 GW 0/15/1999 Capper. Dissolved 000215; 0 H 469733 EPAAJRS -9999.99 ! ! 4 9 j LNRD-073 0 SArt Rl.Cappar. CNssolvad Pertod 3 ;UUW03 GW an7/1999 0.0022; 1.3 __. L EPAAJRS -9999.99 ; ! y 1LNRD-023 SArt" Rl.Cappar. Oitsatrad ! Pertod 3 JUUW03 830 GW 10QO/1999 Copper. Obsahrod 000125! 1.3 L 48977) EPAAJRS -9999.99 ' j 4 9 ; LNRMn 4 0 S"AA Rl Copper. Dissolved ; Ponod 3 (UMW03 ___6|15/2000 Copper. Dkssorvod URS Opening Services for EPA 4r99B99 | ' „__ " S'Arti Rt Copper. bliiohed Portod 3 JUUW03 B30 GW 00006' t.3 0 704787 URS Opereeno Servkes far EPA .9999.99 ! • "N" LNRD-OSi "o™ S Art HI Capper. Dltsafved Period 3 JUUW04 043 GW 619/1998 Capper. Dtsiurved 0001: 1.3 0 400833 UOS a USCS far EPA -9999.99 ! N LNRO421 0 S.Art Rl.Copper. Dissolved ! Periods UUW04 843 GW 000V 3 0 ^H 460049 LUOS a USGS tor EPA -9999.99 ! N LNRD-021 0 .«*19»B 4BaB£5 UOS a USGS far EPA 8T5 S.Art Hi Cappor. Dhsalrad ; Ponod 3 JUUW04 043 GW ^ 11r9/1998 Copper. Dissolved 0.001 3 0 -f 468801 UOS a USGS for EPA •9999.99 3.5 •T N 0 SArt Rl Copper. Dissolved ' Period 3 1UUW04 043 3/23/1999 Copper. OUsotved ^469790 'EPAAJRS •9999.99 - LNRO-023 . 0 l 1 S Art Rt.Coppor, bTssohad ! Period 3 JUMW04 04! 5/18/1999 Capper. Dbualvad 0.00215 .3 0 --n EPAAJRS -9999.99 : LWRSbaT" "fj~ SArt Rt.Coppei. Ofesatvod ! Period 3 JUMW04 H; -GW- 6/15/1999 Capper. Dissolved 6.00215 .3 0 "469828"' EPAAJRS •999999 LNRO-023 0 ^ ?*.J .•1. .!L H: ~rwT 8/17/1999 "s" n 1 469847 EPAURS -999999 i LNRf>O23 n SAriLRI.Capper. Dissolved ! Portod 3 !uUW04 ~043 KV2BV1999 Capper. Dissolved .3 L 469B74 EPAAJRS » TT i Art Rl.Cappo.. JbiMotved i Period 3 JUUW04 GW bVlS/2000 Coppor. Oasatved H 704821 URS Operssng Servfces lor EPA 3.3 "N~ S Art Rl Coppar. Unsolved Penod 3 IUUW04 843 GW OQB/2000 Copper. Dissolved 0.0006 .3 0 L 704877 URS Opening Services lor EPA 499999 i 3.5 as N LHRO-OS8 0 047 GW" Ccppor.OlssaNed " 0001 .3 0 H 46889T •9999J9 i 0 SArtRirCoppOF.'aiioNid' Period 3 JUUWOS 1_ 8A/1998 1 __ S.Art Rl Coppar. Olkcatved • Pertod 3 ! UUWOS 04 7/14/1996 0601 .3 0 H 468913 UOS ft U3GS far EPA -9969.99 ! LNRD-021 0 1 S?M RI.CaKMf'. DfesiobMI i Period 3 ; UUWOS 047 GW B/a/1998 o.oo i .3 0 L r408929 UOS a USGS br EPA -9999.99 i 7 N LNRDXnT" 0 S Art Rt. Cappw. Otssalvad i Period S [UUWOS 14 GW 11/0/1098 o.oot .3 u L 468945 UOS a USCS far EPA -9999.99 i 'J 7 N LNRD-021 0 SArti Rl" Copper. atsaWwd j Period S jUUWOS 047 GW 3/23/1999 1Copper. DtaaaNed 00011 3 0 L 469893 EPAAJRS -999999 i r N LNRD423 ~"547 "cw" 000215 1.3 0 H 4C9912 EPAAJRS -999999 ! 7 LNRD-023 0 lArtRI Copper. Dusotvod Period 3 UUWOS 5/18/1999 ^- ^ "_i SAikRfCorjpV. Dissolved j Period 3 JUUWOS 047 GW 6/15/1999 Capper. Dtetotrad 0.00215 1.3 0 H 469931 EPAAJRS -9999.99 I N LNRD-O23 S Art Rt.Cnppar. Disserved i Pertod 3~j UI4WOS ^047 GW B/1 7/1999rCopper. Dissolved 00022 Ts~ 0 L "469950~ EPAAJRS '-999999 ! N LNRD-023 T S/Arti Rt.CoppBr. Di*«J*vod i Period 3 UUWOS 047 000125 1.3 0 L 4B9969 EPAAJRS -9999.99 — LNRO-023 0 SArt Rl Coppor. DUtoNod ! Pertod 3 UUWOS 047 GW 6/15/2000 Copper. Dtesotvod 0.0008 3 0 ~H~ 7049 U URS Opening Services for EPA -9999.99 2 H LNRO-OSO u S>rt Rl.Cappar. ftssofved I Pertod S UUWOS 047 GW 00000 0 L 704987 URS OperiUng Service* tor EPA -9999.99 2 N LWUMISO 0 SAiiRl.Cnpper. Dissolved i Pertod 3 UUW13 792 GW Capper. ObsatMd 0.0010 3 470749 EPAAJRS -999999 B N LNRO-023 V S Ark Rl Capper. Dissolved • Penod 3 UUW13 792 GW 5/17/1999 Coppor. Disserved 000215 3 -s H 470768 EPAAJRS •999999 3 0 N 0

S Ark Rl Conner. Oissahrad J Periods UUW13 792 GW 6/15/1999 Capper. DtssotMd 000215 3 "o" H 470787 EPAAJRS l!lil|liS|ililli3l3:SlSiS]8$3il]^ ^ : -9999.99 T i 1 r M I ! |»"W « 3 -fl- N LNR0423 *T S Ark Rl Copper. OrstarMd j Period 3 UUW13 CW 8/17/1999 Capper. Dissolved 3 0 470806 EPA/URS cw -9999.99 3 0 N LNRD-023 0 1 n SArtRi. Coppor. Dissolved 1 Pertod 3 !UUW13 GW 1 0/28/1999 0.00125 3 0 L 470025 EPA/URS GW" -0999.99 ~3~ ~a~ N 'lNRD-023 0 SArt'HVCoppw. O«at«d i Pertod 3 iUMWIS GW 6/15/7000 3 0 H ~705Gatr*URS Openong SorwesVia7EPA GW -999999 S a N 0 S Art Rt.Coppor. Dissolved i Pertod 3 ;UUWI3 GW 0729/3000 0.0006 3 0 L 705661 URS Opora&ng Services (or EPA GW -999999 3 N LNRO-OSB 0 SArtHI.Cappai. OlsiaiVed [ Pertod 3 ;UMW14A GW 3/23/1999 0.0011 ' 3" 0 L 470084 IEPA/URS GW* -8999.99 ; "sf N LNRO-023 0 SArt Rl.Coppw. Obsatvod ; Periods UUW14A GW 5/17/1999 000215 3 0 H 470903 ; EPA/URS GW -9999.99 0.8 N LNRD-023 0 SArt Rl.Copper. OissotMd i Periods UUW14A CW B/1S/1999 Capper. Dlssarved 000215 0 GW -0999.99 ~00 0.8 "N" LN*R6-023 0 S Art Rl.Cappar. bttsotved ! Pertod 3 |UUW 4A CW 8/17/1999 Copper. Ots solved 0.0022 3 u L 470938 EPAAJRS GW p«99999 ! 8B *B.B N LNRD-023 u SArtRi. Coppar Dissolved I PenodsiuUW 4A GW 1 10(78/1999 Copper, Dissolved 000125 3 0 L 470960 iEPAAJRS GW -999999 ! "o'a™ Ta- ~N~ LNRDSS" "o S"A* Rl.Coppor. Dissorvwl 1 Periods UUW 4A GW 0715/2000 Capper. Dissolved 0.0003 3 0 H 705696 iURSOpornSng Services far EPA 3/23/1999 ' OUOS .3 0 L j 471074 jEFAAJRa GW <-9999.99 -f N rLNRD-023 0 S.Art HI. Coppar. Dissolved [ Penad 3 {UUW15A CW i snwioK 0.0037 0 H ! 471093 iEPAAJRS GW i-9999.99 1 3 5 N tLNRD-023 0 SArh Rl.Capper. Observed | Period 3 UMWlSA GW^ 6/li7r999 Copper. Dissolved 0022 t. "o H 1 71112 JEPAAIRS GW -999999 i "3"" 5 H 0 SArt Rl.Cappar. Otssolvad J Period 3 JUUWISA 0.0144 1. GW ^ 8/17/1991 Capper. Dissolved 0 L ' 71131 IEPAAJRS GW •0999.99 4__ t H iLNRO-023 0 SArt Rl Copper. Otssalvod j period 3 JUUWlSA GW •9999.99 GW 10/28/1991 Copper. DttiatvBd 00059 t 0 L 71150 ,EPAAJRS J •LNROJH3 T S.Art Rl.Cappar. Dissolved Pwtod 3 JUUWISA GW Copper. Dissolved oojw t. 0 T OS87S JURS Operasng Sorvkes for EPA CW •-0999.99 1 3 ~S~ H JLNRD-05B 0 S Art R rcopper. JHnolved Penod 3|UUW15B GW 3/23/1999 Copper. Dissolved 0.0018 1.3 0 L ^7 1189 iEPAAJRS nw -9999.99 0 [LNRD4I23 0 ,___ JL SArtRl.Capper.Dlssolved Period 3 ! UUW 158 GV) 5/19/199! ICopper.DiuotvM 00021! 0 H i 471188 JEPAAJR3 cw -0999.99 f- 3 H JLNR0423 0 SArtRt~Coppar.bissolvod Periods UUW 1 SB GW 6/1S/199B JCppper. Dissolved 000215 .3 H i 471207 jEPAAJRS -9999.99 P3 0 iLNRO-023 SAitRI Capper. Dissolved Penod 3 UUWI5B GW | 8/17/19Mi Capper. Dissolved 00022 1.3 L j 471220 EPAAJRS GW -9999.99 j 3 JLNRD-O23 i.__ i..,_ Jl ;0 S Art Rl.Cappar. Dlssorvod j Portod 3 1UUW156 GW 10/28/199! iCopper. Dissolved 000125 1.3 0 47l245lEPAAJRS GW -9999.99 ; F T TLNRDMSTrr S.Art Rl Cappor. Disserved ; Period 3 .UUWISB GW 00024 1.3 0 H 705909 luRSOperatng Services far EPA GW 1-9999.99 i 0/15/2000 [Capper. Dissolved ._„_- T -..__ i 3 • a iLNRf>050 1 ° SArt Rl.Cappar. Dissolved j Pertod S lUMWISB CM ; B/29/2001 Coppor. Dissorved If GW j-9999.99 j i ~.~H n S~Art RI.Lud. Dissolved ! Period 3 'tJUWO GW ! Kr9/193E .Lead, Dissolved 0.00 0.015 0 fT | 400043 lUbsaUSGSfar EPA 8.4 jtl.4) •LNRD-021 ^0 Ul S Art Rl Lead. Dissolved ! Period 3 UUWO GW - 001S 0 [408859 JU^Sj UMia'itafEPA GW JLNRD-021 0 jjl9W.99^ ^ ^ J_u,-LT_._r ._ -n ._-_-. - ._.) ._. UL S Art RI.Laod, Dlssorvad T~Pwiod'*3" UUWO CW 0.0014 00 S 0 L • 4S8875 lUOSIUSGStor EPA GW 1-999999 6.4 11.' i N !LNRD-02l 1 0 S.ArtHl.Leod.6TssolVad . Pwtod 3 UUWO GW T" '1/9/199 00001 0.0 5 0 L j 468691 iUOS a USGS for EPA C« "-M99'.n " " 0.4 11.4 N LNRM2t

SArt Rl Lead. Dissolved j Pertod 3 UUWO GW i 3/22/199SjLeed. Dlscotved 0.00 0.0 u L ! 469420 S EPA/URS j-9999.99 84 11> N JLNRO-021 0 S Art Rt Lew), biisatvad p.nad 3 JUUWO CW t 5T17/199! 0.0V 0. i N iLNR'fiOM S Art R 1 Lnod. Dissolved {j>eriod 3 iUUWO GW i Or29nDOt !LMd. Dissotved aoo" 0.0 "b~ L ! 704&29 URS Opendno Senices tor EPA GW {-9999.99 ; Hi i 1 1 .!4 N ILNRO^MO- \ 0 ! tr S Art Rl (dad. DUsarved i Portod 3 iUUWOJ GV • 6r9/t99 il'Md. Dissolved 0.00 00 0 H 1 468707 UOSaUSG5torEPA CW I4999.99 ' "~"!"~ T 1 6 ' 11 = N ILNRO^ST SArt Rt Lead. Dlssalvod ! Penod 3 i UMWOZ CW ! 7/14/1991•Lemd. Dissolved 0.000! 0.0 u H ! 408723 JUO3 4 USGStor EPA uw E-999999 | "~T [LNRD-021 i si s ii i! i!i!ili!il iiililiiil l il ililsliilNllllli iliillilillliliiil 1 TTT t o App_E_gw_Tbl_1 o3.xls Page 3 of 15 10/22/2002 Groundwater Data for River Reaches 0 to 3. Dissolved cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for all data sets, am ital cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for CDPHE data (LNRD-068).

f X r B ,*. g •§•! 'V t 1 V s r ^ l; : : | "^- ti^iiiiii^-V: , r • -... • Cau . -.-.•• Pertod^ II JL *< RHMD DaHnptfon * I SArtRI.LowJ. Diwotv«d GW wissa LMd. Olsiotvad 0.0014; 0015 i0 408739 DOS 1 USGS br EPA i-•999.99 1 tl N iLNRU-021 ] 0 : ll S Art Rl Lead. Dlssav od PcriodS UUW02 T9i GW 1 1 1/9/1998 [Lead. Dtuoived oooost 0.015 u . 40B7S5 JOS A USGS br EPA GW -4)999.99 B 11 i N | NRD-021 0 i Art Rl Lud. Dliialvad Period S JUUWO2 799 mv 3/22/19991 ud. DbsotMd " 0.001) 0015 n . 469521 =PAAJRS

Art Hi LeM. DtuoNed i 830 GW 6/15/1999' Laad, DIuoNad O014 "oois r 489734 EPAAJRS UW 4999.99 H !LNRD-023 0 SArt Rt Loud. Dmotved ' ~Pertbd"3~ JUW03 ~~630 TST 0(1 7/1999Laad, Olisorvw 0.009 0.015 "6" L •489751EPAAJRS GW 4B99A9 ' - 4 B M-l .NRD-023 1 0~ SAikRILud.auo«ed [ Parted S !UUWOS 630 GW _1_0/2a/1999_LMd. Dttaohnd 0.00775 0015 0 L 469772 EPAAJRS CW 4999.99 4 9 N S LNRD423 0 Parted 3 UUW03 63C nw LMd. Dtaaornd 00008 0015 0 H 704735 URS Operating Servicas far EPA GW -9999.99 4 9 N JLNRD4S8 0

SArt Rt.Lud. OnuMMd ! Parted 3 [UUW04 843 GW I 6/9/1 996 Lnd.Oiualvwd 0.001 0015 0 H 468835 UOS A USGS for EPA GW j -9999 .99 35 8.5 N ! LNRD-021 0 SArt RLLnnd. Otatthed ! Parted 3 JUUW04 64: GW t 7/14/1996 00005; < 0.0 IS 0 H 468851 UOS & USGS for EPA GW -099999 3.5 B5 N !LNRD-OIl 0 SArt. Rl.LMd. Diuafred J Parted 3 JUUWO4 843 GWl 9Ar1990iLaad.Olnolv«d 00005; < 0015 0 L 468887 UOS ft USGS br EPA GW 1-8999.99 j Ys™ o" SArtt Rl.Lud. Dfotdved Period 3 JUW04 843 GW 1l/9/l9M!L^.OtuoN»d o.ooos! * 0.015 u L 1 466683 UOS A USCS far EPA GW j-999999 j 8.5 , N~l .NRD-021 0 S Art Rl.Laod. DUtGH-od UUW04 643 GW~ 3/73/1990 Lud.Dluorvwd 0001 < 0015 0 |EPAAJRS GW i-9999.09 : - fS- LNRCMJ23 ~" 0

SArt Rl Lud OutotMd J Parted 3 UUW04 843 nv 5/iOM 099 i Lead. DiiaoNed 0 SW i-9999.99 j ; ! 3 5 BSj N .NR&023 0 SArt Rl Load. Diuoivod ! Parted S |UUW04 843 GW 0/15/1999 Imtd, DUaatvwl 0.014 "rlDTs~ 0 -Si 469829 EPAAJRS CW •9999.99 I i j 3.5 85 j N .NRb-023 b S Art HI Land. Diuojvad Parted 3 :UUW04 843 GW 8/1 7/1999 Lud.Diuolved 0.009 001S 0 L 469048 EPAAJRS GW 499999 i ; 35 8.5 N .NRD423 0 Art Rl Lud. DUUwad Parted 3 IUUWO4 843 ;w lO/28/1999!Laad. DoaoNed 0.00775 0015 0 L ! 409875 EPAAJRS ;w 4999.99 - -- -j. ! J3.5 8.5 "N .NRD-023 0 S Art Rt Laod. DliioNed Parted 3 'uUW04 843 GW 0/150000 Lud. DhnorvM o.oooaj * 0015 0 H j 704625 URS Operating Sarvtoe* for EPA GW -9999.99 t 35 85 i N .HRD-058 j 0 SArk Rt.Laod. OUMfved Period SjUUW04 843 GW 8/29/2000 LurJ.OU»arnd 0001! < 0.015 0 L i 704881 TiRS Operaang Service* (or EPA GW -9999.99 | '35 B.S N 1LNRD-OSB 0 l9 7 N S Ark Rt.Lud. Observed Periods UUWOS 047 CW _fi¥. ?£iLMd.Otuotw«d 0001 < 0015 0 UOS & USGS br EPA GW -9999.90 i 2 LNRDjOZJ 0_ SArh Rl.Lud. Oi»«rad UUWOS 847 GW" am/tosa LMd.Dtuotv«d 0.0005 001 -5- 468931 UOS 4 USGS tor EPA CW 4999.99 2 _LJ_2_ .NRD-021 1 0 SArt Rl Tend. DuMhed "Pa'rtodT" uuwos " 847 1 1/9/1998 LMd. Otuohrvd 0.0005 0.01 0 i- 468947™ UOS a USCStor EPA GW 4999 09 I 2 7 N LKRD421 i 6 n Parted 3 UMWOS •47 JW 303/1999 LMd.Diuotved 0.00 tj 101 0 L ,469834 EPAAJRS GW -899909 .NRD-023 SArfc Rl.LMd. OtuDfeod _1 ! 2 .„_H , SArt Rl LMd. Otuttma Period's" uuwos 847 GW yiB/l999iLMd. Otudved 0.014 0.01 0 H 4B39T3" EPAAJRS CW 4OT9.99 ~" —r~f 'T LNRD-023 ^ S.Art HI. LMd. DisK*ed GW •999999 2 1 I N LNRD-023 ! 0 S Art Rl Load. Dluobed Periods UUW05 104 GW a/1 7H 999 Lud. Oluonnd 0.009! < 0.01 0 L t 489951"" EPAAJRS GW 4999.99 2 7 T N LNRD-023 | 0 SArk Rl Load. D»Mh«d Parted 3 UUWOS 104 GW 1 (KB/1 999LMd.Diualwd 409970 EPAAJRS GW 4999.99 , i 2 ._„7_ N .NRD-023 Lo .Art HI LMd. DIuoNed Periods uuwos 104 ^W 6/15/2000 LMd. DUaatved 0.0006; 1015 f) H 704915 URS Oparaong Service) far EPA TW -9999.99 T2 .NRD-OSB 0 SArk Rl.Lud. Dluarmd Parted 3juuwos 184 GW.,___ 6/29/2QOO;Lud, Unotved 0001 0.0 IS u L 704971 URS Operaang Sarvfcai for EPA GW 4999.99 i 7 N lLNRD-058 6 - 1 i 2 S Art Rt.Lud. DlMCfeed Parted 3 UUW 13 1792 GW 3/22/1999 Lead. DUaatwad 0.001 b~bts L" "470750 EPAAJRS "cw -9999.99 3 8 LNRD-023 6" SArt RLLend. Dluobed Panod 3 UUWO 1792 5/1 7/1999 iLMd. DlmaolVMl 0014! 0.01 S 0 H 470769 EPAAJRS CW -859969 , 3 a N LNRD-023 _0. S.ArtRI.Laad. Dtiidhed "Parted 3' UUW IS r~i792 csr ft/1 5/1999 JUKI. Dissolved 0014J rbois 0 H 470788 EPAAJRS GW 499999 ' ' I "1 i 3 8 1 N LNRD-023 "

S.Art HI. L«ad. OlitoNod ! Period 3 JUUW 3 1792 GW 10/28M999 LMd. Doaorwd EPAAJRS GW -9999.99 i ! 3 B ! N ILNRO-023 f 0 SArhRl.LiwJ. WswNfld ! Parted 3 ;UMW 3 1702 GW anV2000;LBed.Otuotvad 00000 0.015 0 H j 705809 URS Operating Service* for EPA GW -0999.99 j 1 3 B ! N [LNRD-058 j 0 ~702 , S Ark Rl. Laad. DtaHrtMd Parted 3 UMW 4A 1831 GW 3/73/1S99 Laad. DiuDUnK) 0.001 0015 0 L 470665 EPAAJRS GW 4999.99 68 8.8 N -LNRD-023 0 S.Art Rl. Laad. Dutorwd j Panod 3jUUW 4A 1831 dBTj" 5/17/1899 Lud.DUsolVK) 0.014 0.015 0 H ^"470904 EPAAJRS GW 4099.99 4- 6.8 8.B 0 SArh Rl.LMd. Dtuolved Period! UUW 4A 1831 GW 1 6/15/1999 Lkad. Dtudvad 0.014 0015 0 H_L 470923 EPAAJRS GW 4999.99 ] ; ; 66 e.8 i N Jarted3 UUW 5A 1854 GW 3/23M9K Lud.Dtuolww) 0.001 0.015 0 L { 471075 IEPAAJRS uw {•999999 i ._i._JL! 5 i N LHRO-D23 ; 0 SArt HI Laad. diuatnd UUW 5A 1854 CW S/iari9S9 Laad.OUeolved 0.014 0015 0 H 471094 iEPAAJRS CW J-09M.99 t 5 N LNRD423 j~0 „ |~T" S.ArkRlL*ad.D(uafeed i Period 3 UUW 5A 1854 GW 8/17/1999 SS^ — oooa obis" IT 47~lT32 |EPAA»R3 GW 4999.99 1 i— 3 N iLNRDMD» T 6" S.Art Rt Laad. OMiorved Period3 UUM 5A 18* GW 10/28/1995 Laad, Otisotved 00162 0015 1 L L471151 iEPAAJRS GW 4999.99 ! j 5 N LNRD423 •j — • S Art Rl Lead. Dtuobed Parted 3 tuuvi 5A IBS GW 8/29/200C 'LMd. Dluolv«i 0.00 001 "b L 705879 URS Operate; Smvtca* far EPA OVl 4999B9 | i H LNRO-OS8 1 ° SArtRILud. Oiuofrnd Parted 3 UMW SB 1654 GW 3/23/199! •Lud, Diuohw] 000 0.01 0 L 471170 EPAAJRS GW 499999 j ! 3 ! a N LNRD-023 : o S Ark HI Land. DIuoNad ^Period S UUW 5B 1B5 UW 6/IW1B91 LMd. DiiaoNwi oov 001 c H 1 471189 ! EPAAJRS GW 4999.99 i 1 s" a N LNR042T TO" — j— SArt HI. Land. DliuNed Period 3 UUW15B IBS' GW 0/17/1999 jLud.Dtuohed 0.009) 0.01 c L 471227 iEPAAJRS GW j-9999.99 j 3 B !Tr L"NR(W2'H"iir S Art Ri.Land. Otuotod Parted3 UMW15B 185 GW 1 0/20/1 B9tjLMd DtnoNad 000775} 0.01 c L 471246 iEPAAJRS GVS -499999 8 ; N LNRO-023 T-J- i S.AA Rl.Lud. DUtolMd Periods UUW13B 185 GW 0/15/2001jLaad, Dtuornd ~~ "MOO 1 0015 c H 705913'TORS Operating SarviCMtor EPA ' GM 1-099999 s a LNRD-05B H!- 1 SArt RI.Lud. Drtaorved Parted 3 IUUW15B J8S- GW __B/29/2000 Laad, Dlitoivad 0001] 0015 0 L 705969 |URS Oponttna Sarvicai tor EPA '"" i4909.99 3 1 a iiT LNRD-OSB ! C SArtRI.Zinc.Olswfved Parted 3 UUWO "GW ZterZ DJnolved oobisf c H 469849 UOS a USGSfa rEP A '-9999.99 1 6^.4 Ml. 4! H LNRD-021 | 0 SArt R 1. Zinc, OiiMrvad Parted 1 JUUWO I76C GW 7/14/1998 ZMC. Dluorvod 0.0025J c H 468665 UOS 1 USGSfa rEP A f i 4099.99 i 0.4 !11.4i N LNRD-021 ! C — Panod 3 UUWO 176 GW 9/B/i99aiZJnc. Dttcorwd 0001! f 1 46866r UOS & USGS far EPA GW i-9999.99 " ! • }64 hi. ' N LNRD42i f C S Ark Rl Zmc. DicMrvad Parted S 'uuw6 17« GW 1 1/Wl998;Zlnc. Dtuorwed 0.001 j L 488697 UOS & USGS far EPA GW 1-9909 M • T~r«?fiTS N .LNRD-021 - 0 Parted 3 JUUWO 178 GW 3Q2/1999!ZJnc, Ditiolvad iJoossT L 499429 iEPAAJRS CW !-B99a M ( 0.' H LNRD-023 i ( irr SArkRI.Zbw:.DIuorved -i — Period 3 JUMWQ -Tni OW -^Sfianl^OtaohM o.ooasi "( H 1 469487 TEPMIRS OW 14MBM — — fffi}}n N U4RD423

SArk HI. Zinc. DlnohMd Panod 3 UUWO 176 CM lonanawiZJnc, Di«otv«i 00072 n L i 469505 iEPAAJRS '4999B9 ' N f 4~ ™ SArt R I. Zinc. DUsotved Parted 3 UUWO 17& GW 6/ ) SrtOOO ; Znc, Dissolved 0.001 7' 0 H ! 704488 jURSOparallng Strata! for EPA GW i " N LNRD-OSB S Art Rl Zinc. OUstfvod ~— . t^^lS— r: GWJ GAV1 998 fzinc. Dttaotved "6 V I ' 468713 ;'UOS A USGS (or EPA "cv 14099^90 "" j i a i u i N\NRfXU1 i 0

App_E_gw_Tbl_1 o3.xls Page 4 of 15 10/22/2002 Groundwater Data is River Reaches 0 to 3. Dissolved cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for all data sets, ai il cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for CDPHE data (LNRD-068). ,'"- •• [.- "i;. ".'•:'~.\. ','' •'.; :;;l..: •>•,:"•'•" • • .1 • ' ^:^^"-^^ffy:^'^/^:..^ '.';• >..'"•' . .'",'--'•' • '' - -. .V^.;;: •.?•>")".'•/;•'" :^f,^ :' ; * ' •, '•;-.' 'CM* '••, '.-• "' -/ .Period .^. MTOBtofcjnHirreV ' ?-.'- • ' 1 iis§Bi r- f I 1.93 1 I~i 11 , N LNRD-O21 Ark Rl ZJnc. Dluotved Period 3 ' JUW02 179S 17/14/199B Zhc.0svsorwd Hii5 >" I* 488729 iUOS 8 USGS for EPA GW •9999.99 1i. 0 G _._..__ . SArk Rl.Zinc. Dissolved £ Period 3 ' UUWOS I7BS GW i 11AV1998 Unc. Dluorved 2.19 0 L 468761 ! UOS 1 USGSto rEP A 9999.99 i "i ™|T ' j«b«- -0- io7 «a S.Art Rl Zinc, Dissolved ! Period 3 iUUWOJ 17M GW 5/1 7/1909jZmc. Dissolved 1.99J 0 H 4C9543 JCPA/URS GW j-8999 99 i • I 6 ; 11 i N |LNRD-023 0 SArk Rl Zinc Otnolved j Period 1 {UUWO2 179B GW 6/1 S/ 19991 jnc, Diuorved 0893; ) H ! 46B562 ! IPAAJRS GW -9999 99 j N .NRD-023 0 — ! 4 * S Art Rt Zinc. Dtuarved I Period 3 luLtWOZ 179fl GW" Elnc, Dtuahed 1.72 0 469581 !EPAAJRS GW 9B99.99 ! 8 -Jri N LNRD-023 0 LNRD42S 5' Art Riizinc. Dissolved 1 Period 3 3 JUUW04 —i,.".. c Art RTzwc. Dissolved ! Period 3 JUUWO4 842 C". 1 1/9/1998 j Zhc, Observed 1.01 0 L 466889 JOS & USGS far EPA w,-999999 "N LNRD-021 "o" ^ BAA Ri Zinc. Dissolved j Penod 3 JUUWO4 843 GW 5/18/I999J Znc. Diuolved 1.2 0 H 1 469613 EPAAJRS GW -999999 i 3 5 • B.S N LNRD-023 0 SArk Rl.Zinc. Diuolved l Pertod 3 iUUWM 84] 3W 6/1 5/1 999: Zinc, Dtuotrad 138 0 H 489832 EPAAJRS GW -999999 : ! i 35 B5 N LNRO423 1 0 Art Rl .Zinc, DJnaived 1 Period 3 JUMWD4 843 GW 8/17/1999 ZJnc. Dtiolved 2.29 0 L 469851 EPAAJRS GW -9999.09 i ! *S.S8.5 N LNRD-02S j 0 3 5 5 H SArt Hi Jinc. DluarvBd ! Penod 3 IUMW04 843 GW 10/28/1999 Zinc. Observed GW -9999.99 ! i 1 • ^ LNRD-O23 ! 0 843 "GW"* 6" 704838" URS Operattng ServlcH tor EPA -0999.99 '• ! 3 5 8.5"N LNRD-OSa |~0 843 GW i'.24 0 L 704894 URS OperatnQ Sen-fees tor EPA GW 499999 N LNRD-058 10 S Art. Rl Zinc. DtUOfvod 1 Ported 3 JUUWO4 809/2000 Znc. Oluorved _. ! 3.5 ! 8.5 SArt Hi Ztoc. Disserved Pertod S UUWOS 847 GW BAVigaaiZnc. Dissolved 9.29 H" "46890!" udS8USGSfor~EPA GW 4999.99 ; 12,7 N LNRD-02T T" 0 S Art Rl Zinc. DIuarvBd Pertod 3 jUUWW 841 jW 7/1 41 1998 |ZJnc, Otuotved UOS 8 USGS far EPA JW 4999.99 i • 2 7 N LNRD-021 JL S Art Rl Zinc, Dissolved Period 3 ! UUWOS 1847 GW gn/iesa Znc. Diuolved 11 s; 1 L 468937 ^UOS 1 USGSfa rEP A GW 4999.99 i i" ' "7 N LNRD-021 S Art Rl Zmc. Dluorvad Period 3 j UUWOS 1847 1 1 AT/1998Znc, DluoNed 7.53 1 L 468953 UOS & USGS tor EPA GW ;-9999.Uy '_j_ t _^ N LNRD-02) 0 S Art Rl Zmc, OluaNed Period 3 JUUW05 « 3/23/1999 ZkK, OtuoNed 691 1 L 469897 EPAAJRS GW~T4999.9fi '7 i N !LNRO-023 0 1 2 S Art Rl Zinc, Olnalved Period 3 i UUWOS GW f 5n8/1999 J! GW 4999.99 J_ SArt Rl.Zinc. OiuaNed Pertod S [UUWOS 847 GW fl/1 5/1999 Zinc. Dluorved 11 Z 1 "469935"'EPAAJRS GW"•8999 99 - I 12" T' N LNRO-023 4 S Ark Rl.Zmc. Otuotved I Period 3 UUWOS 847 GW 8/17/1999 Zinc. Diuatved 15.3 1 L 4699S4 EPAAJRS GW 49M.B9 ! 2 H LNRO-023 SArtRI.Zlnc. Dh**wd Periods UUWOS 847 GW' io/2B/i"M9~Znc. DtuoKred 9.15 1 L ! 469973 EPAAJRS f^va'GW -9999.99 1 2 7 N LNRD023 ' -s- S Ark fll.Znc, Dissolved Periods UUW05 B47 GW 6/15/2OOOjZJnc. DKsrJved 11.5 1 H i 7049Z8 URS Opening Services for EPA GWj-9999.99 ! i 2 N LNRO-058 0 SArkRI.Zjnc.bluaNad Period 3 UUWOS 847 GW 8/29/2000 ;Znc. Dfcaolved 10.8 1 L"* 704984 URS Opening Service* for EPA GW 4999.99 ! ' i 2 7 N LNRCMJSa 0 SAARI.ZJnc,OIjsatwd Period 3 tUMWlS a 302/1999 Zinc, Oiuotved 0557 0 L 470753 EPAAJRS 3W -999999 i ! 3 a N LNRO-02S 0 SArtRi.Zlnc. Dissolved Pertod 3 UHWlS 92 GW 5/17/1999 Zhc. Diuolved 1.21 0 H 470772 IEPAAJRS GW 4990.99 ; 3 B H LNRO-023' 3 -5- SArkRI.Zlnc.Oluotved Periods [UUWl 9; GW 8/15/1999 Znc. Ciuarvod 8 LNRO-023 0 : i_ S Ark fll.ZJnc, Dissolved Pertod S UUWl L " W 8/17/1999 Znc, Dluolvod "6"849— 0 EPAAJRS cw" .999999 i 3 8 N LNRD423 0 SArk Rl. Zmc. Dluotwd Pertod S UUWl 9; GW 10/78/1999 Zhc. Oiuotved 0624 0 L 470829 EPAAJRS GW •9999.09 3 8 tLNRO-02S 0 SArt Rt .Zinc, Dluolvod Period 3 JUUWI 9; GW 6/15/2000 Znc,0tuarved 0.636 0 H 705622 URS Opereong Service* tor EPA GW 499999 — *~ 3 B -:- LNRD-058 S Art Rl Zhc. Quorved Period 3 luUWI 9: GW j 0/29/2000 Znc. Ohwrwd 0.588 0 L 705678 URS Opefitng Services lor EPA GW 4999.99 3 B N LNRD-OS8 0 r GW -9999.99 H SArkRi.Zmc. Dissolved \ Penod 3 UUW14A 831 GW"! 3/23/r999 Znc.DsBolv«d 00055; 0 L ; 470888 EPAAJRS 68 6.8 .LNRO423 0 SArt RI.Zmc,D4uo*ved j Penod 3 UMW14A 3 GW S/17/1999;Zhc. Ofesohed 0.01 It; 0 H ; 470907 (JW JL 0 S.AA Rl.Zinc, Dluorved * Period 3 1UUW14A i3 GW ryiS/IWOlZJnc, Diuolved 000115! 0 H~! 470028 EPAAJRS GW 499999 ! S.B 8B N ;LMRO-Or> 0 S.Art HLZtnc. Diuolved 1 Pertod 3 IUUW14A 13 GWi 6/17/1999 Znc. ObteoNed 0.0043 0 L j 470942 EPAAJRS GW -0999 99 I 6t • B N 'LNRD-023 j 0 S Ark HI Zmc, Dissolved I Partod 3 IUUW14A i3 GW< IOA8/1999 ZJnc. OEuohed 0.00105 0 L 470964 EPAAJRS GW 1-9899.99 : Tea 88 "N~ JLNRCM123 ! 0 Gw 00017 H URS Operefrig Services for EPA GW 1-9999.99 i 6« iLNHO-OSa ! 0 S.Art RLZinc. Dluotved Pertod 3 1UUW14A 13 _j 8/tsnooa ZJnc. Oluorved 0 705712 B8 N S.Art Rl Zinc. Oiuorvad Period 3 ;UUW14A 1 13 CW 8V29/2000 2nc.0kuorved 00012 0 L 705768 URS Opening Services Bar EPA GW !-9999.99 ! 6.B 188 n !LNRD-OS8 D" 1 SArt Rl Zmc. Oiuotvad Period 3 UUW14B 00055 L 470983 EPAAJRS GW 4999.99 7 12 i N JLNRO-023 0 13 GW W3/19OT Znc. Dbsorved 0 I j S Ark Rl. Zinc. Oinotvod Period 3 UUW14B 13 GW 5/1 11 1999 Ztic. DbsorvM 00049 *o~ 471002 EPAAJRS GW" 499999 ' iTt'N 1LNRD-02S F 0 S Art Rl.Zinc. Oiuorvad Pertod 3 UUWI4B 1 IS GW L_ 6/1S/199I ZncOlualved 000115 0 H j 471021 EPAAJRS GW r4999.99 i 7 ! LNRD-023 : o 3ArtR1.Zmc.Olssotved j Penod 3 iUUWMB 1 13 GW 8M7/l999iZJnc. OLuolverJ O.OOSS1 0 "L fr "'037 EPAAJRS GW 4999.99 HI- N fLKRD-023 '. 0 SArt Rl Zinc. Dissolved Period 3 [UUW14B t t3 GW 10/28/1 OK Ztoc. Dluatved 000109 0 L j 471059 EPAAJRS GW 499999 s « „!|U«041M_ SArt Rl Zinc. Dissolved Pertod 3 iUUWMB 83 GW fl/15/2000 Znc. Diuofved 00017 •5- •HI 7b5802~ URS Opener* Servlcee For EPA GW 1-B9BB.99 ! f ' 1 12 W SArt Rl Znc. Dissolved Penod 3 UUWl 46 83 GW 8/29/200C Znc. Dluafvod 00012! 0 L t 705B58 URS Operating Service* for EPA GW 1-9999.99 N LNRD-05B _j 0 1 i : ' J*. 5AifcRiZlnc.OiS>alvad Periods UUWiSA BS4 GW 3^3/199* ZncOhsorved S.2B 0 L r~47i6nf EPAAJRS GW 4999.39 1 3 N ILNRD4ZS 1 0 S Art Rl Zinc. Druotvod Periods UMWISA 15. GW 5/18/1991 Znc.Dksoh>ed 8.81J 1 H GW 4999.99 i 3 5 : N LNRD-023 i 0 5ArtR1.Ztoc.Dluoh>ed Penod 3 UUWISA 15. GW j e/!S/l99f 'Znc. Otuolved 3.68J 0 ~H 471 116 EPAAJRS GW 499999 S i i > ! * iLNRO-023 i 0 SArt Rl Zinc, Dissolved Periods UUWISA 854 GW I 8/17/199! Znc. Oiuotved 185 0 L 1 471135 EPAAJRS GW 4999.99 1 3 i s i" :LNRO-033 c S.Art Rl.Zinc. Dissolved ( Pertod S luUWlSA GW ! lo/Z8/l999;ZJnc, Oluorved 2.73 1 0 L | 471154 EPAAJRS GW 4999.99 3 l 5 i n \StKSSS~ 0

SArtRiZmc.Otuc4ved 1 Period 3 'UUWlSB GW 3V20/1 999! Zinc, Dtuornd 0.384i 0 L~! 471173 EPAAJRS CWi-0999.99 --H- hr ~'LNRb423 1 0" A J J.J.1 SArkRl.Zlnc.Diuorved j Portod 3 JUUWISB )!> GW 6/15/l999iZlnc. Dtuatved 0.05341 1 0 ~fi"*"47 121 1lEPAAJRS GW j-9999.99 — — j— -5 -h!- LMRD423' T6 S Ark Rl.Zinc. DlMorvwJ [ Period 3 UUWlSB BW GW 8/17/1991 IZInc. DKsorved 0.44 ll 0 L 471230 IEPAAJRS GW 1-0999 99 1 ! 3 ! 8 | H LNRO-023 S Art Rl.ZJnc. Dissolved P.nod S UUWlSB 8S< GW 10/28/1991 tznc. Dkutved 0.118- 0 L -471249 : EPAAJRS GW i-9999.99 ' ' ' r-f-r B i N LNRO-023 1 0 S Art Rl. Zinc. Oluorved : Pertod S (UUWlSB 14 GW VISrXMX Znc. Oiudved D.7DB! H 705926 IURS OpOTJmg ServfcM lor EPA GW i-9909.99 \. — LNRD-058 0 S.ArkRIZIr.c'.btuoived J tisrMl'iUMWisB ' " IS GW 8/Z9/2DO( Znc.Oliulved 2.77 0 L 705982 *URS Opening Services for EPA GW ;-«99.99 ""''' i~3" -T+S JLNRCM58 S Ark RZ.Cedmlum. Dissolved Pwtod 3 iUMWOB 87 GW 8/9/1991 Cedmtom. Dluorved 0.000* < 005 0 H 46A957 UOS 1 USGSto rEP A GW 4999.99 ', ) 1.1 6.1 i N iLNRO-021 SAAR2.Cwlnriun.Otuc.1ved | Pwtod UMWOB 0001 ~ ft GW 7/14/1091 Cedmkm. OluaKed 005 0 "H" "4eB97T iUOS ft USGS tor EPA GW 4909.99 Vl 6.1 TN iLNRD-021 £ ' i 17 CW 9O/199I CertnUum. Dinoi¥en 0001 009 iUOSft USGS br EPA GW 499999 i i 1.1 6.1 JLNRO-M1_ ( S Art R2~ Codrnlurn. DtsKOlvad P«rtod UUWOfl 17 GW 1 1/9/199BCadmium. DEnotved 0.001 < 005 0 L "4i9005~ iUOS 8 USGSfa rEP A GW .9909.99 " - - - r i I l.l61 r-S ( S Art R2.Codmlum. Dtuotved Penod UUW06 1 87 GW __W4/1999 Csdmtom. Dissolved 0000. < 003 y L 469988 ! EPAAJRS GW 499999 i 1.1 6.1 LNRD-02S SArt KI Cadmkm. Ussoivnd *" Pertod UUWOB " 003 0 H '47DOM GW -999999 ~sT GW Csdrniurn. Dtssotved oooot IEPAAJRS ' r~" I ITT 18.1 H -S- I SArt R2 Codmhm. Dissolved Period UUW06 B7 GW 6/15/199! Cedmkm. Doaotvad 00025 1 009 0 H ~470Q21 iEPAAJRS GW 4999.99 M.1 j til H ^LNRD-023 f S Art" RZCodrt^/Mssolved Period UMWOfl 87 GW 8/1 71 1999 {Cadmium. OluaNed 0.000flk * 005 0 L 470040 i EPAAJRS GW 4099 09 i 1.1 8.1 H LNRD-023 n 1 i.sy. i_'5™. *?'il'.Tiir— :...:„.. iSiEi- — L-^ *- J."- . 1. App_E_gw_Tbl_1 o3.xls Page 5 of 15 10/22/2002 Groundwater Data for is River Reaches 0 to 3. Dissolved cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for all data sets, infl^aNj cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for CDPHE data (LNRD-068).

5 ~ f ' -+• . - I- S i|||l||5 : 1 ; RaiuflO Oaaotpibn- -*- -.. ., •'-.. .»' -.-j"-;. -'". •' .V:':"- ''<: : t . •--,, -_ *'. " f '.': . .' | "SM l l .-: •-"• Caw j _,_ Period i 1 : III 876 GW A/1 5/2000 Cadmhim. DiuaKed 00001 iooos 704996 URS OparatJng Sarvfcaa lor EPA CW 9099.99 1.1 LNRD456 * 0 Art R2 Cadirtum. Ouohod Periods 1UWOS 11 Art R2 Codmtum. Obnbed Periods IMW06 B76 GW 8/79/2000 Cadrnkm. Dlesotved 000067 1 ooos 0 L 705052 URS Operating Service* lor EPA GW -9999.99 1 1.1 6.1 N [ NRD456 , 0 S Arh R2 CadmMn. Otsuhed Periods JMW07 877 GW 6A/19981Cadrrrium. Deuohad o'.ooos{~« OOD3 0 H t 469021 UOS A USGS br EPA •0990.99 - 1 j 5.9 ! N i'NRD42I 0 SArk R2.Caorrdum, Observed PertedS UUW07 677 GW 7/14/1998 ICadmkxn. Otuolved 00015 < 0005 0 H T, 690371UOS A USGS br EPA GW _.._-0090.0_9 __„ _ ^ , 1 | 59 I N iLNRD-021 0 877 rw" Period S -UUW07 uw — ii/giaaa'Cadmaim. Dtt»oNed~ 00015 "ooos" 0 469069 UOS A USGS kv EPA cw"5999~99 i N JLNRD-021 SArt R2 Cadnfcvn. Uuobed . 4 ''L» 5 Arh R2.Cndm1um. Dbaotoad Parted 3 IUUW07 877 GW 3A4/i999!Cadmhjm. Diuofwi 0.0005 0005 0 L | 470081 EPAAJRS GW -3999.99 i 1 ! 5.0 N LNRD-023 0

1 S Arh R2 Codmkm. Diuohvd ( Period 3 IUUW07 sir GW 6flS/l999f Cadmium. Ofubrved" 00009; < "oooT "b~ H"t 4701 16 EPMJRS S999.BB "I *~t s.a NlLNRD-023 ^ 0

SArt H2 CadrnWt. Diuobed [ Period S JUMW07 1677 GW 10/78/1999! Cadmium, Dtsaolved 00009J < 1005 0 ~c 470137 EPAAJRS 499999 j i 1 !59 N fTNRD-023 0' S Art R2 Cadmium. Dtuarnd ; Period 3 !UMW07 1877 GW 6/15/2000 Cadmkim. Dtuohwd 0.00011 < 0006 0 H 703066 URS OparaUrH] Servian ta EPA GW 499999 j 1 5.9 LNRD-05B 0 S Art R2 Cadrnfcun. Duaived T Penbd 3 'UMW07 1B77 GW B/29/2QOOj Cadmkm. Diuolvwi OOOOlSj * ODD5" 0 L 703172 URS Operating Sarvtca* (or EPA GW -9999.09 i T i 5i9" L'NRMSB"! 1 q ^ SArt HJ.Codmhm. DUMhed Period S JUUW08 1866 GW Cadmium. OiuoNed 001631 1 0.005 1 H 469101 UOS A USGS tarEPA CwI-9999.99 ' ~ " " '^" "" 1' " 1 1 i 6 i N ILKRD421 ! 0 S.Art R2.Cadmfcm. DIscoNod Period 3 JUMW06 1686 GW j 8/8/1998 Cadmhim. Dluotvad 0.0097] 1 1005 1 JL^*HIJ«L:UOS A USGS br EPA GW 1-9999 99 ! ; > 1 • 6 i N iLNRD-021 0 Art R2.Cadn*jm. UisoNed Period 3 iUUWOB 1681 GW | i t/e/1996 Cadmium. Dtuorved 000691 (005 1 UOS A USCStaTlPA ~ " 3W i -6999.99 ' r i i .1.4 LNRD-021 0

Art R2 Cadmun. Duutved Period 3 iUUWOB 1661 CW i S/lB/1999:Cadmkjm. DieioNed 0007; -,- toos 1 IH j_ 470243 EPAAJRS 3W !-0999.99 • •- 1 1 fi N iLHRD^O23 f 6 SArt R2 Cadmium. DUcoNod periods JUW08 1666 GW i 6/15/1999 CadrnktfTi. DisioNad 0.0 IB 0005 1 470259 EPAAJRS GW [-9999.99 6 LNRD-023 i 0 __j i ...™ .™. S Arh RZ.Cadmhjm. Diuotrad UUWOB r&66 GW"* vi 77im 0006 0.005 t" f 470276 EPAAJRS GW -MM 99 j r N LNRCMD23 j 0 S.Art R2.Caorrii*T«. OUtahed ! Period 3 jUMWOO 1046 GW 10/20/1999 Cadrnum. DiMoTwd 00063- 0005 1 470300 EPAAJRS GW -9909.99 i ' 8 N LNR&023 ! 0 S Arit R2 CDdrrtfura. DU«*«d Period 3 lUUWOB 1686 6/1 3/2000 Cadmkm, DkaoNed 00241i 0005 l"" 705206 URS Opervtkq Santeei tor EPA GW [4999 09 [ i 6 H .NRD-OSB j"b" S Art R2.Codrraum DUtabed ! Period 3 JUMWOB 1U8 GW i tujunuuu Cadmum. Disurved 0.0109 )005 I L 705262 URS Opening Sorvicaa lor EPA GW 4999.90 E JLJULLNRD-OSB j _0 S Arti R2.Codrnun. Oiualvwl ; Period 3 lUMWOB 1689 GWJ a/9/1694 Cadmium, Di»otvad 00305 QMS" 1 H "469"l49 UOS A USGS br EPA GW 4909.99 i i •,-- 6 i H LNR0421' i 0 Arh R2.Cadrrdun. DlnoVod ! Period 3 -UUW09 1689 GW 7/14/1996 Cadmium. Dbaolnd 00199 0005 1 H j 469165 UOS A USGS far EPA CW •9999.99 I i t 6 ! H^ LNRD-021 ; 0 SArhraCadrT*im.btHoN»d T Period S UMW09 1689 GW^ Cadmbm. btnotved 00289 OOOS 1 L i 469181 UOS A USGS far EPA GW 4999.09 i ! 1 6 N LNR&O21 t"b" 5 Art R2 Cadrmm. D»«*ed j Period S JUUW09 1689 GW | HAV19H Caorrwim. Oissahred 002 OOOS 1 L | 469197 UOS A USGS far EPA GW 4999.09 | LNRD-021 j D ._.nu._|... SlAr h R2\C«frhkm. Ouaotved ! Period 3 UUW09 1889 cw MM/IMS 0.0146! 0005 1 L 470310 TPAAJR3 "~ "GW" 499909 " i " - '"r7" LNRD-023 0 S Art R2 Cadmhan. Ofetotvad Ponod 3 JUMW09 1889 ^S/1 9/1998 Cadmkm. 0«orwd 001B7 OOOS 1 H 470338 EPAAJRS GW !-9999 99 • Ill 6 N LNRD-023 -5" S Art R2.CaaVrtun. DbftaVed j Period 3 IUMWDO 1839 T& 6/15/1099 Cedmkim. Dluarred 0.0257 0.005 1 H 4703S4 EPAAJRS GW 14999.99 """ ! i l i 6 N rNRD-023 0 _._ S Art FQ.Cadrntint, Ouched' ; Period 3 UUW09 -rah -Jar 10(76/1999 Cadmkm. Oeuolved 0.0171 "oooT L 470395 EPAAJRS GW I-99M 99 ! i 1 ! 6 \ H LLNRD-OMT""o1 " S Arh RZCattnhm. Dissolved i Period 3 UUW09 1889, GW e/lSnOOOiCadrnkm. Diuolved 0.003 H 705298 URS OperaOng Semca* for EPA GW r-9999.89 j LNRD458 0 SArk RlCadmhan. OtiuNed j Period 3 iUUWOS 1869 GW 6/30/3000 Cadmkm, Dauotved 0022299999 OOOS r ~L ! 705352" URS Operabng Servfcaa lor EPA GW -9999.99 ; -l-r-kf N LTSSSeT' 0" SArt R2 Capper. Oruolved Periods UUW06 IB/I uw 6/9/1991 Coppar. Dbufvad 0.001 1.3 0 H }_ 468961 UOS A USGS lor EPA GW 490909 ! i h.i 6.1 H LNRD-oai 0 SArt R2 .Copper. Dtuatved "Period 3 uuwoa 1876 GW 7/1 4/1998 iCoppef. Diuotved 0.001 3 0 H ["480*77 UOS A USGS br EPA GW •099999 j • r -i i.i 6. l"' N LNRD-021 ~o" S Art R2.CoppM. Oiualved Periods UMW06 1876 GW. 9JB/199I 1Cappar. Diuortred 0.001; 3 0 L 1 466993 UOS A USGS tor EPA GW i 9999.99 j ; 1.1 ! 6 1 N LNRD-021 0 S.AA R2 Capper, Dlcmatved "PvtedS UUWOe 1B76 GW] I1WT991 Capper. 0"l»atved obbir 3~ "o" V"p469009 UOS A USGS far EPA GW ; -9999.99 T 1.1 6.1 j N LNRD421 S Art R2 Capper. Oiuorved ! Period S uuwoa 1676 GW 1 3/24/1 099 iCopper. OluotveO 0001; 3 0 L I 469086 EPAAJRS GWi-909909 __|_l.L. 6.1 N LHRD-023 0 S Art R2 Copper. Ot«r*ad j Periods uuwoe 187 GW; 5/19/1999 Cappw. Oaurvod 000215! 3 0 H 470007 iEPAAJRS GW 1-9999.99 ! t.i 6.1 nr LNRD-023 ; 0

S.Art RZCopper. Daubed j Period 3 UMWD6 itTfi GW T aft 7/1999 ICoppar. OhMfved 000£ 3 0 L i 470043 iEPAAJRS GW i-9999.W 1 • i i.i fi.i i Hi iLNRO-023 i 0 1876 GW .Copper. DtMQtwd 000125 3 (J 470064 EPAAJRS GW 1-6999.09 j ! j 1.1 S.Art R2 Copper. DUsnNad Period 3 UUWOB 10T2B/199I .... 6.1 ! N LNRD-023 j 0 S Art R2 Coppar. OUMhed ' Period 3 uuwoe 1676 GW 6/1V2000 .Capper. OtasatvBd 00003- 0 705001 )URS Opereang Sorvton far EPA GW -B90909 ' : 1 1.1 TT TT LNRD-058 ! 0 S Art R2.Copper. Olisobed j Ponod 3 UUWOB 1676 GW i 8/29/2000 Copper. Da solved 0.0006 3 0 L ; 705057 URS Opntog Sarvlcaafa rEP A GW 490909 i i 1.1 ! 6.1 LNRD-OSB 0 f i Art R2 Capper. Dtuatoed | Period 3 1UUW07 1877 GW 6S/19Q8jCopper. Dbuohed 0.001 3 0 H ; 469025 UOS A USGS br EPA GW 4999.99 i 1 59 -rT LNRJ>021 S Art R2 Capper. Dluatwed | Period 3 JUUW07 1877 GW 7/14/1998.Copper. D»Mfved oooi! 3 0 H 469041 'UOS A USGS for EPA GW 499909 [ l 5.9 1 N LNRO-021 0 4 S.Art RZ Capper. Oluafved Period 3 UWWOT 1B77 GW 9A/1B9B Copper."Daiicirved 0.001J 3 0 L 469057~iUOS A USGS tor EPA GW 4909.99 ! "sTTV S.Art R2.Copper. Osiotved Periods UUW07 1877 GW 11/9/1991 Copper. Dtaotvod 0001 3 0 L 469073 JUOS A USGS far EPA GW 4999.99 { ! i 5.9 N LNRD-021 0 S Art RZ.Cappoi. DttMMd Periods UUW07 1877 GW 3Q4/1099fCoppcr. D4UOrWd OOOI 7 — 3~ D L 4700B3 iEPAAJRS GW 499909 "—i 1 [50 LNRD423 r-o' S Art R2 Copper. Dludved Period 3 UMW07 S/19/19W Capper. DEaahwd H 470102 .'EPAAJRS UW -9999.09 ! ! 1 i 5.0 ! N LNR0023 0 S Art R2.Canpar. Dtsutoed PariodS UUW07 1B77 GW 6/15/l999iCopper. DHKrfwd 000215! 3 0 H TTBTiS- iEPAAJRS GW [-9999.99 ~" i i fi6TH"Tii«D«i i o S Art R2 Copper. Dltwr*ed Periods UMW07 GW 8V17/1B9* :Capper. DluoNed 0.0022] L 470137 jEPAAJRS GW1-B99999 f I JJL N ;LKRD-OJ3 Q S Art H3 Copp*. CNiiotved Period 3 'UMW07 1B77 GW 10Q6/1 999 iCopper, Dbufved 000125 J 0 L "ere'isT JEPAAJRS GW I-S999.99 59 0 j ' S Arh RJ.Coppor. DUMlved Poriod 3 UUW07 fi/lS^OOl ; Copper, Dluahnd H 705091 :URS Opening Serwion (or EPA GW ! -0999. 09 i i iso N ILNRD-058 0 SArt R2.Capper. OiUOtved Periods JUUW07 1877 GW 6/29/2OOI 'Copper. DitcoNeti 0.0008r 3 0 fURS Opwmbng S«rv1c*. Icr EPA GW J.9999 99 ~~ " ' ' ) 1 [ 59 H LNRD45A \~ S Art R2 Copper. OlMOVed \_ Parted 3 JUUW06 1886 GW * •*.!?"JC2W?ri_I?_tl^rtd___ 0.001; 3 0 H : 469089 • UOS A USGS lor EPA j GW •999999 i i « N LNRD-021 0 . i ' i « SArh H2 Copper. DUubod i Period 3 uuwoa 1886 GW 9JB/199J ; Copper. DttMhed OOOIj 3 0 L [ 469121 .UOS A USGS br EPA GW j-9999.99 i i s e N LNRD-O21 0 1 S Art R2 Copper. OUubed ! Period 3 i UMWOB 1888 GW~ 11/9/I99J [Capper. DajsoNed O.DOIj S 0 L 469137 UOS A USGSto rEP A GW j-9999 99 tile N LNRD421 0 S.Art R2 Copper. Dluobed j Period 3 {UUWOB 1688 GW i 3/24/1991 iCopper. Oeuolved 0002l! 3 0 L 470226 EPAAJRS GW-^99909 N LNRO-023 0 1 i i e S Ark R2 Copper. Dluotnd ; Period 3 JUMWOB 18*6 GW i 5/19/199! iCoppar. ObaoNad ToSTsT i" 0 "H 470245 : EPAAJRS GWi^99999 .1 e : t? LNRD-023 S.Art R2.Copper. OUwrvad ! Parted 3 IUUWO6 1686 GW ! 0/15/1991 Copper. Diuorvad oon: 3 0 H 470261 GW -9999.99 [ ~0 ._ j IEPAAJRS ..._.__.. i^ 6 i N LNRM23 S Art RZ.Coppor. Dfetobad i Period 3 JUUWTJ6 1686 GW ifl/ 17/19 9Coppar. OUtohnd 0.0022! 0 L 470280 'EPAAJRS CW 1-9999 99 6 TN~ LNRD-023 0 S Art R2.Copper. Dlaiohed ! Period 3 jUMWOB 1B8B GW Copper. Oawrved 00012! '. .3 0 L 10/2B/199! ._„_ 470302 jEPAAJRS GW j.9999 99 ! » 6 ! N LNRD-023 0 S.Art RZ.Coppw. DtMObed ! Period 3 UMWOB 1888 GW &7J 5/2000 : Coppar. Dtuohed 00071 0~ H 1 70S211 ;UR3 OperaDng Sorvicaa far EPA GW i-9999.99 i * B N LNRO-OSB a S Arh R2. Copper. DJiiobed j Period 3 uuwoa 1886 GW anrv2oo iCopper. DbtorvwJ 00011 .3 0 L 705287 luRS Operaing Sorvtcai tor EPA GW 1-8999.99 J iLNRD-058 c S Arh R2.Coppar. Otuotrad ! Period 3 UUW09 1669 GW ' awiwe !cipp.r.O«oK«d " 606 t .3 ~d H 469153 [UOS A USGS far EPA GW -999999 r r i "6 1 ;LHRO-02N 1 0 SArt RZ.Copper. DiuolMd I Ported 3 UUWOO IBM GW [ 7/14/tW iCoppar. Ditaorved 0.00 .3 0 H 469169 iUOS A USGS far EPA CM 4990.09 1 6 ! N LNRD-021 0 S.Art' R2 Copper. Diktobed ''"Period S iUUWOS GW an/193 ICoppar. Ocssotvod 000 1.3 0 L i 469185 IUOS A USGS br EPA GM •9999.99 1 T6 i N *LNRD-021 0 S Art R2 Copper. OtKHtoed [ Period 3 JUUWO9 i&ea cw 11/B/1W 'Copper. DtuoNed 0.001! 1.3 0 L | 489201 !UOS A USGS br EPA GW 4909.00 ! ' V 'LNRD-021 0 S.Art H2.Copper. Dfeubed Period 3 JUUWO9 166! GW 1 3r24/199 icwbeMfcar- OODDSJ 1.3 0 L ] 470321 ! EPAAJRS GW 4999:99" " '" - " T-' t -WtaRMZT hr S Art R2.Coppar. Dluotved Period 3 JUMWO9 CW [ 5/19/100 [Copper. Dbwrved 0002151 1.3 0 H i 470340 'EPAAJHS GW !-9999.99 i l B } HJLNRD-023 0 SArt Rl.Coppor. Dtuohwd Period 3 lUMWTjg IBB! GW! e/is/Vw ICoppar. Deuolved 00021SJ 1.3 0 H 1 470356 iEPAAJRS GW j-9999 99 11)6 N* iLNRD-023 S.Art R2 Copper. Dttaobed Period 3 JUMW09 18BS GW a/17/l990|Capper. Obcotved 0.0022 13 0 L > 470375 EPAAJRS GW J-B999.99 rr e i ILNRD423 ! 0 3 Art HI Capper, Dliiorved Penod 3 UUWOO 1B8S GW 10/28/1 9991 Capper, Di»molved 000125; 1.3 "o ! 470397 iEPAAJRS GW 14999 99 i T 1 6 r N !LNRM23~ ~0" SArt H2 Copper. Dtuorvwd Parted 3 UUW09 teas GW 6/15/200 iCopper. DHaorrad 0.000 [_ 1.3 0 H i 705301 !URS Opanang Sarvtce* tor EPA GW 1-9999.99 '- 1 j 6 • N ;LNRD-OS8 Q Period 3 IMS S Art. Rl.Cappoi. OUeatved uuwoa GW 6/30/2000 ICopoer, Dtuatwed 0.0001 1 3 0 L j 705337 iURS Opanbno Service* tor EPA GW '4999.99 i 1 T6"~1~N 0 ~wi GW 0.00 S Art R2 Lead. Distorted Period? uuwoe 6/9/19081 Lead, Otuolved 0015 "o H ' ; uos a uses (or EPA GW"4999.09 •—! 1.1 JLNRD.021 SArt Rl.lead. Oluabed GW 7/14/199 .jLead.Dluohwl 0.0005} 0.01! c H 466979 i UOS i USGSfa rEP A nw 4999.99 i 1.1 B.fl N |LNRO021 ( SArt R2 Laod, Dlisobed Period 3 'UMWOB GW j 9W199J1-Laad. Diuoivad 00005! 0.013 0 L 466995 "jUOS A USGS far EPA GW" 4009,99 ! 6.1 1 N ILNRD-021 SArt R2.Leod. Dtuohrod "pertoVs UMW06 GWl 11(9/199 ,'Lead.OiuaNad 00005 001! 0 L ^69011 ! UOS A USCSta rEP A GW *4999.99 i ~ • I.i 6.1 j N* LNRD-021 1 ( S Art R2 Lead. Dttcobttd Periods 187 GWJ 3J24M99I} Lead. Dluotved 0.00 0015 0 L " 469989 JEPAAJRS GW j.9999 09 i ... j 6.1 i N LNRD-023 j 0 S Art R2.Lead. Dtuofrod Periog-3 uuwoe 187{ GWJ 5719/199-} Laad. Ouiotved 001 0.011 0 H 470008 ] EPAAJRS GW j-9999 99 T " Tl 1 N 1LNRD42S 1"i SArt H2.Lead. Dxaohred Period 3"*UUW06 GW j fl7l5/19& Lead. Oiuorwd 0001 001! 0 L i 470043 JEPAAJRS GW J-9999 99 j ~ ¥ S Art RM.BDd. Druobed 1 Period 3 uuwoa 0.017 j 0.01! L~l 470065 [EPAAJRS CW j.000999 — — -T-frl"Vlj N JLNRD*a3 T App_E_jgw_Tbl_1o3.xls Page 6 of 15 10/22/2002 Graundwater Data for r. River Reaches 0 to 3. Dissolved cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for all data sets, an cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for CDPHE data (LNRD-068). : 1 L "•(.i~. | > ] i ^ Saralratoaflc., __ J Cau Partod ^ UFCSlatwiKarr- I ; tacVtft DaaortoJfcn , ll I 1878 GW 6/1 5/2000 iLaad. Dluotvad ooooa 70SOOS URSOpanthoSarvKntorEPA 499999 V i0 Art R2.Laod. OnsoNad ! Parted 3 JUUW06 4 u1 GW Laad. Dluotvad 0.0011 < 015 0 L i 706001 !UR3 Opening Swvfcnta rEP A i Art R2 Laad, DluoNad Pariod 3 JUUWOO -u fi iM > 1 1 HRD-021 H 469043 "UOS A USGS tor EPA GWI-999999 _ _ _ , LWR0421_["o~ SArt FH.Laad. DfuoVad Patted 3 UUW07 1677 GW 7/14/l998|Liad, Otuolwl 00005 o!oT 0 — — mi Art fU Land. Druoivad { Partod 3 UUW07 1677 CW Laad. Dkuotvad oooos; < 0.01 0 L 469059 JUOS A USGS tor EPA GWr-0999.99 -S9 "S" S Art RZ Land. DtuoNad Partod 3 UUW07 1871 GW 11/9719081 ,aad. Oluorvad 0.0005|_< 015 0 . 46907SJ IQSAUSGStofEPA •909000 5.0 N SArt R2 Laod! OuioNad" " " i"P«*d 3 UUW07 ~ 1677 GW 3/24/1 099 iLaad. OluoNad ~" obdir 001 0 L 70064 EPAAJRS SS"' •9090.00 • 5.0 1 " LNRD-023 i 0 1877 GW S/1 8/1999, aoi4f 0.0 1 0 N 70103 EPAA/ffS tiW; 9999.99 ! 5.9 i T S Art K2 Laad oiuorwd ! Petted 3 UUW07 I S Art R2 La'ad. DUwNed | Parted 3 .UMW07 1871 CiW 6/1 5/1999 jLaad. DtuoNad 0.014 — 1 o" H 70iiiT " 1PAAJRS cw"| 0999.99 ' ' ~ ' ' ! 551 LNRO-023 ! 0 SArt RTlaad. Oluotvod Parted 3 ;UUWQ7 1877 GW 0/17/1909^Lead. Dluotvad 0.009 < 001 0 70138 iPAAJRS GW {-0999 99 N S.Art R2 Laad. biuoNed j Parted 3 (UUW07 1877 GW 1 0/76/1909 L«udj , Oiurdvcd 0.00775! * 001 "b" T- ~ 70160 EPAAJRS GW i-9999.99 : ToH H" 0 Art R2 Land. DnioNBd ! Pariod 3 JUUW07 in 71 GW 6/1 5/2000 :Lead. OteioNad oooie! O.Ot u H 05095 URS Oparadng Sarvtea* for EPA GW •8999.99 5.9 ! N LNRD-058 0 S Art R3 Lud'. DHiorvad i Partod 3 UHWQ7 1877 GW 6/29/2000 ILaad. DrsnUvad oooip< o'oi 0 L j 705181 iURS Gpantng Sarvlcu for EPA CW -099009 : YopN LJ4RD-056 t Art R2 Land. DluoVad i Parted 3 UHWOB 1861 GW 6W1096 Laad. DtuoNad 00132! 001 0 H i 469001 UOS A USGS tor EPA GW (-909999 6 N "o" Art"R2Laad\D«uoNad j Patted 3 luMWOO 1886 GW 7714(1990 Laad. DluoNad " 00734| 001 1 H S 469107 tuOS a USGS far EPA GW 14099.99 0 N LNKO-021 0 1 S Art R2 Laad. Ottaolvad i Partod 3 fUUWOa te« GW WB/lflSB- .aad. {Huorwd 00119:' MM 0 L i 469123 loOS 4 USC3to fEP A W '-099899 N LNRD-Q21 0 Art R2.La*d. DtuoNad j Pariod 3 UUW06 188£ GW 11AV1098 Laad, Diuotvad 0.0031 1 1 0015 0 L 1 469139 ! UOS 1 USGS far EPA GW j-8999.99 j 1 -ft •TLNRD-021 _^ 0 S Art K2 Laad. Dluolvad ! Pariod 3 UUW06 1861 GW 3«4/1909 .aad. DtoioNad 0008! 0015 0 . j 470227 IEPAAJRS CW -9999 BO 8 _J ,!L .NRD423 0 SArtH2ia»d.bli**od ! Patted 3 UUWOa 18AI CW "~ S/19/1090 Load. DtuoJvad 0.014 OOlS 0 H 470240 1CPAAJRS GW -099B.99 --f— 6 " LNRD423 0 SArt R2.LMd. Dluokrad i Panod 3 iUUWOfl 1861 GW 6/15/1090 Laad. Diuotvad 00963 0015 t H 470202 iEPAAJRS GW -0999.09 _!L 0 SAfkR2Laud.DlMONed j Partod3>UUW08 1881 GW 0/17/1999 Laad. DluoNad 0.009 0.01S 0 L 470281 EPAAJRS GW -9999.09 I -f~ N LNRO-023 1 0 S Art RZLaod. OiiuNod 1 Partod 3 jUUWOO 1681 CW 10r2B/1900 .aad. OluoNad 000775 1.015 0 L 470303 LPAAJRS ;w •9999.00 | « N LNRD423 0 S.Art R2.Laod Dif toNad Parted 3 JUUW08 1881 GW 6V1S/2000;Laad, DiuoNad OOG5G99997 O.Ot 5 1 H 705215 iURSOparalhgSarvtoulorEPA CW -9999-99 " " ""•• T p i rnrLNR 0-058 "6" S Art RZLaatf. D>»olva 7/14/1998 Laad. Oruotvad 0015 0 GW -9099.00 LNRD-021 0 SAri R3 Laad. OKuNad Partod 3 JUMWOO 1809 CW &/B/1DS8 Laad. Dluotvad 0.0011 j 0.015 0 L 469187 UOS A USGS tor EPA GW -999900 --!- -»- 1 NR 0-021 Art R2 Laad. DluoNad Pwtod 3 lUUWOO 1S GW 11/9/1098 la*d. ObioNad 00005 0015 0 L 469203 JUOS A USGS tor EPA GW -090909 s H LNRD-021 1 0 |_ ?? 1 •=- r = . 4- ._. _i._ _i oooi K S S.AtkR2 Laad. OluoNad Parted 3 UUWOO i i8oa ;w 5/13/1999 Laad. Druotvad 0014 0.015 0 H 470341 j EPAAJRS GW j-990999 ; N !LNRD-023 0 ,AA rexaair. DH'»oWad Partod 3 UUWD9 ion CW — S7s7i999 Laad.QtuoNod 0.014 00)5 0 H 470357 IEPAAJRS CW -9999.99 " 1 i rr- SArt R2iaod.DiMoiv*d j Parted 3 iUUWOO 1869 GW tV17/1999 [ O009 0015 L "470376"! EPAAJRS "cw" -9999.99 ! 6 N iLHRD-023 j 0 S Art R2.laad. OtuONad Partod 3 IUUW09 iw 1 0/26/1 099 i LMd. DtuoNad 000779; mis n 1 470390 > EPAAJRS 3W -9999.99 ! - "r-j "W"]LHRCMJ23 j" 6 Art KI Land. Dtuotead Parwd 3 [UMWOO 1889 3W 0.0008- 1.0 15 0 H 705305 :URSOpantkigSarvka:i(orEPA GW -0990.99 j -H N ilNRD-058 < 0 SArt R2 LHd. dtubtvad Partod 3 !UUW09 CW 000/2000 Laad.OiuoNBd OOOli 0.015 0 L 7b~536l URS OparMng Servicas tor EPA GW -9999.99 ! ~N" LNRD458 0 SArt R7 Zinc. DluoNad Partod 3 j UMWOO 187C 3W 679/1998 ZJnc. Dtuorvad oooeel S 0 H 406060 UOS A USGS tor EPA GWi-099900 1.U61 LNR 0-021 ' 0 S Art R2 Zinc. Dluotvad j Parted 3 ;UMW06 1Q76 GW 7/14/1998 Zhc. Oiuotvad 0-0104J 5 0 H 469085 JUOS A USGS tor EPA Cwi-0990.09 "" 1.1 I«1 'i-T LMRD421 "~s Znc,Ouotvad 469001 UOS A USGS tor EPA LNRD-021 Q S Art R2.Zlnc, OrtsoNBd j Patted 3 UUW06 1876 GW OO/1098 00052 5 0 L GW -0990.00 6.1 N ™. SArt R2.Z]nc. DiuoNad i Parted 3 IUUW06 18,6 CW 11/9/1998 Zkic, ttMOtvod 0001 5 0 UOS A USGS tor EPA GW 1-9999.00 -h .1 6.1 N LNRD-021 SArt FU.ZbK, DluoNad ! Partod 3 i UUWOO I«H CW 3Q4J1909 Zinc. Dluotvad 00055! 5 0 L 469992 EPAAJRS 99M99 — .1 6.1 N LNRO-023 0 S Art R? Zinc. DlwivBd Pajtod 3 JUUW06 1876 GW 5/1 0/1990 Zinc. Druotvad OD946J 5 D H 470011 iEPAAJRS S;-9999.99 .1 a N LNRDXro 0 S Art R2 Zrnc, Oluorvad Patted 3 JUUW06 1876 3W 6/15/1090 Zinc. OluoNad 00067; 5 0 H 470027 EPAAJRS GW -«0»O.DO .1 0 N 0 S.Art RJ ZbK. Dlttatvad Partod 3 iuUWOfl 1676 ^W 0/17/1009 Znc. OtuoNad 0307! S 0 L ! 470040 EPAAJRS GWi«S9.99 r ! .1IT SR^~ 0 SArt R2.Ztec. DluoNad ( Parted 3 !uUW06 1876 M 10/20/1 999 -Zinc. Diuotvod oooios! 1 5 0 L i 470060 EPAAJRS GW j-OSOO.OO j._\L „• LNRD-C23 0 ^~ ^ SArt R? Zinc. DIeorvad ! Parted 3 lUUWOO 1876 3W tmODODl Zhc, Diuotvad 0.056200001 5 0 L 705074 URS Opanbnrj SarvicM tor EPA 3W i-9999.99 { H- .1 e N LNRD-OSB 0 h S.Art H2 Zbx:. Oiuofvad • Parted 3 IUUW07 1877 GW ! 6V9/1998 Ztec. btuoNad P 0.0127! 5 0 H 489033" UOS A USGS tor EPA GWj-9099.09 i ~is N LNRD42I "if •"5 ^|«g. — j — t — S Art RZ.ZJnc. DluoNad i Parted 3 |UMW07 1677 T55 J Mi/1998" ZhK. Dlstotvod 0.001= IT T" 469065 iuOSaUSGSbrEPA 5 "N LWRCM72I -o- S.Art R2 Zinc. Dtuotvad ! Partod 3 1UUW07 1877 GW 11/9/1098 Ztoc, Druotvad 0001 5 u L 489001 UOS A USGS tor EPA CW ;-9999.99 5 N LNRD421 0 SArt R2 Zinc. Dluotvad ; Partod 3 JUUW07 " 1877 "GW i 3/24/1999 Ztnc,baw)tvad 0.0055 S a L "4"70067~ EPAAJRS CWj.9999.90 •~ — i 5 H LNRD423 0 S.Art R2.ZJnc. OlnoNad ! Partod 3 JUMW07 1677 GW : S/19/1999 Zhc. Oluorvad O.0037 5 0 H 470106 EPAAJRS GW -0989.99 ^,- 5 N LNRD-023 S Art RJ.Zinc. OlMoNad i Partod 3 !uUW07 187] GW P e/is/Tooi Zkic. DluoNad OOOIISj 5 0 EPAAIRS GW !-B99999 } ! N LNRD423 ~0~ S Art R2. Zinc. DtuoNad i Parted 3 UUW07 1077 GW j a/17/1999 Zinc. Dinatvad 0.0057J 5 0 L 470141 iEPAAJRS GW -090909 — ! N LNRD-023 0 SArt R2 Zbw. OluoNad | Partod 3 UUW07 1677 "GW" j TO/28/1090 Zlnc,Ohwotvad 6.0117 s"~ 0 L 470163 iEPAAJRS GW' -099999 S N LNRD423 D S Art R2 Zinc. OluoNad ] Parted 3 UUWO7 1877 GW 1 fl/15/2000 Ztec. DtuoNod 0.0286J 5 0 705106 URS OparaOng Sarvicai (or EPA GW S-8999.99 1 ! N jLNRO-OSO 0 SArt R2.Zlnc. OluoNad ! Parted 3 UMW07 ' 1877 cW > 07290000 ZJnc. Diuotvad 0.001 3; 5 "o L 705104 /URSOparaOngSarvlcaatorEPA GW (-OfrBfl.OO '. N 'LNRD-OU 0 S Art R2 Zinc, Dluotvad > Parted 3 UMWU7 1877 GW i 0/28/2000 ZJnc, Oiuotvad 000045 _, S 0 L j 70S164 URS Operating Setvteg) (or EPA GW -9099.90 I ! S LNRD-058 0 SArt R2 ZJnc. DtuoNad | Pariod 3 UUWOO 18B8 'GW~ i 6*1998 Zinc, Dluotvad 6.06 5 1 "H i 469097~*udsau'SGS""torEPA"™ '" GW -9999.99 I -5-'LNRO421 0 SArt R2.ZJnc, Oluotved I Pwtod 3 UUWOfl 1886 GW ! 7/14/1938 Zinc. Dluorved 9.4 7i ,_5. ., 1 H I 469113 iUOSAUSGSfbrEPA GW 4999.99 LNRD421 0 S.ArtR2Zlnc.DiuoNad Parted 3 UUWOB 1666 GW"* 8*1998 Zinc. Oiuotvad " 823*~ 1 L i 460120 [UOS A USGS tor EPA •&M -0999.99 I ~S" 1LNRD421 D S Art R2 Zinc, DluoJvad ! Patted 3 UMWOO 1886 GW i 11(9/1008 ZJnc, Olnotvad 4.84L 5 0 L i 469145 UOS A USCS tor EPA GW t-9909.00 t L ELNRD421 0 S Art R2.Zinc, DtuoNad S Parted 3 UUWOB leae "GW 3H4/1999 Zinc. Oruotvad 4.09 5 "6 TTrbncT GW i-0099.99 ! --"• j LNRD-023 0 S.Art R2 Zinc. Diuorvad j Parted 3 LUUWOO 1U£ GW 5/19/1900 Zinc, DluoNad 8i t S i M 70249 EPAAIRS GW i-S999.B9 1 ; LNRD-023 0 S Art, Rj.Zinc. Oluorvad [ Partod 3 fuuwoe 1681 GW ~via/im Zinc. Oiuotvad 5.92 S i H 70265 EPAA/RS CW ,'-«S9.99 " i — }— |~f- TT •LNRO-023 S Art R2 Ztec. OluoNad j Parted 3 iUUWOB IOBG GW 8/17/1999 Zinc. DaioNad 565- 5 i L 70284 JEPAJURS GW [-6999 09 i 'LNRD-023 0 1 1- S Art RTZtec. Otuotnd | Pwtod 3 jUMWOfl 1866 GW 10/20/1090 Znc, Daaotvad 4.09 5 0 L 70308 EPAAJRS GW 499999 ! i rr tLNRO-023 0 SArt R2.Zlnc. OruotvMl j Partod 3 iuUWOO t68l GW fl/1 5/2000 :ZJnc. OluoNad 082 5 1 H ] 705226 URS Oparmang Sarvtcai tor EPA GW -0999.09 i i i ; N •LNRD4S6 c SArt R2.Zlnc. Oluorvad [ Parted 3 UUWOB 168C GW 8730V2000 jZJnc. Dtuotved 534 5 1 L T 705264 tuRS Oparaftig Sarvlcu tor EPA CW -0999.99 1 P nr iLNRiMrU S Art RZZlnc. Oluorvod | Parted 3 UUWOO 1663 GW jZmc. Dtuotvad 6.74 5 1 H I 469161 UOS A USGS tor EPA GW -9099.09 [ N ;LNRO-OJI 1 SArt RUinc. DtuoNad Pwted 3 [UUWOO 1889 GW1 T/TvioS EZiic. DaaoNad 619; 1 5 1 H i 469177 iUOSAUSGStorEPA GW -0999.99 i -f J~N" 'LNR002I c S Ark R2 ZJra. DtHorvad Parted 3 JUMWO9 1B6S GW I am/tooa ic. Dtuotvad 83 5 1 L J 460103 iUOSAUSGSfarEPA GW •099009 1 N JLNRO-021 t SArh R2 Zinc. Druotvad 1 Pwtod 3 UMWOO 164 GW f 11*1998§K.0afolvad 332 S 1 L 1 469208 UOS A USGS tor EPA GW -999999 • T JLNRD-021 c S Art R2.Zlnc. OluoNad i Pwtod 3 UMWOB 1681 GW , 3/24/1009 Zrnc, Dluotvad 3.5fl 5 0 L 470325 EPAAJRS GW •9999.90 ! I N ILNRIM23 0 S Art R2.Zlnc. DluoNad ' Period 3 UUWOO 186! GW J 5/19/1009 Zinc. DbioNad 438 5 0 H 470344 EPAAJRS GW "-8999.99 ' ' f -j- — hr!u«MB~ n

S.Art R2 Zinc. Dtaotvad 1 Partod 3 UUWOO "Teas GW T 6/1 7/1090! Zinc, DtuoNad H- 5 1 L 470370 EPAAJRS GW 1.0099.90 N JLNRO-023 { SArt H2 ZbK. OtuoNad i Parted 3 -UUW09 186 GW 10/26/1 090 IZkic. Dtuotvad 4J6 5 c t 470401 EPAAJRS GW [4999.90 JLNR0423 » T.._ N 0 S Art R2 Zinc. Diuotvad Partod 3 JUUWOS 186 GW r 6S1~S/2OM!ZlM.DIubNwJ 80r3 5 1 H 705316 URS Opwatkig "Sarvlcas to EPA GW I-M99 99 1LNRIM58 S.Art R2.Zlnc. Dluotvad Partod 3 iUUWOO tea GW 1 TpTOMTT URS Oparaltna S«rvka> tor EPA CW 1-9999.99 1 N 1LNRD-058 ( S Art H3 Cadrrdum. OruotMd Parted J [AWT1- 1 211 owl loavtw 0005 0003 I L 70f724 JUSC3 GW {499999 M LMRO-050 r r S Art R3 Cndmhm. DUaoNad Partod 3 jAWTio "TTT GWT 5/7/1998 I'cadmfcMTv. Diuotvad" 0005 "H" h 701 736'uses CW -999903 H LNR0450 0 S.Art R3 Cadmlun. Diuotvad Parted 3 JAWTL1 211 CW 1 6M/1008 jCadmtom. Dlnotvad O0025 < o.otn c H 701760 CW 409090 -1 — zri— N LNRMM

J — i " SArt R3 Codmturn. DiuaKad Partod 3 JAWTI-1 211 GW i 8/4/1 996 iCadrnJum. DrUOtVed O.OOC 000! 1 L ~70T790 USGS CW 4099.90 — ~ T " ! ' NILNRD-OSO i S.Art R3 Codrnkm. OluoNad } Partod 3 UwTI-J 2.1 Gwl S/7M996 Cadmium, Dluotvad 0.00 "6.005 1 H 701818 UJSG3 GW j-0990.09 ' — r-nrrt-: j — __ ^. 1 . ^ 1-.^._.... 1 — ! » — — — — .! }¥ — * . .L App_E_gw_Tbl_1o3.xls Page 7 of 15 10/22/2002 GrouncJwater Data for River Reaches 0 to 3. Dissolved cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for all data sets. an^BWcadmiuma , copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for CDPHE data (LNRD-068).

:V : : ! . \'''^]^:^^'^' -';i\-.'-*>' '-:!" •r / " : ' ; * f • 1||||l;::;|::::;i;is:,ii|:|;| ;;|: ; 1* liiffil; ; Parted . i -. UFGStaOOfiHjma ;-;. ,1 UaadardVkhM f !• RaoMO I S Ark R3 Codmkjm. Oluolvad Partod 3 AWT 1-2 2117 GW 7/BV1996 Cadmkm. DnsorMd 00025; < 0.005 0 H 701 560 USCS CW 499999 ! i ""~ "M*j LNRO-OSO S.AA RD.Codmlum. CMiulwd Panod3jAWT 1-2 2117 CW BMn99e;Cadmkm. Db*otv*d 0.0025 0.005 0 L 701872 USGS CW -0999.99 ! LNRD-OSO 0 1 ^_L_L J* 3 Arii R3 Cadmium. OtiKtfwad Partod TjAWT 1-3 2118 GW i 1CK4/1995 Cadmkan. DhuorMd 0027 1 0.0051 1 L 701888 USGS GW 9999.99 ! 1 INILKRO-OSO ~6" Ark R3 Cadmtum. Dluolwad Parted 3 AWT1-3 2111 GW i S/7/I99B Cadmium, Disserved 0.12 J0.005 1 701900 USGS GW -099999 i LNRO-050 _o_ S Ark R3 Cadmium. d»*orved f Parted 3 AWTC-3 2tU CW| &WI09B CadrrAn. Ofluorved 0079 oboif "Rl 701914 GW--0999.99 i ! N LNR&050 SArt R3 Cadmium. Dis&oNed ! WT1-3 21K GW ; 7W199S Cadmium, OkseNed 0043 ^ 0005 t < 1 701928 USGS GW -999909 ! ; N ! LNRD-OSO | 0 SArk fO.Cadmlum. DIsMtod "pertod"3 AWT 1-3 211B "cw" 9W10U Cadnwm, DruotvM ~OOM 0005 t "701942~ __use_s GW 1-9999 09 1 r T ' fTlLNRD^OSO TO*

S.Art R3.Cadmnm. Duiohwd "PtatadT AWT 1-4 2 ifl GW fJM/1998 5SdmkSTbtooN*d™ 0.0025; < 0.005 0 H [ 701970 iUSGS GW -0999.99 | ; : ! N iuNRD-oso 0 SArk R3 Cadmtum. Observed AWT1-4 2111 GW 7A/199Q CadmkJtn. DUorvau 00025! < 1005 u H 701984 uses CW -B999.B9 • ; N .NRD-O50 0 S.Art R3 Cadmium. Dtuolwd 'pirtedY ew fl/4/1 996 "Cadmium, DtuoNod 00025 0005 0 L 701990 1USGS CW -0909.09 t- ' LNRO-OSO -5- — i — • — 1 — J~S^ SArk RS.Cndmtum. DU*otv*d SSI AWT2-1 2112 GW 5*yi9M; Cadmium. Dtuahari 0.011 0.005 t H j 702020 JUSGS GW -0999.99 i -I—I — }— f~LNRMSO" T S Art R3.Cadmlum^Or»»or-«l Pamd 3 WT2-1 2li: GW ] aft/1994 Cadmium. Dlualvad 0007; 1.005 1 H ! 702040 USGS CW 999999 i ! > : IN [LNRD-OSO 0 SArk R3 cWmkJmTDFssarued ~ "' AWT7-1 2112) CW 7/9/1 998 ICadmoim. DtooNad 00075] < 0.005 0 H j 702054 USGS GW i-0999.99 j I |N JLHRO-050 T SArk R3 Cadmkm. Dfeeorved Pariod3 AWT2-1 211; GW 1 QyS/199(liC«dmkHn.Druorvad 0.006 0005 1 L i 702060 IUSGS -099909 • .NRDXtSO SArk R3 Cadmhm. Diubtoed Parted 3 AWT7-2 21 if. GWJ 10r75f109S Cadmium. Ouuarvad 0.0025 < 0.005 0 L" 702082 USGS GW •9999.99 1 I'M' .NRD4»50 -tf- SArk R3.Cadmkim. Qsiorved Partod 3 AWT2-2 21101 iB/1996 Cadmum. Diuornd 00025 __ 0005 0 H 702005 USGS GW -9999.99 j i NLNRD-OSO 0 S.AiX RXCadnmm. Dusofved Parted 3 AWT2-2 ft 10 GW" 6*1996 Cadmtom. DIuoNM 00025 0.005 0 H | 702110 USGS GW -9999.99 ) LNRO-OSO 0 SArt R3.Cadmlum. Oiuorved Partod3 AWT2-2 2110 GWJ 7W1996 Cadmkm. Dftaolvad 00025 0005 0 702124 USGS GW -999939 i ' . !" LNRD-OSO 0 SArk R3 CadmUn. Ofssorvad "pertodY AWT 2-2 21 TO GW i 9^1990 iCadmkjm. Dbaolvad 00025 0.005 0 r 702138 USCS GW--9999.99 ...-..., i i NLNHD-O50 IT Ark R3 Cadmium. Quotvad Parted 3 AWT2-3 210' GW 1 10/24J1995 Cadmium. O*w«*ved 0.019! 1 1.009 1 L 1 702152 USCS GW •9999.99 ill i N -NRD-O5O ! 0 1 1 S Art RiCadmium. DJiiafved "Period's :AWT2-3 2107 GW 5n/l09a!CBdmuni, Dlxutvad 0005 H i 702168 USGS GW -9099.99 ' "" " ~T"r 1 •[«•LNRO-050 i 67

h S Arti R3.CodmUn. Diuofcad Parted 3 JAWT2-3 2107 GW 7"S/r99« Cadmium, Dkuotvad o.oba 0.005 1 H i 702194 'uses GW )-9999.99 I i— T— ;- -"N"!Qais«b h> Ark HI Cwdmtum. OJiiolvad S Parted 3 AWT2-3 2iO: CW BI5r199G jCadmhim, Obaotvad ooii IOOS 1 L TQ22I2 USCS GW -9999.00 • LNRO-OSO j 0 i~ / I i H SArt H3 Cadmium, biiitoiwid ! Parted 3 AWT2-3 2107 GW 9ft/ 1998 "Cadmkjni. ObsorMd 0012 0005 1 L 702206' USGS ~ GW j-0099.09 i iij N Arh RlCadmkm, Otuotvad ! Partod 3 AWT2-4 2 OB GW 10/24/1995 CKlmkim. Dtasahad 0.249i >.OOS 1 L 702232 fUSGS GW '-9999.99 i ill!" .NRD-OSO Art R3 Cadmium, ouiibrvad Parted 3 AWT2-4 2 06 ew 5mV199fliCadmtem, ObmrivM O.lll! 0.005 t H i 702248 USGS GW -0999.99 ! L j • 1 H LNRD-OSO 1 S Art R3 Cadmium. OiuoNad , Pariod 3 AWT2-4 2 a GW 6»1998!Cadmkjm, Druolwad 0.13| 1005 1 H 702260 USGS GW -099909 i j_ | i i NLNRO-OSO JS. SArii R3 Cadmium, biuorvad l Parted 3 AWT2-4 2 CMS GW 7/9V1996 Cadmtum. OtscoNM 0.112 i 0005 1 H 702274 USGS GW -999909 i LNRMSO o p ltad 3 SArt R3 Cadmium. Dtuofced _i_ * AWT2-4 2 OG Cadnuum. Olsaolvad 0.104| 0.005 1 L 702288 USGS CW -009999 | ! 1 i i H LNRD-OSO 0 SArk R3 Cadmium. DI»oK34/1995 5»tak»Vato£Jvad~ ~ Soofi' 0.005 L 702302" CW -S9S999 r— i —t nrLNRD-OSO -6~ S Ark fO.Cadmtwn, Dlualvad } Partod 3 AWT2-5 21011 GWJ 10*24/1995 CadmUn. DbrcoNad 0.007} 0005 1 L 702318 USGS GW -999999 1 i '• • ' N LNRO-OSO _0 ! h Ark R3 Codirium. OuioirMd [ Period 3 AWT2-5 2101 GWj fi/7yi99e CadmUn,OluoIvad 0.207 0.005 1 H 702325 uses GW •»»«• "" " 1 | !« LNRD-OSO S.Art R3 Cadmtom. Dissolved ! Pariad 3 AWT2-5 2101 GW | OM/109t Cadrnhvn. OksoNed 00711 0.005 1 H 702339 uses GW -0999.99 t i =N LNRD-050 0 S.ArkRi.C»dmium. Ottsatvod ; Ported 3 AWT7-5 2101 GW ! 7r9/1998;Cadmkm, Dbsohrarj 0.030! 0005 1 H 707353 USGS CW -0999.99 ] i ' i N LNRD-OSO 0

S Art RlCadrnfum. diseoNed T"p*riod 3 AWT H 2105 GW 10/25/1995,C«lmkun. Oiuohrad 6.002S 0.005 0 T"~§5Sr USGS GW -0999 99 it : ! N JLNRCWrSO "T S Art R3 Cadmhim. CNiMrvod P«hod3 AWTJ-1 2105 GW SW199rj CadmJum. DiuoNed 0.0025 0005 o 7023BS USGS GW -0999.99 LNRO-OSO tn ....1 . i^ N S Art R3 Cadmium. Dissolved "Parted 3 AWT3-1 2105 GW US/199C Cadmtom, DiMorvod 0.0025 0.005 0 H USGS GW -9999.99 """ | ~oT SArt R3 Cadmium. Dts&otnd Parted 3 AWT3-1 2105 GW 7/9/1 99t CKlmkn. Dtssolvad 0.0025 1 0.005 0 H 702423 uses GW -999999 = i 1 NLNRO-OSO 0 S Art R3 Cadmium. Disserved [ Parted 3 AWT3-1 2105 GW 9/5/1898 Cadmium. OtuaNad 0006! 0005 702437 USCS CW -999999 i i ; 1 IN "T

S.ArtRy Cadmkm. Dtasolved j Pert* 3 JAWT3-2 2102' GW —^Slallc^Sii-dr^rS- 00025; 0005 0 H ; 702485 Uses GW 1-9999.99 > LHRCWSO 0 SArkR3.Cadmtum.Du*olmd j Partod 3 AWT3-2 2102 OW BVS/1096 Cadmkim, DtuotvM 0002* 0.005 0 H 702479 USGS GW {-899999 i I = f N LNRD-OSO 0 S Art R3 CadmUn. Otssafced 1 Parted 3 AWT 3-2 2102 GW 7/9/1996 Cadmfcim. Obsofwd 0.0023 r 0.005 0 H 702493 USCS GW •999999 I 1 ! L N LNRD5SO~ 0 SArt R3 Cadmium. Otucrvad i Pertod 3 AWTJ-2 2102 GW 9C/1996 oooe 0.005 L 702507 USGS GW -0999.99 i ! ! i i NLNRD-OSO 0 SArt R3 Codmlum. DlssoNad Period 3 JAWT3-3 aVorii GW O5/199( Cadmkm. Dtuornd 00025f- ODDS' "o~ 702S21 USGS GW -909999 ' ! 1 i Hi LKRD^50 " 0 0.042; H SArt H3 Cadmium. Disserved Parted 3 AWT 3-4 2095 GW 10/25/1995 'Cadmum. OrMoInd 0.005 1 1 j 7O2535 USGS GW -909999 } i— ! \-N LNRD-OSO 0 SArt R3.Cndmtum, Disserved Period 3 AWT3-4 2095 GW j 5W10BGiCadmam. ObwKvM 0.019; 0.005 1 H i 702583 USGS GW -099999 ! 1^ T LNRO-OSO 1 SArt R3 Cadrrium. Disserved Parted 3 AWTJ-4 2095 GW , 7nO/109t .Cadmium. Dluolvtd 0.02 : 0.005 ._1_ H i 707503 USGS CW -9999.99 ! ! i IN LNRD-OSO S Art R3 Codmlum. Dissolved Parted 3~ AWTW 2095 "cw 9Afl99Bi Cadmhm. Dissolved 0.01 i 0.005 Li 702597 USGS CW -8999.99 ; - - i i MLNRO-OSO Hr S.Ark R3 Cadmium. Dissolved Pariod 3 AWT 3-5 209] GW 10/25/1995 fCadmem. DtuoNad oot 1 0.003 t L 1 702AM USGS GW -9999.99 j i i j NLNRO-OSO 0 I Art R3.Codmlum, Dtssotved Parted 3 AWT 3-5 209] GW 5«109B:Cadmajm. DtttaNad 0054 0.005 1 H t 702625 USGS "GW" -9999.99 LNRD-050 "0 ! I ! NN S Art R3 Cadmium. Dfitotoad Partod 3 AWT3-S 209J GW j_ 7/10/1998 'Cadmium, Dbsotnd OCU 0005 t H j 702649 USGS GW -8999.99 ; LNRD450 i 0 S Arh R3 Cadmium. Disserved Parted 3 AWT3-5 2092 GW 9JBV199( jCadmlum, Otuotvad 0002 - 0.005 0 L 1 702683 USGS GW~ •999999 ] LNRMSO~T6" S Art R3 Cadmkn. Observed j Pamd 3 Awn-e Toa? GW 1Q/25/19K jCadmJum. Oluorvad 0.0025! 0005 0 L i 702677 USGS GW -9999.99 ; i i IN LNRD-OSO SArt R3.Cadmtum. DJisotvad j Parted 3 AWT3-6 2087 GW SrW199( iCadmbm. Oluorvwl 00025! 0.005 0 H 702691 USGS GW -9999.99 i - !~rT rHLNRiMM" ' •4 S Art R3 Cadmium. Distorted ! Pariad 3'AWTS-B 2047 GW 6«/1B98;C«lm(urn. Oisutnd 00025) 0.005 0 H 702705 USCS GW -999999 ; 1 ' L 1" LNRD-OSO • 0 S Art R3 Cadrniurn. OluoNod j Pariod 3 VwTW 2087 GW 7/10/199) Cadmium. Ohufvad 00025! O.OOS "H" 702719 USGS GW -9999.99 1 LNRCWST] 0 SArt R3.Cadm»um. Dltsafved J»ariDd.3_ AWT34 2087 GW 9W199I •Cadmkim. DbcoNtd 0002 i 0.005 0 L_ 702733 USGS GW .-9999.99 I \ ' \ N LNRO-OSO i Q L S Art R3.Codndum. Ottsgrvad AWT4-1 209E GW \omi\9v. ICadmhim. Oruotvwj 001 i 0005 702747 USGS GW 1-899999 " j i i NLNRO-OM To S Art R3 Cadmium. Qiuatvad \ Fund 3 !AWT4-1 2096 GW 5W199I JCadmlum. Oasorvw] 000? 0005 0 H ,702781 .uses GW -9999.99 ! 1 1 N LNRO-OSO U- S Art R3 Cadmium. Otsutvod Period 3 IAWT4-1 2091 CW fl/7/199l CadmkMn. Dtuolvad 0002* i O.Ott TT H 702775 USGS ew LNRD-OSO 1T S Art R3 Cadmlun. Dissolved Parted 3 JAWT4-1 2091 GW 7/11/1991 Cadmium. DftK**d 0.002 si 0.00! 0 H 702789 USGS CW i-0999.99 t N SLNRCMMO fo SArt R3 Cadmtum. DtuoNad Parted 3 'AWT4-1 209) GW W7/199I Cadmhrm. Oiisdvad 0.0 11 0005 1 L 702803 iUSGS "GW 1-9999.89 i i j N!LNRD-OSO T o

S Art R3.CadJmbjm. Dissolved Pertod 3^AWT4-2~ 2094 GW — final 0.005 0 i USGT GW 1-9999.99 1 | ! 1 i N LN'RCMMO i 6" S Ark R3.Codmkjm. DisioNad Partod 3 IAWT4-2 2094 GW 6/7/1991 •Cadmkm. Dissolved 0.0. I. 0005 1 H - 702845 USGS GW i-0999.99 ; F ! : N 'LNRD-050 ; ° S.Art KJ.Cadmtum. Dlssorvad Partod 3 IAWT4-2 2094 GW 7/1 1/1996 jCadrakim. DfssoNod oocrsi 0.005 0 H 1 702859 iUSGS GWi-999999 "" " ! ILNRCMiSo" S Art R3 CwtrrriumTnuolvad t Partod 3 1AWT4-2 ~»54 GW 9/7n99«!CadmJum. Dtuohml 0.002i! — 0.00! 0 L j 7Q2B73 iUSCS GW i-9999.09 i ILNRO-OSO 4 IsArk R3.Cadmium Otuotvad | Parted 3 JAWT4-3 min GW 10/20/1095 Icadmum. DIssoNvd 0.111 0005 1 702887 iUSGS CW j -9999.99 ^ ! -s- SJMk R3.CsdmlurH. Disserved ~ i Partod 3 AWTV3 "2085 GW 5/9/1 996^ Cadmfcxn. Dtnohrad 0.0fl2i 0.005 1 H 702900 IUSGS GW i-9999.99 ] jLKRO-OSO 0 S Art Rl Cadmium. OlsuirMd Parted 3 (AWT4-3 20S aw 0.096,' O.OOS f H 702914 GW f-B999.99 j i i ' i N S.Art H3 Cadmium. DIssdMd Parted] IAWT4-3 CW 7no/lSH Scadmun. DbsoNed 0.112J O.OOS 1 H 702926 uses GWi-0999.99 " ' 1 ^LNRD-OSO SArt R3 Codmlum. Dissolved L..-L1. Parted 3 ~208S GW 9miB9t tcadmkim. Dttaoh^d -' - 0053! 0.00! 1 L 702942 lUSGS GW -9999.99 ! ~0~ 0 S Art R3.Cndrr*um, DMsarved "peTtoTi AWT4-4 20ft GW 5«/199a:CarJmkjm. Oluorwd O.OMr 0005 1 H ~70M70 USGS GW H-H--S ?LNKD-O50 TT SArk R3.Cadrrtum. Disserved Peflod: AWT4-* GW 7/10/109 Cadmium. Dluolved 6.0341 "abosf ™i ~» TTQ299S iUSGS Tiw 1-999B.W -4-f-!--^ 1 1 AWT4-< "JOB •Cadmhim. DteaotvwJ 0017] V.M" «/7ri9tt L 703012 fuses GW•4m9ia ' ~ 1 S.ArhR3C»dii**n. OluDhwd Pertod*: AWT4-5 " __20B5JGW 5/9/1M 'cadmkmi. Oliietvad 0 002SJ < oooT "H" ™703040*' ]USGS "cw 1-0999.99 1 KRO-050 i 6 S Art R3 Cadniium. DuaoNed i Parted 3JAWT4-5 ^ 6ffi/i~99( Cadmium. OiuaNad 0.0025! * 0001 c H ^ 703054 =USGS tizptz,: 1 -j~jj^- ... -. .-. 1 Parted 3 JAWT4-5 2oas| GW 7/10/1091 'Cadmem. oiwrvad o.oozs < 0.00 0 . 703068 IUSGS ! H "ow , j L i iLNHD-050 1 ( T I : IN !LNRD-050 i ( SArt R3.Cudm)um, Dissolved ! Partod 3 iUMWIO OOOQ 204*1 GW 1 erByiSUlCaomkim. Dbsotvad ooo o H j ««13 !UOS ft USGS fcv EPA *cw i«m.M — — 1 — j i 1 26 [ 76 j N JLNRD-021 } 0

App_E_gw_Tbl_1 o3.xls Page 8 of 15 10/22/2002 Groundwater Data for ^is River Reaches 0 to 3. Dissolved cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for all data sets, ai il cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for CDPHE data (LNRD-068). i f | , } | 41 Co* Pertod UTOStafcnNama 9HJBUL W " ; Dele SeMdemVakje I RaauBO 1 1 ::|i: S Art R3 Cadmhm. OwMtved Period 3 IUUWiO 2048 elf 7/14/1998 Cadmiuma, Dluatve£d 0.0015 0.005 J» L 489229 JOS 4 USGS far EPA GW 9999 99 i28 iH JNRD421 i0 S.Art R3 Codntum. Dbtotved ! Penod 3 iUUWiO 2048 CW Cadrreum. Dissolved 0.0015 » 0.005 0 L > 469245 UOS & USGS tot EPA GW i N99.99 2ft 76 N .NRD-021 0 SArt R3 Cadmium. Dluafced Period 3 JUMW10 2048 CW 1I/Q/1W8 Cadneum. Dkaotved ooois < 0.005 0 L I 469301 UOS 1 USGS lor EPA CWi 099999 t 20 7.8 N LNRD-021 0 S Ark R3.Cedmium. OHiatved i Penod 3 JUUW10 2048 GW 3/2&71B99 Cadmum. Dicsatved 00005 < OOOS 0 L [ 4 0414 JEPAAJR3 3W 1-0999 99 N .NRD42S 0 — — t IB re SArt R3.C*drrtum. Diuaived } Pertod 3 JUUW10 2048 GW 5/1B/1999 ;CedmUm. Dttsotved 0005 0 GW L4J999.99 1 ifj-fe N .NRD423 ~" 0 S Art R3 Cadmium. Dusolved 1 Penod 3 IUUWIO 2048 6/15/1999 Cadmium. Dkutived 0.0009 0.005 0 H 470452 iEPAAJRS GW «999fifi N LNRD-023 0 S Art R3 Cadrrium. Dissolved 1 Period 3 iUUWiO 2048 CW B/17/I999 Cadmun. Oluarved 0005 o" L : 470471 JEPAAJR3 ~" GW 09999 ij" "H" LNRO-023 t 0 oTiSol -fT 1 S~Art RJ CadrnUm. Dtuorved ! Penod 3 ;UUW 0 204B GW B/1SV2000 Cadmium, Devolved OOOOIj * "oooT 6~ TT 70S38B IURS Operating Servicas tor EPA GW 499999 ! T""^ rr -Ir SsS^~[T" S Art H3 Cadmium, Dtiuvved ! Pertod 3 UMW a 2048 GW . B/ZB/2000 Cadmun, Deuotved 000015 0005. 0 L 705442 URS Operating Services for EPA GW i 999999 I ;26 N LNRD-OS8 i 0 1 SArt'RSCadmkn Outolved ! Pertod 3 UMW 1 2052 GW fiAfl998 Cadmun. Diuolved 00029 OOOS 0 H 469277 UOS A USGS fcv EPA GW -909999 1 3 N LNRD-021 0 GW 0 489293 S Ark R3 Cadmium Dt.utved i Pertod 3 JUUW 1 2052 7/14/1998 Cadmui), DtsMtvad 0.0015; < 0.005 H UOS A USGS lor EPA GW 1-9999.09 .™_ LNRO-021 0 " .Art R3 Cadmium. Dlt-ofved 1 Pertod 3 "UUW 1 2051 GW 9A/1988 Cadmajm. Dkaolvad o.otwsr 0005 0 L 469309 UOS & USC3 kv EPA CW I-9999.99 N LNRD421 0 S.AA rU.CadmUii. DliMKed . Periods UUWll 20SJ UW Mfl/1998 Cadmtm. Dtesotved 0004 O.OOS 0 L 469325 iUOS 8 USGS kw EPA GW i-9999.99 j 1 N LNRtM)21 i 0 ~T rw LJ_ SArtR3Cadmlurn DtssoWed ! Periods UUWll "2052 "cw" S/l8/1999;Cadmlum. Diuotved 00074 0005 H 470578 'EPAAJRS GW 1-0999.99 t~T" ' N |LNR[M)23 ! 0' 1 p-y-i S~ArtR3CedmUjm.rjlMOrVed Pertod 3 UUWll 2052 GW : 8717/1999 'Cedrrvjm Otuotved~ 0007 0.005 1 L 470814 EPAAJRS GW f-9999.99 H LNRM23 ' 0 S Ark HiCadmJum. biuotved Period 3 jUMWI 1 2052 GW| 10/29/1999 Cao^rn.Otuorrad 00117 H- 0.005 1 L 470633" EPAAJR3 GW 499999 i : s N LNRD-023 0 SArt R3 Cadmium. Oti*o»vod Pariod 3 -UUWl 1 2052 Cadmium. Dttaotved 0.0058 1 0.005 1 L 705478 URS Operating Scrvfca* tor EPA UW -990999 !_.'___ N LNRD-05B 0 SArt U.Codmium. biubived i P«tod 3 i UUWl 2 2058 GW ! 6/9/1998 Cadmium. DeooNed 00018 1 OOOS 0 H 469341 UOS ft USGS br EPA GW -099999 -- N LNRD-021 0 S Art RJ.Cadmrum. Dissolved i Period 3 IUUW12 2050 GW 7/14/1998 Cadmium. Dkaotved 0.0015] < OOOS 0 H 409357 UOS A USGS lor EPA UW •099999 1 1 N LNRD-021 0 . Art H3 Codnaum. BisoNed i Periods UMW12 ~2658 GW E 9fl/l998 Cadmium. Deuotved 00034 ~6"oos~ 0 L '489373 UOS A USGS lor EPA GVT 099999 2.; LNRO-021 0 S Art R3 Cadrraum. DUsotvod ! Pertod S ;UMW12 2058 1 11/0/1998 Cadmium, Observed 00031 0.005 0 L 469389 UOS 4 USGS hjr EPA GW -9999.99 i 21 77 LNRD-021 0 S.Art R3.Cednium. Otuofved ! Penod S UUW12 ~205B S- 1/26/1999 Cadtrtum, Dttaotved 0.0051 OOOS 1 L :- 470652 EPAAJRS GW 1-9999.99 \ 2.7 7.7 LNRD-023 ~t 0 Art R3.Cadmtum. Dissolved • Period 3 UMW12 2058 UW 5/18/1999 Cedmbm. Oiualved 0.002* j,.ops_ 0 H 470671 EPAAJRS GW ;-9999 99 I 27 7.7 N LMRD-033 0 S.AJTRyCedmium. OluoWed Period 3 UUW12 2058 UW ~~fl7i5iiS»"Cadmium. Diuaived" 00043 o" H 4~7069a~ EPAAJRS GW1-899S99 1 '" 7.7 N LNRD-023 SArt R3 Cedmhm. OiHotved Periods UUWl 2 2058 GW ovi 7/1 gat Cadmun. Dosntved 0.0018 O.OOS 0 L~7 470709 EPAAJRS GW 1-3999 99 ! 2.7 7.7 N 0 ArtR3Cadmiurn.Oiuohred Periods UUWl 2 2058 GW | 10/29/1 99S Cedmtom. DIsaoNed 0005 OOOS 0 L } 470728 EPAAJRS GW [-6999 99 i "1 "2* 7 TT "N" LNRD42S 0 S Art R3 Cadrrium. Dluohed Penod 3 UUW12 2058 GW j fl/iS/200C Cadmium. Observed 0.0022 0.005 0 H 705510 URS bperatng Service* tor EPA GW -9999.99 1 ' I - 77 N LNRD-OSB 1 0 S Art RS Cadmium. Diuaived Period S !UUWl2 2058 GW 8/28/2000^Cadmium. Obsoived 00037 OOOS 0 •- ~7055fla *UR3 Opera^~SefVkWfar EPA -0999.99 77 N LNRD-05B 1 0 S Art R3 Cndnjum. Dusahed i Period 3 i UMW 16 2083 GW 3V2S/19SE Cadmkjm. Dissolved 00005 0.005 0 471262 EPAAJRS GW -999999 .... J N LNRD-023 0 S Art R3 Codmium. OUsaived S Pertod 3 jUUWia 2083 GW 1 5/18/1999 Cadmun. Dbsohed oooog; 0005 (f "ir 471281 EPAAJRS ~GW~ -9999.99 H LNRD-023 j 0 2DU Cadmbrn. Dkaorved 00009 OOOS GW i.9999.99 3 S Art R3 Cedrrrium. Orsaalwd f Penod 3 (UUWIB GW [ artvims 0 H 47?3CO EPAAJRS '_ < H LNRD-023, 0 SArt*MCadnum.6lua»nd i Period 3 ; UUWl 6 2083 GW ! 8/17/1999 CadmhMn. DtuoNed 00009 "oobT E'PAAJRS"" " GW i-9999.99 * 3 H" LNRD-023 0™ SArt R3 Cadmium, nuorved Period 3 IUUW16 2083 GW IQ/2BM999 Cadmkjm. Dissolved 00009! 0.005 0 L 471338 EPAAJRS 999999 N LNRO-023 0 S.Art R3 Cadmium. Dissolved i Pertod 3 -UUWlB 2083 GW 6/15/2000 Cadmtom. Diuolved 00001 OOOS 0" H 70S99T URS Operating Services (or EPA Wr -9999.99 -H- N LHRb-OSa"'~ 0 S Art R3 Cadmium. Dissolved 1 Period 3 JUUW18 2083 CW I B/30/2DOC Cadrreum. OlMotved 0.0005 )OOS 0 L ! 700050 URS Operating Services tar EPA GW -9999.99 ; i s LNRD4S8 0 S Art H3 CwHWum. DtssoNed j Pertod 3 JUUWI7A 2109 CwT MS/19W Cadmium. Dissolved 002SI - OOOS 1 L • 471357 EPAAJRS GW 4999.09 i 3 -- V LNR^O-023 "o" S Art RS.Cadrrium. Diuotved i Pertod S JUUW17A 2109 GW V18/IWQ Cadmkm. Dtootved 00204^ O.OOS 1 H : 471378 EPAAJRS -999999 i ; s N LNRD-023 0 2109 t ^ SArt R3.Cadmium, DJuoWed i Pertod 3 -UUWI7A GW" 6/15/199! 'Cadmium. DBJaoVad " 002OST 0.005 irpi71395~ EPAAJRS p-9999.99 — j— i— - LNRD423 *> 0 i/rtRjCadrnJurii. DIssoNed Periods UUWl A 2109 GW~ l(V2B/l999iCadmlum. Dlnotved O.OTJ69J OJM5 1 f 471433 EPAAJRS GW i-999999 -r *• N LNRD-023" 0 SArt K3 Cadmkm. Diuotved Periods UUWl A 2109 ^Gw «/1 S/200t Cadneum. DIsaoMed 0.021200001 0.005 706084 'URS Operating Service* tor EPA GW -9999.99 : 1 3 N LNRD4S8 0 1 SArt R3 Cadrrrium. ObBoVMt ! Period 3 UUWl A 109 GW (/JO/2000 iCedmajm, Diaiolved 0.01 3fl "ooos "f f 706140 GW -9999.09 j T~1 3" tHRMSa"" 0 IDS CW iCadneum, DisaoNed 00312: 1.009 L ; 471452 EPAAJRS -9999.99 3 N LNRD423 S Art R3.Cadmun. Ottscdved | Periods UUWl B 3/25/199! 1 .S™!. -.. 0 S.ArtR3.Cadrn^w.druatved i Periods UMW17B 109 GW 5/ia/i999JCadmkim, Diuotved 0.0207'. 0005 t H ! 471471 IEPAAJRS GW -B999.99 > ; — ™rT LNRD423 *"o SAARXCadmJum Diisatved • Pertod 3 SUUW17B 109 GW; 6/15/1991 {CadrraMn. Diuotved 0.0195' 0.005 1 Hi 471490 iEPAAJRS GW 1-9999.99 — ! LNRD-023 ! 0 S.Art R3.Cadmiurn. OUsotved ! Period 3 .UUWI7B 109 G«t"e7i7/S9i Cadmium. Dhtsohttd 00213! 0.005 1 TT 471S09 iEPAAJRS GWS-9999.99 " n "S"iNRMM-yo" S.Art R3.Cadmtum. Olssotved Pertod 3 .UUW17B IDS GWj 1009/109! iCadrnkm, Dtnotved 0.0103J 0.005 1 L i 471528 IEPAAJRS i GW 1-9999.99 i 1 N ,LNR& 701792 iUSGS GW -9999.99 1 , — i — N THRO-OSO ff S Art R3 Capper. Dissolved 1 Period S AWT -2 2117 GW j IQV24/19B' {CoppM.DIuorved 0.02! 1.3 "o TpoiBOB iUSGS GW -9999.99 LNRD450 0 i 1 N SArk R3 Copper. Diuaived j Period 3 AWT -2 21i; GW| 5/7/199 .Copper, Dtstotwd 0.025] 1 3 0 H } 701820 JUSGS GW -899999 ' • LNRD-050 0 T- 4- i S Art R3 Copper. Dissolved Period 3 AWT -2 2117 GW : 8MJI996jCapper. Oiasatved 0035: 1.3 0 H f701834 iUSGS GW •9999.09 i P N iLNRD-OSO 0 S.ArtH3 Copper. Ditsofved ! Period 3 AWT -2 2 17 GW I 7/S/199 i Capper. Diuotved 0.02 •i— 3 0 H 701848 iUSGS GW -9999.99 j N ^LKKCWSO 1 S Art W Copper, aswrved i Period 3 iAWT 2 "2 17 GW ! 9W1B9 iCopper. Ohsolved 0.02 i 3 0 L "701874 iUSGS " GW -099999 i jLNRD-050 0

S.Art H3.Cappar. DUtatved { Pertod 3 IAWT -3 2 IB GW[ 1Q/24/199 jCopper. Diuaived 002 i .3 0 'L '• 701888 'uses GW -099999 T i N iLNRO-050 0 S Art. RJ Capper. Dissolved i Penod 3 AWT -3 2 11 GW ! 5/7/199C CappeVrDbsoived 0.34 r~ .3 0 H 701902 'uses GW •9999.99 - N LNRD-050 0 S.Art R3 Copper. Dl.iaNed p Period 3 iAWT -3 2 11 GW i art/tag Copper. [Huatved 0.272: 3 'o H 701910 :USGS GW -999999 lLNRFJ-050 0 1-"- S Art R3 Copper. blisaiMd ~| Period S JAWT O 3118 GW < 7/8/1 906 'Copper, Diuotved 0.153! 3 0 H 701930 JUSGS GW -999999 JLNRD-050 4 SAA R3.Copper. Dluarved period 3 :AW1 -3 2 18 GW OH/199 ;Capper. Olnatved 002 L 701944 iUSGS GW J-B999 09 iLHRD-050 — f-fjT 1" SiAr t RJ Capper. Dissolved j" Period 3 jAWl -4 2 1 GWT 10/24/109, •Capper. Diuctved 002 f~70195B" JUSGS GW --0999.09 [ i N K l L iLNRD-050 LI S Art Rl.Cappet. Dissatved 1 Period 3 JAW1 -4 2 1 GW ^ BM/1991 jCapper.OUsahed 002 ,« .3 0 H 701972 [uses GW 1-9999 98 ! i N LNRD-050 1 o |_. - f — S Art R3 Copper. OUsotved 1 Period 3 JAW1 -4 311 GW i 7/8/199< 'Copper. DejtoNed 0.025 .3 0 H 701988 IUSGS GW =-9999.09 t 1 N LNRD-OSO i 0 S Art R3 Capjxtf . OtssaWed • Pertod 3 JAWl -4 1 t GW i 9/4/I9E iCapper. Dtuatved 002$ 3 n I 702000 iUSGS GW j-0999 99 I : N JLNRD-050 t C 5 Art HI Capper. OtssarVed Period 3 iAWT2-1 J i: GW i 1005/1 995 iCopper. Ohsolved 0025 3 (1 1 702014 IUSGS GW 1.0999 9B r- — K -• N ;CNRI>DSO 1 t

3 Art H3 Cap|j« . DUufced Period" 3~TAWtt"l ™ ; 11: GW B/S/198 liCapper. Dtssalved 0.02S 3 0 H r~7"02043 IUSGS Cw 1 NILNRO-OSO SArh R3 Capper. Dissolved Periods AWT2-I 2 1 GW 7/3/1 M I! Cooper. Diuolved 0.025 y 0 H 702056 iUSGS GW .man " ' 1 — i— ^ —-L- .LJ? ILNRO-OSO 0 — y- SArt R3 Capper. Oiuotved Pertod S 'AWT2-2 ~2~~T 10QS/1995iCqppar. Dbnhnd OCC -5- L 702084"Fuses Gw •neg.n r N LLNHD4SO "*~I i— SArt H3 Copper. duarVed i Pertod S • AWT2-2 2 r GW 5/a/iaa I [Copper, bissalved - OK 5 .3 0 H \~1mS ;USGS GW •9M9.» i Tif 1LNRD-OSO ~rT SArt R3.Cat.iper. Ottsorved | Pertod 3 .AWT2-2 2 1 GW twieg 1 'Capper. Disserved 0.025 .3 a H 1 702112 iUSGS GW -99M99 ' " ' : N ILNRD450 -j SArt"R3.Capper. OlssaWed i Period 3 SAWT2-2 GW 7~/g7i9s liCopper. DbuTved 0.025 .3 a H j TUizatusc's GW J-M99M ' ! T"N iLNRD-050 "o" S Art R3 Capper. Dluatwed I Pertod 3 JAWT2-2 2 1 GW W5/1U ^Capper. DasoNed | 0.02S, .3 0 L [ 702140 iuscs Gwi-999999 " ' ! " ILNRD4SO 0 .. ______"t" App_E_gw_Tbl_1 o3.xls Page 9 of 15 10/22/2002 Groundwater Data for is River Reaches 0 to 3. Dissolved cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for all data sets, ai il cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for CDPHE data (LNRD-068). ; • t :' ' '.-•;-.; :••••.!•. . •:;•.;_ -^8i : l ; .L» :•''.. "v^ ':•:••''• y.V^ 1 >"';.^;^ ^;. 1 T«&M • 'ca*e ' "i ". '• .. • • Pwtad- 1 A 1 vf.l* i 2107 '^j&S M''M'\ GW iN Art R3 Capper. Dissolved Period 3 kWT2-3 UV24/1993 Copper, OUsoNed is 1i0 1f 02)64 ; JSGS GW 999999 B 0 SArt R3 Copper Dfssarved • Period 3 ;AWT2-3 2107 GW 5W1996 LCapper. Dlsiolved __ 002! 1.3 0 H 702168 ! JSGS GW -9999.99 ! i . N LNRO-050 0 1 Art R3 Capper. Dhsohed Penad^ AWT2-3 ~2~107 CW &S/1QM Copper. Dtssahed 0.025 1.3 0 H 702182 < JSGS GW -0999.09 i ! N LNRD-OSO 0 SArt RS.Capper. Dissolved Period 3 MrVT2-3 2107 Gw ! 7)9/1996 Capper. Dft solved 0.02! 1.3 0 H 702198 j ISGS nv -0999.09 ! LNRD-OSO 0 t S Art RlCopper. Observed j Period 3 'AWT2-3 107 GW 9A/19aa Capper. Duofved "0.025 1.3 0 L 702224 IUSGS GW -BO99.90 ' i LHRD450 1 S Art R3 Cappar. Dissolved 1 Penod 3 kWT2-4 106 GW t 10/24/1995 Capper. Disserved 044! 1.3 J u L 702234 iUSGS CW -9909.99 i ! N !LNRD-OSO 0 S Art R3 Copper. DnsoNed 1 Period 3 AWT2-4 10E owl ""SO/TOM Capper, Dissolved 0.171 1.3 0 H 7022481JSGS GW j-9999.99 ! N :LNRD-OSO 0 WT2-4 106 CW 6/5/1906 Capper, Dissolved 0296 1.3 0 H 702282 !USGS GW 1-0999.99 i N ,LNRM50 i 0 S Art R3.Copper. Otuotvad ! Period 3 — t S.Art R3.Cappar. dissolved | Penod 3 WT2-4 "Toiji Capper. Dissolved 03031 1.3 0 H 7*02276 JSGS GW i-0009 99 i i l Periods . *WT2-4 106 9A/19S6 Copper. Dissolved 0.2791 1.3 0 L 702290 JSGS CW 499000 ! i N LNRD-OSO t 0 S Art R3 Cappar. Dissolved j ~- 1 SArt R3 Capper. Dissolved |"Period 3" AWT2-5 101 10T24/I99S^Copper. Dissolved 0025 1.3 0 L 703304 USGS GW •0999.09 j N LNRD-OSO [ 1 Ark R3.Coppei. Dtssotvod Period 3 ^ WT2-S 10) GW 5/7/1996 Copper. Oisaotved 0025, 1.3 0 H 702327^USGS GW -009999 ; _I_..J__. LNRD-OSO JO S Art R3 Copper . Dissolved i "Period 3AWT2-S Tor GW" SM/1996-Copper, Otuotved 0025 1.3 0 in" "7b2341~ USGS Gw •0000.09 I -3- LNR04Sd" | 0" S Art R3 Cappar. Disserved j Penod 3 JAWT2-5 2101 GW • 7/9/1998 iCapper. Dasatved 002SJ 1.3 0 H 7023S5 CW 499009 LNRD-OSO ! 0 "702369 -r-j-4-4^ 7JRn5so~l a SArt RS.Capper. Disserved Pertod3 AWT 3-1 2105 GW i 10/2S/1S95 iCapper. Disserved 0025 1.3 0 L 702383 rUSCS GW -0999.09 ; ! ! i N 'LNRD-OSO 0 1 . . ™ S Ark R3.Coppor. Dissolved Period 3' AWT3-1 2105 GW 1 5AM 086 'Capper. Dissolved 0.025) 1.3 0 H "TdnoTlusGS ~ GW" -0999.09 ! N JLKRO-050 AWn-1 2105 GW I 8/5/1998 Capper. Oasarnd 0025i 1.3 0 M 702411 !USGS JW i-9909.99 ; HRM5C S.Art R3.Copper. Duvtfvod j Period 3 . _r - L_1_„„ Art R3.Copper. Dissolved Period 3 AWTS-1 210! GW ! 7/9/1991 [Copper. Ottsdved 0.025: 1 3 n H 702425 1USCS ;WJ'9Q9999 i V S.AritR3.Copper. Dissolved ! Period 3 AWT3-1 2105 iCapper, Dissolved 0.025! .3 u L 702439 USGS GW -999999 i L i { N LNRD-OSO 0 r r 1 S.Art R3 Copper. Dissolved ' Pertod 3 AWT 3-2 "2102 WrTorS^ iCopper. Oluarved 0.0251 .3 0 L 70245T" USGS GW" -.099999- - - ! T ™ : N" LNRMSO™ 0 S Art R3 Copper. Dissolved ; Penod 3 AWT3-2 2 02 GW i 5*1 we[Capper. Dbsohed 0.0251 .3 0 H 702467 USGS CW 1-0999.09 j LNRD-OSO t 0 SArt R3 Copper, Dissolved j Period 3 i AWT 3-2 2 02 ^Copper. Dtnorvod 0025i .3 0 H ! 702481 USGS GW -9090.09 i i i —fir LNRO450 i 0 SArt RJ.Copper. Dissolved ! Period 3 AWT3-2 2 02 GW ! 7/9/1991 ICapper. Dissolved 0.025! .3 u H i 702495 JSGS GW -9099.99 ! : j : N {LNRD-050 ! 0 SArt R3 Copper, Dissolved Perad 3 IAWT3-2 2 02 CW ! OrB/iOH iCopper. Dkualved 0.025; .3 0 I~[~702503 USGS GW~ •9999.99 : I t i N LNRO450 0 S Art R3 Capper. OnsoKad Periods AWT 3-3 3 O CW ; 6/5/199) iCapper, Dissolved 0025 .3 0 H [ 702523 JSGS iw -9999.99 < j i < N LNRO-OSO 0 SArt R3 Capper. Dlsialvod Periods AWT3-4 2095 GW 10r2S/l995;Copper. Ditaolved 0081 3 0 L 702537 USGS GW -0999.99 i i I V LNR'MSO 0 .Art R3 Copper. Dissolved PertaJS AWTS-4 20ft CW 5/6/tOBi iCopper. Dttsorved 0025 1.3 0 H ,702551 JSGS JW -9009.99 : LNRO-050 t SArt H3 Coppof. DusoNed "Period's' AWT3-4 2O95 GW 1 7/10/1996 Copper. Dissolved 0069 3 0~ H J 7025115 GW -099999 ~i~f~ — N LNRD-OSO 6" S.Art R3 Coppet. Dissolved Periodj AWT3-4 2095 GW i 9A/1994 Coppar. Dissolved 0025 3 0 L t 702599 jUSGS GW -0999.99 i .. -I- N ILNRO-OSO 0

SArt H3 Copper. DIssoNed Periods AWT3-S 2092 GW 1 SrW199C Coppar. Disserved 0.253 3 0 H 702627 uses CW -099999 — ' — 1 — ' N LNRO-OSO 0 1 S Art R3.Coppai . Disserved i Pertad 3 AWT3-5 "2002 GW] 7/1 61 1991 'Copper, Dissolved 0.132 S 0 H i 702651 USGS GW -0999.09 i j n" LNRD-OSO ! 0 SArt R3 Cappar. Dissolved AWT3-5 2092, GW 9/6/1991 : Copper, Dtsaorved 002! 3 a J. 702685 USGS CW •0990.99 ! LNRD-OSO rfS&L i J*.. .Art R3.Copper. Dissolved Periods AWTW 208 •GOTb3/25/109! jCopW. Dissolved 0025 3 "a" 702679 "*USGS GW -9999.90 j •3- LNRO050 S.ArkR3 Copper. Dissolved ! Penod 3 AWT3-6 208 GW i 5/9/19915:Copper. Dkssohmd 0.025 S 0 H i 702693 USGS GW i-9999.99 J j LNRO-OSO 0 S.Art HJ Capper. Dtuolved ! Penod 3 JAWTW "SB" CW! MfiBlSiC^pper. Dbaotved" 0.025 S 0 H 702707 USGS GW j -8999 99 1 -S- LNRD-050 0 — SArt HS.Cappnr. Disserved Periods *AV¥T3-6 208 GW 0/G/199JS[Cepper. Dusohed ~~' 0025 — T -6" T~ ~7§fir USGS GW [-9999.99 1 j "fi" LNRO-OSO 0 Art R3.Coppar. Dissolved Periods AWT4-1 2096 GW 10/26/1095; Capper. Dlssahed 0.025J 3 0 L 702749 'USGS SW 1-099999 ! H LNRD-OSO 0 3. Ark R3.Cappar. Dissolved 'Period's" AWT4-1 2096 GW 5nVl096;Copper. Onsohed 0025 3 0 H 702763 USGS GW -999999 ! ! N LNRD-OSO 0 .__!__i !' j__ s:Art"rUa£peY; Dissolved Periods AWT4-1 2096J GW 7/1 l/1996!Cappar. Dissolved D.025J 3 0 H 702791 USGS GW 499999 N ILN'RD^ISO' 0 S.Art RS.Copper. Dissolved Periods AWT4-1 2096 GW 90/199 ^Copper. Olisarved 0025. 3 0 L 702805 JSGS 3W -0999.99 j. j .._, N LNRO-OSO 0 S Ark R3.Copper. Dtisarvad Periods AWT4-2 2094 GW 1006/199* ICoeper. Dlscotved 0.0251 3 0 L 702819 USGS GW -099999 j LNRD-OSO 0 SArt R3 Copper. Dtitalvad Periods AWT4-2 2O* GW 5/9119G .Copper. Dissolved 0.025; .3 0 H 702833 USGS GW -9999.99 ! • N LNRO-OSO o 1 SArt R3 Capper. Dissolved 'Periods AWT4-2 2094 GW" 6/7/1 D9J 5 Capper. DlssaVed 0025; 3 0 "H~r702o47 USGS "GW -9999.99 " •" ' ' ! "N~ LNRMSb" 0 S Arm WCoppm. Dissolved Periods AWT4-Z 2004 CW 0/7/1 096.. Copper. Dissolved 0.025 3 0 "Tj" 702875 USGS GW •9999.0B ~~ f I } j { HlLNRD-OSO [0 S Art R3.Capper. Dissolved ; Period 3 AWT4-S 2089 GW 10/267199!i!Capp«.Dls»**d 0021 3 0 L > 702889 USGS GW •099999 i i ! N LHRD-050 | 0 SArt HJ.Copper. Dissolved Periods AWT4-S 2089 GWl 5/9/199Bl Copper. Dissolved 0.025 3 0 H i fD2002 1USGS GW -0999.09 N LNRD-OSO 0 S.Art R3 Cappar. Dissolved Period 3 AWT4-3 2089 GW ( 6/6/199(Capper. OtssoVed 0025 S 0 H 702916 USGS GW •0909.09 _N_ LNRO-OSO S.Art H3 Coppar. Dissolved ! Period 3 AWT4-S 2069*~GW 7/10/199B. Copper. Dissolved 0.025 3 0 "H" 702930 USGS GW 1-9999.99 I ^'NRD-OSO i 2089 S;Copper. Dinalnd SArt R3 Capper. Dissolved L.P-3S1AWT4-3 GW W7/199I 0.025 S u L \ 702944 USGS GW 1-9999.99 i N LNRO-OSO 0 S Ark H3.Capper. Dissolved Period 3 AWT4-4 2086 GW i 10/28/109SjCopper. Dissolved 0025 3 0 L I 702058 USGS GW j-9999 99 i LNRO-OSO 0 SArt R3. Cooper. Dissolved 1 Penad 3 AWT4-4 2088 GW I 5/9/1991B; Capper. Dissolved DOTS 3 0 H i 702972 USGS CW j-0999 99 N LNRO-OSO 0 SAri R3.Copper. DliiaMed T Period 3 !AWT4-4 2068 GW I 4/6/199Gj Copper. Dissolved 0025 .3 0 H 702086 USGS GW i-0009 99 i "I "N" LNRD-050 0

S Art R3.Copper. Disserved ! Period 3 jAWT4-4 "MM GW j 9/7/1996; Copper. DftaoNM 0025! .3 0 L 703014 USGS GW j -9999 99 f j 1 j i "S~So^*1"i" S.Ark K3.Copper. Dusarrad < period 3 1AWT4-5 2085 GWl 10(75/1* SiCapper. DissaKed 0025 i — .3 0 L 703028 USGS GW ;-909000 i 1 j ! i JL LNRO^SO 0 S Art R3 Copper. Otesaived j Period 3* -AWT4-5 2085 CW l SVB/199Q!copper. DtssolMd 0.023 .3 0 H '"703042 USGS CW i-999999 1 ! i i N TNRD-OSO 0 SArt RS.Coppar. Dissolved Periods 1AWT4-5 206S GW l-Capper. Diuahred 0025j .3 0 H 703056 USGS GW i-9999.99 LNRD-050 i 0 r i— U i — S.Art RS Coppar. Disserved "Period 3 JAWT4-5 708! GW TnoTTw iCopper. Dissolved 0.025 .3 0 H i 703070 iUSGS GW i-9999.99 N LNRD-050 0 S Art R3 Coppar, Dissolved Periods AWT4-5 2085 GW 9nVie9BjCopper. DtssaMd 0025 .3 0 L j 703084 uses GW f-0999 99 ; ! LNRD-OSO 0 S Art RS Copper. 'Dissolved •periaVs" UUWIO 2O48 GW 8/9/1998;Capper. DkuaNed 0.00 .3 0 H i 489217 UOS A USGS tor EPA CW 1-0999.90 j hf 1LNRD421 0 S Ark R3 Copper. Dissolved Periods 2041 GW 1 7M4/199 0.00 J 0 H i 469233 UOS A USGS tor EPA GW UUW10 ^Copper. OissoNed 4___ 1-909999 j LNRD421 0 SArt R3 Copper. Dissolved '""Periods uMwib 2041 GW i 9Wi«BiCapper. Otavrved 0.00 ' .3 0 L 469249 UOS & USCS tor EPA GW 1 -0999.99 i —+ —|-|iT r-S- LNRCWU1 0 SArt R3 Cappar. Disserved Periods i UUWIO 2041 GW 11/9/l096;Cappar. Obuotved 0001s < .3 0 L 409265 UOS & USGS tor EPA GW [4009.09 1 , i_ a 17.6 N LNRO^Ul S Art R3 Capper. DUsabvd Periods 1UUW10 204C GW 3V26/l099lCapper. Dlssotved 0.0014! 1 .3 0 L 47041B EPAAJRS CW •9999.09 j i 7.6 N !LNRCM)2S -1- SArt R3 Capper. Ottsahed ± Period 3JUUWIO 204. GW S/lB/'lO! )'Capper. Dissolved 00021 ! " .3 0 H 470439 EPAAJRS GW j-999909 i 6"j_7.6 N iLNRD-023 j 0 SArt R3.Copper. Dissolved ! Period 3 luuwio 204 GW enS/tOOOiCopper. DtseoNed 0.0021 < .3 0 470454 i EPA/URS GW ! -9999.99 \ "*" e i "rt N •LNRD-02S i 0 iUMWIO 2041 GW « 3 L 470473 EPAAJRS B/17MB9OiCopper. Dissolved 0.002* 0 .... GW '-9990.99 j 26 ILNRD-023 0 S Art R3 Copper. Disserved i Ponod 3 JUMWIO 204 GW 10/29/191SiCapper. Disserved 0.0012 .3 0 "470492 EPA/URS GWI-W99.B9 2.1 TB i "N"iLNRD-023 i rj S.Art R3 Coppar, Dissolved 1 P«rlod 3 juuwio 204 GW 8115/200OjCopper, Dissolved 0.000, .3 0 H i 705391 URS Oparsang Services lor EPA GW 1-0999.09 ,2.B 7.6 iLNRD-058 0 S Art R3 Capper. Dissolved 1 Period 3UUWIO 204 nw warn ^Copper. DbsoNed 00013 3 r I 1 70544UR7 S Operating Services tor EPA CW I-BW999 ~ i ~ Ti 7R •i-S iLNRD-056 "* 0 SArhRJ.Copper.DUiarvBd • Periods UUW11 205, GW 6/9/199aiCopper. Dissolved 0.0028 3 0 H ! 489281 UOS I USGSto rEP A GWi-690909 ! I S iLNRD-O21 0 S Art RS.Capper. Dissolved ' Period 3 UUW11 20i GW 7/14/1998 Capper. OEseatved 0.001- 13 c H f 469297 UOS& USGS for fcPA CW [-9999.99 j I-!- jLNRD-031 c S Ark Rs'Copper. Dissolved Period 3 UMW11 205 GW gn/1998-Copper. Dissotved 0001! .3 0 L i 469313 UOS & USGS tor EPA GW i-9990.90 i TV 1LNRD-011 S.Art R3 Copper. Otssatnd ] Period : iUMWll 205 aw 1l/9/l996:Capper. Dissolved OOOli .3 r L i 463320 'UOS A USGS tor EPA GW i-9999.99 j -M- fl 'LNRiM21 " SArt RS.Cappor. Dissolved I Period 3 iUHWll 205 CW ^ 3n6/1999!capper. Observed 0.002.V .3 0 L i 470559 i EPA/URS GW {-9999.99 ! 1 1 3 8 \NRD-02S j 0 GW 5/1 8/1 009. Capper. Disserved 00021S * IEPAAJRS' _GWJ-0999.99 i , 6 .LNRD-023 0 S Art H jTCapper Ssioived i Portal 3 !u5w7i "as: GW 8/1 S/igag.Copper. Otssolved oowT . < u H ! 470597 EPAAJRS GW 1-9999 99 i —^— 14 N iLNRD-023 j ( S.Art HI Cappar. Dissolved ; Period: >UMW11 205 j GW 8/l7/l909;Capper. Dissolved 0.0022 * .3 L i 470616 EPAAJRS GW i-9999.99 j 1 ! j ! t N ! LNRD-023 j 0

S.Art R3 Cappar. Oissoiwd ! Period 3 JUUWI 1 205. GW~| e72BV2ObO;Copper. DissaNed "bdbzij i 1.3 L~f 705481 URS Operatog Services for EPA GW [-0999.09 : j ; 3 1 » N iLNRD-OSB i 0 S Art H3 Copper. Dissolved j Period 3 1UUWI2 20* GW ; 6/9/l09e;Cappcr. Diesolved 0.001! • 1.3 I H S 469345 UOS i USGSto rEP A CW J-9999 99 ! ^N JLNRO4)21 I 0

SArt RS.Copper, OliMlved i Period 3"iUMWIZ "MS GW i BA/lDSalCopper. Dosotved 0.001; < 1.3 0 1T'™459377" UO9 A USGS tar EPA GW [-0999 09 ! 2.7 [ 7.7 N JLNRD-021 > (

App_E_gw_Tbl_1 o3.xls Page 10 of 15 10/22/2002 Groundwater Data for r Is River Reaches 0 to 3. Dissolved cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) (or all data sets, ai il cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for CDPHE data (LNRD-068).

App_E_gw_Tbl_1 o3.xls Page 11 of 15 10/22/2002 Groundwater Data for River Reaches 0 to 3. Dissolved cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for all data sets, ai il cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for CDPHE data (LNRD-068). • ".-"; .':..:••:;• l'^:&^r[':^;M^ 1 |f| •• • :• •• .Can • .; -,. ••• -Period [, : . UFGStwBnMarm/" 1 •••DaW"-' g 210: 7/9/1 996 000251 < H 102499 JSGS GW i-9999.99 ' " \ \ H {LNRD-050 i0 SArt R3 Lawl. DI»DMK] Period 3 ! AWT 3-1 GW Lead. DluoKed 0.015 ii iL " 1 SArt H3 Laad. DkuoMd 1 Partod 3 |AWT3-Z 2102 wry 1996 .aad.DiuolwM 00025J * 1.015 0 L 702513 iUSCS GW i-9999.99 i mm'. J f N jLNRO-OSO 0 S Art R3 Laad. Ois*c*md 1 Penod 3 [AWT3-J 2100 cw] 6/SM996 Laad.auotmd 00025' < 0.015 0 H 702527 [USGS GW 1-999999 j { ; N LNR0450 I 0 S.AA R3 Laad. Dissolved f Pwtod 3 lAWTiM 209! GW ! 10/25/1995 Lead. DittohwJ OOtt 1 0015 u L 702541 ! JSGS GW I-B999 99 ; I 1 N LNRD-050 < 0 S.Art R3.Leed. Dtuohw} ! Parted 3 IAWTH 2095 GW i SWiggKLead. DHuhenl O.OOCT 1 O.OtS 0 H 707568 tUSGS CW j-9999 99 i j i i H jLHRD-050 o" Art R3Leed. Dtuotvod Pwtod 3 [AWT3-* 2095 GW 5/8/1 99&LMd, OtuoNwl 000251 < 0015 0 702555 iUSGS GW ;-n9B.B9 ll| i N JLNRO-050 I 0 1 709' nw~ 7MW1996 Lead. OtuoNed 0012 1 0015" "H"! 702589 i USGS GW 4999.99 i | } j N 1 LNRD-050 0 SArt R3 Lead. Oiuofced ! Pwtod 3 JAWT3H 209! GW 0017 t OOlS 1 L ; 702603 < JSGS GW -9999.99 ; 1 i i ' '. H tLNRD-050 0 1 S*Arii R31oM. DlsiioNwJ I Parted 3 SAWTM 2092 "GW "ToSMTO Laad,OUurMd 0013J 1 OD15 0 L j 702617 iUSCS GW 1-9999 99 ' j i ! \ t N iLNRD-OSO 0 SArtR3Lo>d Dbuhml ', Parted 3 IAWT3-5 2O92 5W1B9C Laad.OluaNwl 0.0061 1 3.015 u H 702631 1 JSGS GW j-9999.99 i ( j j IN tLNRD-050 0 SAWrmeaa:ta*oh«d "" " " ! Pw»d 3 IAWTM ""2092 BwT 7/10/1996 00025J < 0015 0 702855"? JSGS GW '-999999 J! ] |N jLNRO-OSQ 0 S Art R3 laall. DiSKriwd i Pwtoct 3 'AWT3-5 2092 GW ; 9M/199S:i** "i****. -.. 00025] < 001 0 L 702669 I USGS GW 1-9899.99 } J I [ N iLNRf>050 0 •QW"V~i7u5««SS SArt R3 Lead. 0&oh*d j Pwtod 3 JAWT34 ?oa; GW — 5an9igLaad. Diuohiwl 0.0025 < 0 H 702697 [USGS GW 1-9999.99 SArt R3 LeM Otuoivw] i Pwtod 3 !AWT3-« 208; GW Gf6/IS96 Lead. OUiotMd 000?5[ < 0.01 0 hi ! 702711 iUSGS GW i-9999 99 ! ; | H ILNRO-OSO j 6 SArt RJ Laad 0(mv*»d Pwtod 3 JAWTTM 0 USGS iArt R3J.ead. biuofrad Period 3 [AWT34 2oa: r.w 9rB/199KLoad. Ouofnd 00025 < DOl (1 1 "* 702739 ISGS GW J-9999 99 i i i N 'LNRD4SO 0 S Art R3 LWHI. DtitDfred Partod 3 JAWT4-1 2096 GW ions/1995J.BBd. DillOrVwJ 00025 < 0.01 u L 702753 . USGS GW 1-9999 99 ] ] j N 'LNRD-OSO 0 i Art RJ I Lwtt Jnaiohw) J Pwtod 3 JAWT4-1 70ft GW "5/9/1996 Laad. OluoNed 000251 < 0.015* ft H TmeTt JSGS GW 1-0999.99 " ...... ; ! i ! N jLNRD-050 0 .Art R3.Le«J. Oliiolvod 1 Pwtod 3 AWT4-1 2091 GW 6/7/1 9W Lead.OBaahad 00025! < 0.015 0 H 702781 :USGS GW j-0999 99 i i ! : N LHRD-OSO ....a. S.Art R3.Lead. Diuohwd i Period 3 JAWT4-1 2096 GW ] T/11/199fi.:Lead. DtssoNed 0.0025! < 0.015 T H 702795 USGS GW --9999.99 ; • :< 1 I N ILHRD-Q50 5 Art R3.Le*d. DliioNed Penod 3JAWT4-1 2096 GW i 9f7/1990 Lead. OttaoNed 0002Si < 0015 0 L 702809 _|USGS GW 1-999999 ! j N JLNRD-050 _0. S Art ru.Laad. DbMtved \ Pwtod 3 :AWT4-2 2094 GW 10/26/1995 LMd, Dluotnd 00025 < oiis" 0 L 702823 ~?USGS GW 14999.99 i { f ! N •LNRD-'OSO' S Art R3 LaM. Ola**™* i Pwtod 3 'AWT4-2 2094 GW 5/9/1996 0.0025 < 0.015 0 H 702037 |uses GW -9999.99 ; : | i N ;LNRO-OSO ; 0 5 Art R3.Laad~.~CtaioWod i Pemd 3 'AWT4-2 2094 GW 6/7/1996 Lead. DtuoKed 0.0025 < 0015' 0 H 702851 'USGS GW 4999.99 j 1-1 |"| j t N LNRD4M 1 S Art R3 Laad Otssobed i Pwiod 3 1AWT4-2 2094 W 7f11/1N6 Lead. Oluolved 000251 < 0.015 0 H 702865 ' JSGS GW -OB99.M 1 •i 1 JN i LNRD-050 . SArt R3 L«M. Otiioived | Pwtod 3 [AWT4-2 2094 W 9/7/1996! Laad. Dtuohed 0.0025! < 0.015 0 L * 762179 uses GW 4999.99 " " : "i ! 1 "! M LNRDOSO"1 SArt R3 Load, DUM*W) | Pwtod 3 JAWT4-3 2089 w 1Q/26/i99SiLead.D(Moh»d 702893 jUSGS GW !-eoag.99 ' i i j H JLHRD-050 j

Art R3 Load bissofmd ! Penod 1 IAWT4-3 2089 iW 5671996 Lead. DJuoNed 00025] « O.OTS 0 H 702920 USGS GW 1-B999.99 1 1 N iLNRtWISO S Art R3 Land. biublwod } Pwtod 3 1AWT4-3 20*9 W 7/10f 19961 Lead. Ddeohvt) 0005! 1 0015 0 H i 702934 USGS GWi-9999.99 — , ; i N !LNRO-050 " _. L-. L— .a -i JL. LNR-tw*° . . lAfiiRHaad Unofcad ! Pwtod3'AWT4-4 208B 3W P*irj/26/1995;Lawt, Dtuornd 000251 < OtitV 0 L 702962 USGS GW 1-0999.89 ! •• \ \ IN JLNRD450 j SArt R3 Load. Diuarved Petted 3 AWT4-4 2088 GW i 5/9/1996 Lead. Oisufvad 00025: « 0.0 15 0 H 702976 USGS GW;-999999 = ! I i : N SLNRD-OSO I Art R3 Lend. OissnvwJ Pwtod 3 JAWT4-4 2088 GW i UG/199G Laed. DtacoNed 00025! < 0.016 0 JL, 702990 USGS GW ;-9999.99 ! i f i : N jLNRO-050 SArt R3 LaM. Diuofead Partod 3 1AWT4-4 GW j 7/10/1 99$Lead. Oluotvad 0.0025; < 0015 0 H { 703004 iUSGS GW ^9999.89 ! ! ! ! M [LNRD450 i

SAA R3 Laad. oitaohed Pwtod 3 iAWT4-5 2085 3W lOr25/t99S:Laad. DisaowwJ 00025- * 0015 0 L 703032 iUSGS CW j-9999 99 ! ! i N iLNRD-OSO S Art R3 LaM, OKulrad Partod 3 AWT4-S 2085 CW 5/91996 Lead. n»o»»ad 0.0025! < oTois" -fl- USQS GW i-9999 99 "" " - -- ,- ! | JN lLNRO-050 -

SArt R3 Laad. Oluolwd i Pwtod 3 {AWT4-S I~208S GW 7/10li996:Laad. Dluotnd 0.0025; * 0.015 0" H 703074 [USGS hGW"|4999.99 I ' i N ILNRO-OSO

S Art R3LoN. UttaNrad ! Pwtod 3 JAWT4-5 2Mi 3W 1U6/199I Lead. DtuoNwl 00025: < 0015 0 L 703088 USGS CW j-9999.99 i 1 u N iLNRD-050 1 S i Art R3 Low. giuaNod Pwtod 3 !UUW10 2048 GW 6JW1B98 Lead. Devolved ODDli < 0.015 H"T*6M1» 'UOS & USGS tor EPA GW -9999.99 i ! 2.6 7.6 H LNRD-021 - !.Art R3 Land. Disiotvod Penod 3 JUUW10 2041 GW 7/14/1998jLetd. DaaahwJ 0.0006J < 0015 0 H i 469235 UOS & USGS tor EPA [ GW -9999 99 ; • 26 7.6 i N LNRD-021 S Art R3 Load. Dissolved ! Pwtod 3 JUUW10 2040. GW 9A/i*99« Lead. Okuoivwl UOS & USGS for EPA GW 14999.99 1 1 ! 2.6 7.6 5 N JLNRCMJ21 1- S Art HJ.lBod. DJisotad J Pwtod 3 iUMWtO 2IM4 L.W 11W189I Laad.DKiotwd OOOOSi < O.OlS 0 L 469267 UOS & USGS far EPA GW -9999.99 • i j 26 7.8 j N iU4RD-021 I/Art RJ Laad. DUuAw) j Pwtod 3 illUWlQ 2046 GW]r~33wrl9ri^aad. Dluotwd 0.001 i < 0015 0 L "470417 EPA/URS"" GW -9999.99 i i 2 6 7.6 N ILNRO-023 r SArt K3 Load. Dutotved > Pwtod 3 JUUWtO 204< GW 5/1 0/199! Lead, Dksolvwl 0014' * 0015 0 H 470436 EPAAJRS 3W 499999 i ; 2 6 ! 7.S j H 1LHRO-021 [ Art R3 Laad. Dfuotvad 1 Pwtod 3 iUUWIO 20481 GW 0/15/l99g;Lead. Oiuohad 0014 < 0015 0 H 470453 EPAAJRS GW 4999.99 ! I i 2.6 ! 7.0 { H jLMRD-023 SArt R3.Laad. OlsioKwJ ! Partod 3 :UMWIO 2048 GW a/17/lB99iLead. Ote*o*ved 0.009 < 0.015 0 L ^70474 EPA/URS CW -9999.M j i 2.0 ! 7.0 ! N JLNRD423 SArt RJ.Load. DlHoNed i Partod 3 UMW10 2040 GW 10,29/1999 Laad. DluoTMd 0.00775i < 0.015 0 L 470493 EPAAJRS GW '-8999.99 ; : 2.6 ! 7.6 ! N 'LNRO-023 S Art R3 Lead. Diuorvwl i Pwtod 3 UMW10 2048 GW 6n5QOOCrlLaad. OleaoNed OOOOOi < 0.015 0 H 705396 URS Opwatng Swvtcae far EPA GW {4999.B9 { 2.6 > 7.6 i H JLKRO-OM S Ark R3 Laad. Dts*MWd Partod 3 UUW10 2048 GW OQanooojLaad. Dtuotwd 0.001] < 0015 0 L 705451 'URS Operating Service ifa tEP A GWi4999.99 t 1 2.6 | 7.6 : H LKR0450

SAftR3Lead. Oltwrvwl Pwiod 3 UMW11 2052 GW 7/14/ 19BaTLeadrOouolv«d 0.0005! < 0.015 0 H j 469299 UOS & USGS tor EPA GWj-0999.99 j ' t 3 1 0 1 N LNRD-021 f S Art H3 load. DUubed i Pwtod 3 IUUW1 1 2052 GW 9/8/l998iLeed. OkcohwJ 0.0005; « 0.0 15 0 L i 469315 UOS ft USCS far EPA GW 14999.99 j ! i 3 i 8 I N (LNRCWHt S Art KD Land, Dliiofved Pwtod 3 jUUWI t 2052 CW 1 1/9/1998iLe*d. Oeudvad 0.0005= < 0015 0 L 469331 UOS t USGS lor EPA GWJ499999 j j i"3 j 8 N lLNRD-021 S Art R3 Load. Disiohad Partod 3 UUWt 1 2052 GW 3/20/1993 ;Lead. Deuotvad EPAAJRS GW j-9999.99 i i ! 3 1 B j N iLNRD-023 SArt RJ Laad. DuaoNvd i Pwtod 3 ;UUW1 1 2052 GW 5/10/19W .Lead, DhaoNad 0014; < 0015 0 H 470579 EPAAJRS GW 1-0999.99 j ! * 3 1 0 ! N !LNR[M>23 S Art R3 Lead. Dtiurvw) •; Pared 3 ;UMW1 1 2052 CW 6/15/I99S •Lead. DJuohnd 0014! < 0015 0 H 470598 EPAAJRS GW i-9999.99 i ! 3 I 0 1 N jtNRD023j S Art H3 Lead. Disaoivetf i Partod 3 jUUWii 2052 GW a/i 7/1 ra 'Lead. ObnoNwl 00091 < ~

S.Art RJ Laad. Dluobed j Period 3 'ufctWta 2051 GW 1 lUBTlsWLa^^aoS' o.ooos; < 0015 0 L i 469395 UOS A USGS tor EPA GW i-9999.99 = 2.7 ! 7.7 ! N i LNRD-021 | S Art R3 Load. Dusohrad i Pwtod 3 UWW12 2051 GW 1 3J26M99" iLewl. Diuohvd ooon < 0.015 0 L 1 470GS5 EPA/URS GW 14999 99 1 2.7 t 7.7 i H LNRO-023 : S.Art R3 Lead. DiuoNed I Pwtod 3 iU«W!2 205Q GwT 5/18/19M LewJ. Obeormd 0.014J - 0.015 0 H 1 470074 EPA/URS GW 4999 99 jT? ! 7~7 I N iLNRLV02"3 SArt RJ Laad. Dluowed i Panod 3 :UHW12 70S GW e/lS/l99g;L0wJ. ObsoNed 0.014: « 0.015 0 H i 470693 EPAAJRS GW J4999.99 < 2.7 ! 7.7 | N LNRD423 ! SArtR3Lood. Oi«o**«d | Period 3 JUUW12 2051 GW B/t7/19S9:Lead. Dlaaotwd EPAAJRS GW 1-9999.99 ! "" f2.7l 7.7 ! N LNRD-023 ] S Art H3 Lead. Oliurved i Partod 3 JUUWI 2 2051 GW 1009/199)),Lead. Oeuolved 000775 < 0.015 0 L 470731 EPA/URS GW 1-9999 99 I >. • 2.7 i 7.7 i H jLNRD-023 S Art RiXead. Otitatnd f Pwtod 3 JUUW1 2 'Toss cw O.OOOOi < 0.015 0 H 705519 URS OpwaihQ SwvfcM (or EPA GW J4999.99 - - -- - j Z.J ! 7.7 TN 1LNRD458 S Art R3 Lead. DlMotved j Period 3 |UMW)2 2058 GW 8/28/2000! Laad. OiuoNad 0.001! < 0015 0 L 705575 URS Operating Swvtcai tor EPA GW 14999.99 : 1 { 2.7 | 7.7 [ N ILNRO-05D SAA R3 Load. DUiovwJ 5 Periods UMW10 ""208 GW MS/tgggrLead. Okaotvad oooti < 0.013 (1 1 471265 EPAAJRS GW 1-9999.99 ' " " " " """ " ~ ' ' {" i 3 8 N w 3QS/1 999. Lead. Otttotved 00129' 1 0.015 0 1 471360 lEPAAJRS GW '4999.99 • I i 3 f 5 N ILNRO-023 t SAA R3 Load, OUloM* \ pirfod 3 :UUWl7A" "" ~ 210 GW 0014{ < 0.015 H r 471379 EPAAJRS" '" " GW 4999.99 1 i 1"3~|"5" N LNR0423" S Art H3 Lead. Obsofred 1 Pwtod 3 JUMW17A to CW 6/i5/l999iLaed. D«*o*v«iJ 0014! < 0015 "6" EPAAJRS GW -9999.99 ' ! f J 3 j 5 N LNRD-OZ3 S Art R3 Lead. Dluotoed } Period 3 |UMW17A ' 1« r.w a/l7/i999lLaad. Otuohwl o.oMrr 0~015 n 1 i 471417 EPAAJRS GW -999999 ' di 3 ! 5 N ILNRCM323 S Art R3 Lort. Oluohrwl ^Peiwd 3 EUUW17A "" iff GW 0.007751 < 0.015 •d~ L • 47143d EPAAJRS ' GW 499999 ' I ! 3 • 5 N JLNRD423 0 S Art '.to Laad. DtitoivlKl ; Porlod 3 UMW17A IV GW 0.0043! 1 o.ois" 0 "H I~706M3~ URS OperBfing Service* tor EPA GW -9999.99 i ~ ; i 3 i s 1 N ILNRCMISO* *

App_E_gw_Tbl_1 o3.xls Page 1 2 of 1 5 1 0/22/2002 Groundwater Data for River Reaches 0 to 3. Dissolved cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for all data sets, ainmRlci cadmiumi , copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for CDPME data (LNRD-06B).

| X _'. ••C-ii"' v. ..'.;•";;•*- '"> ' X UFCStBOonHwm f t •/be*' >iEy |s" f 1 i 1 S.Art RS Lead. DbsaN*d Period 3< IUW17B 2109 CW^ S/ZS/1999 O.O01 015 i 471455 •PAAJRS i«999.99 » N 'LNRD-021 "o .Art R3 land. Dissolved Periods JUW17B 2100 3W 5/l6/t099;Le*d, Observed 0.014 < 015 0 471474 EPAAJRS GW 1-0999.00 ! \ N JLNRD423 0 S Art R3 Lead. Dissolved JUWI7B 2109 CW I 6/15/l999:Lead. Dissolved 0.014 .015 0 2- 471493 i i N :INRD-023 "o" S Art R3 Land. Dissolved Period 3 JUW17B 210V :w ; 8/i7/i090iLaad.Otssalved 0.009! [PAAJRS f H 1LNRD423 0 S Art R3 Lead. Dissolved Periods j 1 0/29/1 999!Lead. Dbsotved 000775 0015 GW 1-B99999 j * H LHRO-023 0 6fl5/200CI:LeM. DissoNod ooooa' 0.015 706163 !URS OperBtag Sank** lor EPA GW -999909 S Art R3 Leed. DUsoNed _??*5.^J IUWI7B dj;r S Art R3.Lead~. Dissolved ! Period 3 ! IUW17B 2 00 CW B/ionooo,Lead. DfeaoNed 00039 0015 T" 706239 URS OperabiD Services for EPA GW 1-9099.00 - . ; TN LNRD-O58 "o" Art R3 Lead. Dissolved Period3 ! IUW1B 2 24 GW 3/25/1999 Lead, Dissolved 0001 0 GW [-9999.99 N J ._.. S.Art R3 Lead. Dissolved ~PeftadS JUW18 Tvi cvT Laad, Dlsaorvad 0014 - 1.015 •1 I 471569 ! EPAAJRS >W S -9999 99 — — H LNR"b-023 ~0

— SArt R3 Lead. Observed Periods 'UUWIB owl am/inff Lead. Observed 0000 0015 0 L 471606 'EPAAJRS GWj-999099 — -- N-jase™ - 0 Art R3 Lead. Dissolved i Period 3 JUUW1B 3 2' GW] IO/2WI099 Lead, Observed 000775 L GW 1-0999.09 __ 1 S. Art' R3 Land. Dissolved 1 Period 3 lUUwTif 2 "24 GW< 6/15/2000 Laad. Dissolved ooooa! 0015 0 H 706273 URS Operating Services for EPA GW 14999.00 — "STllNSCMrSS " S Art R3 Lead. Dissolved j Parted 3 [UMV 8 3124 CW 1 V30/2OOC Lead. Observed OOOOflj URS Operating Services lor EPA GW J-S999.99 i S Art H3~z££ DJuolvad i Period 3 [AWT -1 3 If GW I 10/23/1995 Zlnc.DKso.ved 1.565 9 0 L uses" " GW --9999.99 1 i N SArtTrnZnc. Dissolved i Period 3 'AWT -1 i To GW j 5/7/1 D9t Zhic. Dissolved O.SOS 5 0 H 701749 USGS iw -0909.99 N LNRD-050 0 S.Art Rl Zinc. Dissolved ! Period 3 JAWT 1 2 10 GW ] 6/4/1 09ft ZJnc Dissolved 0.151 5 b~ H 701763 uses GW 499999 1 N LHRD-OM "6" S Art R3.Ztnc. Dissolved Period 3 {AWT -1 9119 GW j 6M/199C Zinc, DbsoNed GW 4099.99 [_ S.Art R3 Zinc. Qrstotved Period 3 i AWT 1 2~ 19 GW 1 7/0/1 996-: Zinc, Observed 0.125 — 5 0 H j 701787 USGS GW 4909.09 i - — • "o" S.AA R3.ZUVZ. DlESoNed Periods AWT 1 GW _ S Art R3 ZJne. Dissolved Period 3" AWT 2 2U7 GW Zinc, Dissolved 2.781 5 0 L 701615 ^ USGS CW 4999.09 — S Art RSZInc. Dissolved Periad3 AWT 2 2117 GW i 5/7/1096 Zinc, Observed 2.926 5 u H T 701829 USGS GW 4999.09 ! — H LNRD-050 Art R3 Zhe. Dissolved "PertodT AWT -2 2117 GW 1 U4/199G ZJnc. Dissolved 1.087 5 o" H | JO i 843 USGS GW 409999 ! -f- N jLKRD-050 "a" — 1 S.Art R3 Zinc. Ousotved Period 3 AWT -2 2117 GW~L 7(8/1096; ZJnc. Observed 0.758; 5 0 H 701669 IOSG3 GW i. 9999.99 N lLNRD-050 -o~ S Art RS.Zrc. Dissolved Periods *.W1 -2 2117 GW 9/4/1 894 Zinc. DbsoNed oeos! 5 0 L 701683 USGS JW i-9999.99 • i H LHRO-OSO 0 S ArtTRlZlnc. CMssoNed Periods AWT -3 2118 GW 10n^l09S!zinc: DOsoived 2.348! 5 0 L 701 807 JUSGS GW|-D90BB9 N LNRD-050 0 -j- 1 S.Art R3.ZMC. DtasaNed PeriadTtAWT .3 2MB GW BM/19KJZM. CUssolved 7.663J 5 1 H "ToiSzT uses GW 499990 I NLNRD-050 0

S.AA R3 Zinc. Dissolved Period 3 JAW! -3 21*18 GW OM/199G1zinc, Dbsorved 0693! S 0 L 1 701B!Sa~1USGS ' Cw'ioMO"9T ! — ••~i~N~ LNRO-050 0 SArt R3 Zinc. Dissolved Period 3 f AWT -4 2111 GW ! 10/24/1995 Zinc. DbsoNed O.IOli 5 0 L j 701 9G7 USGS GW -9999.09 j " N LNRO450 0 S.AA R3 ZJnc. Dissolved Period 3 iAWTI-4 2111 GW ; Gf4/l996:Zlnc. ObsoNed 0.149! S 0 H ' 701981 GW 499399 • H ! LNRO450 ~Q~

SArt R3 ZJnc. Dissolved Period S JAWT1-4 2111 G-wf SSHSilzV^bb^ 0022 5 0 L ' 702009 USGS GW 1-9999.99 i i ! i » LNR[W)5O 0

S.Art R3 Zinc. Dissolved rperiodTlAWT2- 211: GW j 5/6/1 998; Zinc. Dissolved 2.858! __5_ 0 ~M~F702fl57~ USGS i i ! H LHRO-OSO SArt RS Zinc, Dissolved Periods AWT2- 211: GW • 6/5/1 996; Zinc. Observed "o" H ; 702051 'uses ' iW j-9990.99 ! N LNRD-OSO 0 S Art R3 Ztnc. Dissolved Period 3 IAWT2- 211; GW ! 7/9/1 996' ZJnc Dissolved 3076 5 0 H USGS cwl4999.99 ! i N JLNRO-OSO 0 S.Art RJ Ztnc, ObSONed Period 3 IAWT2- 2112 GW 1 B/S/l996!ZJnc. Dissolved 3278 5 0 L 702079 USGS GWj 499B99 -H N JLNRD450 S.Art RS Zinc, Dissolved j Pariod 1 i AWT 2 -2 Yiiff GW 10/25/1095 Zinc, Dbsotvod 0769r. 5 0 L 702093 USGS CW -9999.99 "T N LNRD-050 0 SArt R3 Zinc. Dlssotvwd | Periods AWT2-2 2110 GW 5/B/199G Zinc Observed 0.018 5 0 H 702107 USGS SW [-9009 00 i N LNRD450 0 S~ Art R3~ Zinc. Dbsotved "~ Period 3 AWT2-2 2110 GW [ 6/5/1996•ZJnc. DbsoNed S 0 H 7011121 USGS CW 1-B999.99 ,- —j — f N LHRD-050 0 SArt RJ.ZJnc, Dissotvad PeriadS AWT2-2 2110 GW ! 7/9/199) Zinc, Disserved 0.239] S 0 H 702135 i USGS 5W I-0999.9S i LNRO-050 0 , Art RJ.ZInc, Dissormd I Pariod 3 AWT2-2 2110 GW j fl/S/1996[Zki; Dbsotved D.4B5; 5 D L 702149 jUSGS GW [-9999.99 • i IN LNRD-OSO 0 S Art R3.Zinc. OUsotVDd 'Period 3 AWT2-3 2107 GW j 10/74/1995: Zinc, Dissolved 2.775 5 0 L 702163 USGS CW -9999.99 N LNRD-OSO 0 SArt R3 Zinc. ObaoNed Period 3 iAWTZ-3 2107 GW 1 5/8/199 k ZJnc, Dissolved 2908 9 0 H 702 ITT USGS GW 493999 — •— N LNRD450 0 S.Art RS-Zlnc. Dissolved Periods AWT2-3 2107 CW ! 6/5/1B9Ct; Zinc, DbsoNed 3.069 5 0 702101 USGS GW 4990.99 N LNRD-OSO 0 r S Art R3 Zinc. Dissolved "PUSH AWT2-3 107 GW~! 7/9/1 9M l! Zinc, DbsoNed 1.896 "6 IT "702205 USGS GW 4090.99 j — N LNRO-050 0 SArt RS.ZIne. Observed _j_ Period 3 AWT7-3 107 GW 9/5/1 09Dy ZJne. DbsoNed 2.564 5 u 702229 USGS GW 490909 ! N LNRD-OSO 0 S.Art H3 ZJnc. Dissolved ; Period 3 AWT2-3 107 GW 0/5/19Mt-Zinc, Db»orved 1.992 5 "o" -r 702219 USGS GW -9999.99 N LNR04SO 0 SArt R3 Zinc. Dissolved ! Parted 3AWT2-4 106[CW i 10/24/199!|Zinc Dtssolvad __ . 12J__7 M 5 1 L 702243 USGS GW 4999.99 ! i N LNRD-OSO I 0 I.Aife RS Zinc. Dissolved T Periods AWT2-4 Toe, GW i 5W199C ; Zinc, Dissolved 5 1 H ""ianst USGS •cvT -000999 ! i N LNRD-OSO \ 0 S.Art R3 Znc. Dissolved Periods AWT2-4 108 GW {_ fi/S/199 IZJnc. Dissolved 9555 5 H 702271 USGS GW (-9999.99 N LNRD-OSO • 0 S Art R3 Ztnc. Dlssolvad Periods AWT2-* 106 GW" 7/9/199 Zinc, DbsoNod 9.875 5 T H 7022B5 USGS GW 1-0999.99 " N" 'LNRD-OSO 0 S Art RS Zinc. Dissolved Periods AWT2-4 106 GW i 9/V1B96 Ztnc, Dissolved 6041J S 1 L 702299 USGS GW •0099.99 1 i. L _i_N_jLNRD-050 a S Art RS Zinc. Dissolved Period 3 IAWT2-S 101 GW ICW4/1 995; Zinc, OiaooNed 1.814? 5 0 L I 702313 USGS 3s. •9999.99 j i N LNRD-OSO *T

SArt R3 Zinc. Dissolved Period 3 rAWTZ-S 2101 GW~ 4.545 5 0 H 702350 USGS GW '4990*0 i— N LNRO450 0 SArt H3 Zinc. Dissolved ] Period 3 iAWT2-S 2101 GW 6834 5 1 H 702364 USGS 4999.99 ; H jLNRO-050 7/B/t09KZkic. Obsolvad __ — aw i . . j '

SArt R3 Zinc. Dissolved i Period 3 JAWT3-1 2105 cvT 10/25/19% ZJnc DbsoNed 08G7 5 1 L j 702392 jUSGS GW 4999.99 i r~r~ ! N 1LNRD-050 i 0 SArt HJ.Ztnc, Dissolved i Period 3 ;AWT3-1 2105 GW snnott Zktc. Obsohmd 0.434'. 5 0 H 702406 •USGS GW 499909 i ; ! HiLNHD-050 S Art R3 Ztnc. Obarorved ) p*rtod 3 JAWT3-1 ""aids •GW — Ss/ToSi-iZint Dissolved 0077 5 0 H 702420 •USGS GW 4099.99 j ! ' N]LNR 0-050 H- S Art R3 ZJnc. Obsotvod j Periods AWT 3-1 2105 CW 7/9/1991JlZinc, DissoNad 0.05 S H_ 702434 SUSGS GW -9909.99 ILNRD-OSO i o SArt RS Zinc. Dissolved TPertodi jAWTS-l 2105 GWJ On/1991SiZJnc. Obsotvad 073 \ l 9 TT USGS GW {4999.00 [-J- JLNRD-050 i 0 SArt R3.ZJnc. Dissolved j Period 3 AWT3-2 2102 GW 10/25/1 995; Zinc, Obsotved 1 SB 1 5 L j 7024B2 GW j-999909 tj --t— ! N ILNRD-OSO j o t.. i ;™ __, GW 6/5/199 --5- AWT3-2 ~2102 slzinc. DbsoNcd (fir 5 "o" ; 702490 EUSGS GW J-9B99.99 ! j_— 1 N JLNHD-050 S.Art R3 Zinc, Dissolved AWT 3-2 2102 GW 7"/97ToaKZinc. Dbaolvad O.'7'i" 5 0 "H" ! 702504 USGS GW ,4999 09 ! TH lLNRD-050 j 0

S. Art HJ Sic; DIssoNed 'Period 3 Awris "aloe GW" *5/T9»WobsoN'ed' • 0.41 5 0 H 702532 'USGS GW 1-9999 99 ! ? N [LNRD-OSO | 0 Pariod 3 AWT3-4 2095 GW | 10/25/1 095; Zinc, Dissolved 6.532; 1 LL iUSGS GW 1-099999 ! 1 N iLNRD-050 i 0 Period 3 r- i - S.AA R3 Zinc, Dissolved 'period s IAWTM -2MS GW i 5/B/1086 Ztnc, Dissolved "H""""tozseo IUSGS GW j-0990.99 ! N lt.NRD-050 < S.AA RS Zinc. Dissolved Period 3 | AWT3-4 209S GWi 7/10/199BiZtoG. Dissolved " "~ 3.S7 : 5 0 H 702594 >USG3 GW E-W99.99 - • ; N ILNRO-OSO 1 ( S Art R3 Zinc, Disserved • Period 3 i AWT 3-4 209! GW L 9/6/19! B? ZJnc, DbsoNed 2.26 •_ 5 0 L i 702608 !USGS GW 1-999999 i LNRD-OSO S Art R3.Zhc. Olssorved j Period 3 IAWT3-5 2093 GW 10/25/1095 Zinc. Oissorved 2.41 5 0 T"!"76262T GW •0990.99 ....— ' 1— (-5- tLNRO-050 1 0 2093 GW IZJnc, OnsoNed 66S5! 1 H 702636 IUSGS GW 499909 : ft :LNRD-OSO 1 -i-J- S Art R3 Ztnc. OissolvAd < Period 3 IAWT3-S 2093 GW 7/10/19! 6|Ztrc, ObsoNed 2.44 5 0 H 7026EO iUSGS GM 4099.09 — 1~H JLNRD-OSO — S Art' RS Zinc. Dissolved [ Period 3 JAWTM ' ' ' ~20T GW 10/25/1 OvSiZlnc. DbcoNad 0005 < 5 0 L 702688 iUSGS CM -B99999 - - ' " - ~ | — 1._ S Art R3 Zinc. Dissolved I P«nod 3 AWT 3-6 208 GW 5W19J)frZJnc, DtsaoNed OOOSj < 5 0 H 702702 .USGS CT !^9M.09 ' 1 .....L.. f MJLNRD-050_J 0 S Art H3 Zinc; Dissolved j Period 3 iAWT3-6 208 "GW 0005! * 5 0 H jLJSGS GW j-9900.90 ! .... 1 N 1LNRD-050 1 1 "GW i 7/10/1 096! ZJrc. Olssorved 0.005! < 5 0 H 702730 USGS GW 1-9999 99 i ! LNRD-050 i 0 _L_ S I" S.Art R3 Zinc, Observed Period 3 jAWTS-a JOB GW 9/B/l 096! Zinc. DbsoNed 5 0™ L 702744 uses' GW 14993.09 i ; LNRD-OSO ; i

,i . i . . i . i . i ! <.<• App_E_gw_Tbl_1 o3.xls Page 13 of 15 10/22/2002 Graundwater Data is River Reaches 0 to 3. Dissolved cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for all data sets, a cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for CDPHE data (LNRD-068). v ; rr •••':•'--:- -:••-,-• •,•'", ;..>•',- 'I. .-'. '••-^. -.. '*'? : ; S- • -.:/ ,-'. T;':- :•;:- •:.-.;••- .•.••-•;;.'•.•••:: .v. ; fi f § ;.•'•.; •:,-\\>::v:-::lW. =-.l.v-^,::<>J-;::-v:: 1 & j : ; MMttarrJVikM RMUHO BMOriptfan . _ _ "1 - . C*»' ;-. ' .., Pwtod | ' . JMFCBMonNm •••/.. 1 g I 11 r- i 2006 ow" Ml Zinc. DkMclvttJ 0.275 i5 H 702772 GW 0999.90 N LNRD-050 0 Art R3 Zinc. Druotvad Pwtod 3 JAWT4-1 1i uses GW| 6/7J Zbic. DtuolMd J iW 1-9989.90 | N LNRD-050 0 S Art R3 Zinc. Dtssolvad 1 Panod 3 JAWT4-1 20M 1** 0101* 5 H 702786 JSGS -f-j— ' SArt* R3.Ztoc. Dluelvad Parted 3 ;AWT4.1 2096 GW; 7/11/1996 Zlnc.Olualvad 0215 " "5" 0 ii70260CT USGS WE«99.99 " i 1 LNRD-OSO SArt RJ Zinc Diuolvad Pwtod 3 JAWT4-1 20H GWJ W7 1UW 0.71 S 0 LT 702814 JSGS M j-9999 99 i t SArt R3 Zinc. DiMolwd Pwtod 3 IWT4-2 2094 GW( 10T26/ 1995 1.371* 5 0 L f 702828 GW -9999.99 | -|~ ~H~ LNRD-OS^O SArt R3 Zinc. UtaaNad Period 3 kWT4-2 2094 GW; SHI1996 Zinc. Dlnorvad 24071 1 S 0 H [ 702842 USGS GW •9999.99 --]— , N LNRD450 Art R3 Zinc. DiMcivad Pwtod 3 AWT4-2 2094 GW i 6/7/1 •W&ZJnc, OUolvad 4.213 S r "HITOMST USGS GW •9999.99 ! LNFfO-050 0 SArt R3 Ztee. D.EMIVMI Parted 3 kWT4-2 2094 GW 7/1 1/ 1996 ZJnc. Dtuohad 2327 5 0 H 702B70, USGS GW •999999 i N LNRO-OSO iw IHRO-OM SArt R3 Zinc OluolvwJ Parted 3 kWT4-2 20* GW B/7 1996 Znc. OiuolVBd 1491 5 0 L uses _i 4999.99 i N -r Art R3 Zinc, DluohmJ t P»rted 3 AWT4-3 2061 GW 10V26/1 995i Ztoc. Dtmulvad 16203 5 t L 702898 USGS nv . B990.99 j j N LHRD-OSO 9990.99 - - . - - , j — S Art H3 Ztoc. Ottsolvad Parted 3 r\WT4J 2089 GW SftVI 996| Zinc. Dkutvad "l 1.168 '1 5 t H 702911 jUSGS GW' LNRD-OSO SArt R3 Zinc. Olsuhwl Parted 3 IWT4-3 2089 GW SM 1996 ZncOiuahad 11.583 1 1 H 702925 USGS GW 9999.99 1 | j N LNRD-OSO __, Art R3 Zinc. blnatvad Pwtod 3 AWT4-3 2089 CW 7/1 0/1996 Ztnc, DUwlvad 13635! 1 5 1 H 702939 USGS GW 9999.99 i | j LNRD-OSO S Art R3 Zinc. Orualvad [ P«nad 3 1AWT4-3 2089 GW 9/7 l«Ub Ztoc. Gluolved 7.6961 1 5 1 L 702953 USG3 •9999.99 [ H LNRD-OSO ._| i— S Afk R3 Zinc. DJuofwd ! Pwtod 3 ;AWT4-4 "2088 GW" 10/26 1995 ZJnc. DbntvarJ 4 55! 5 0 L ~702987~ USGS iW 1-8999.99 ! -H LNRD^MO Art R3 Zinc. Diuohwd Portod 3 ; AWT4-4 20*8 GW 5/91 1998 ZJnc.DtuolvwJ 5878 5 t H 702981 USGS !W j-0999.99 i | H LNRD-OSO S Art Rj Zinc. UsulvwJ i "Pttrnd 3 AWT4-4 2068 GW 6ftl1 996; ZJnc. DUolvad 7.645 5 1 J3J 702995 .USGS GWf-999999 ! —I '"N LNRD-OSO -j- >.WT4^ 208B GW 7/1011996 Ztoc. DItaotvwJ 5254; 1 S 1 H i 703009 USGS GW j-e999.99 j | LNRD-OSO SArt R3 Znc. Dascrnd i Pwnd 3 a _j_ SArkrttZjnc DteaNad 1 Pwnd 3~AWT4-4 2088 GW 9/7 1996 Ztnc. Drnatvad 2.023 1 5 0 L ' 703023 USGS GW 1-9999 99 ! j N LNRD-OSO "f ArtR3Zinc.DliMh.wl i Pwtod 3 AWT44 2085 GW 10/2511995 'Ztac. Dbiocvod 0005 5 0 L i 703037 uses •"I-9999.99 [ __|.._i — LNRD-OSO SArk R3.Zmc. Oluorvod ! Pwtod 3 AWT4-5 20* GW 5/9/1 996= Ztnc. DtMohwd 0.005 5 0 H I 703051 USGS GW 999999 1 " LNRtWSOn AWT4.5 2085 GWJ 7/1 0/1996J Zinc, Ditsohwd 0.005 5 0 H"* 703079 USGS GW j-9999.99 ! --i 1 — H LNRD-OSO S Art R3 Zinc. Dluorrad i Pwtod 3 KWT4-5 20U GW 9/6/1996 ZJnc, Dluolvad ^ 0005 5 u L 703093 -USGS GW 1.9999.99 I i ... '._ N LNRD-OSO SArt R3 Zinc. Disurvad Pwtod 3 UMWIO 2048 GW 6AV1998 0.0015 5 0 H 469225 UOS & USGS bf EPA GW j- 0999.99 j 26:7.6 N~ LNRD-021 -S- SArt R3 ZtriC CTnoKafl Pvtod 1 lUMWIO 2041 GW 1 Til* \9U Ztoc, Otudvad 0.002 & 0 H 469241 UOS & USGS tot EPA IW i-MM.« 1 LKRD-021 0_ (—— ~ S Art RJ Zinc. DiublvBd Pwted 3 UUW10 2048 GW a* 19BI ;Ztoc. DtuolMd 0001 0 "T" 469257 UOS & USGS tor EPA 1W (-9999.99 1 2.6 -S- LNRD-021 j~ SArt Ftizinc. Diwotvad Period 3 UUW10 2048 GW 11/B ISM.Zinc. Dlsinlvad OOOIt 5 0 L 46B273 UOS & USGS tar EPA 499999 ; j 26 N LNR[XO2I Art ft! Zinc Diwotwd Pwtad3!UMW10 2048 GW 3/26) 199B jZJnc. Otecotoad 00055 S 0 L 470420 EPAAJRS Ja 9999.99 i 1 2.0. iZtoc. Oiuanwd 0.007* 5 0 H 470439 EPAAJRS GW j-9999 09 H LNRD-023 204 GW 6/1 5/1 999i Ztoc. DlMotvad 5 0 H 47045B GW J-B999.99 : -i~i|-;- LNRM23 i Art fifi Zinc. Oteiialvad Pwted 3 UUW10 000115 L- EPAAJRS u I __. i Art R3 Zinc OtuafrwJ Pwted 3 JUUW10 2048 GW i6^Jl9lzS:!5sSr;S — 000105 0 L j 470496 JEPAAJRS GW<-9999.99 " | : n 7.6 N LNRD-O23 S Art R] Zinc. OluatvwJ ' Pwtod 3 ;UUW10 2048 GW 6/1 5/2000; Ztoc. DEuohad 0.00171 5 u H 1 705406 URS Onaraang Sarvica* for EPA GW i-9999 99 i —i— LNRD-O&B SArt R3 Zinc. btawiwd 1 Pwted 3 -UUW10 2044 CW 6«afi!DOO,ZhC. DrslOrVWl 000045 5 0 L • 705464 URS Oparatng Swvicss tor EJPA GW '-9999 99 t Ys rJi -r .LNRD-056 -5- S Art R3 Zinc. Oluafvad ! Pwted3|UUWtl 205 ,GW 6/9/1 938- Zinc, Oluoniad l.Ofl S 0 H 469289 UOS & USGS tor EPA OW j-9999.99 — _?...... • a. S Art Ri.Ziric. DttiblVad" " ~ ! Pwtod 3 JUUW1 1 2052 GW 7/14/1 BQBiZJnc, DixntVad 0463 5 0 H" 469305 UOS & USGS tor EPA GW j-9999 99 ! "N" LNRD-021 S Art R3 Zinc, OiTOfvwJ i Pwtod 3 JUMWI 1 2052 GW 9A/l998:Zlnc. Oiuonrad 1.23J 5 0 Li 469321 UOS ft USGS tor EPA GW {-9999.99 • LNRD-O21 S Art R3 Zinc. OtuSiid ! Pwtod 3 lUUW1 1 2052 GW 1 l/9/1998iZlnc. Oh^tvad 1.39 5 0 L f 469337 UOS & USGS far EPA GW -099999 I i i 3 -f "N LNRD-021 -j- S Art H3 Zinc. DiMorvad T Pwtod3jUUWII 2052 GW l__3aa 4.79 5 0 L 470563 EPAAJRS GW .999Q.99 j '- \ 3 N LNRD-023 T '•• 3 !S Art R3 Zlric biuatod i Pwtod 3 -t UW1 1 2052 GW ^friSS 3.01 -- S f> H "* 470562 TPAAJRS GW • -9999.99 1 ~TT H LNRD-023 •o- S Art (U ZJne, DiwdvBd j PwtodllUUWll 2052 GW 4 6/1S/1BK rZtoe. DasolvwJ OS s 0 H 470601 EPAAJRS GW -0999.99 ; N ,LNRO-OU S Art R3 Zinc, binalvad Pwtod 3 UUW11 ~»S2 GW B/17/199G ;Zhc. Otaohcil 2.36 "9 0 L 470620 EPAAJRS GW -9999.99 ~T" — 1-ffS- H :LNRO-O23 S Art R3 Zinc, Dluorvad Pwtad 3 JUUWll 2062 GW 10/23 l9Bf ZJnc,Oatatmd 6.03 5 1 L 470839 EPAAJRS GW -0999.99 1 i 3 • a N LNRM23 rr Partod 3 UUW12 20S GW i 6/9/1998!Zinc, Dtaotvad 1.0* 0 H 489353 :UOS4USGStaf EPA GW •9999.99 i N ILNRIMT2I S Art R3 Zinc. Ouiwlwwi i Pwted 3 IUUW12 20581. GW 7/14/1998' Ztoc. Drwolvad 0.&2 5 0 H 489369 [UOS & USGS tor EPA GVT-9999.99 i — — 27 } 7.7 i N iLNHO-021 1— 2058 GW i 9/1 '199 ;Ztoc, DbiaNvd 1.24 S L 468305 JUOS ft USGS tor EPA GW !-9999.99 t 2.7 i 7.7 jLNRD-021 { iArt R3 Zinc Diuolvad ^Period 3 UUW12 f LH. S Art R3 Zhe. Dtwiwl i Pwnd 3 JUMWI2 "2058 GWi 11/9 /199I !ztoc.D«c4ved \z: 5~ If 469401 iUOS ft USGS tor EPA GW -9999.99 ! ^TiT7~1 N 2056 GW 3/28 /18B- [Ztoc. Oluatvad 2.5: 5 0 L ,470658 JEPAAJRS GW -9999.99 j • 2.7 i 7.7 :LNRD-023 S.Art R3 Zinc, DinoNod | Pwtod 3 IUUWI2 _JL L S Art Rj Zinc, Oiaorvad ' Pwtod 3 [UUW12 2058 GW fi/IB /IBBt ";Zlnc. Olnotvad 1.94 5 0 H 470677 JEPAAJRS GW -9999.99 "27 i 7.7 iLNRD-023 1 W GW 6/1S/1999,Znc, Dtaiotyad 9 0 H J170696 S EPAAJRS jW •9999.99 ! 2.7! 7.7 H !LNRCM>23 I S Art R3 Zinc, D.uc*wJ ! Parted 3 JUUW12 fe 1.11 SArt RJ Zinc. Ol«oJvad i Pwtod 3 -UUWI2 20« GW ! 10/7nw9 llztoc! Oaattvrt 1.85 5 0 L 470734 'EPAAJRS GW -9999.99 I iLNRD-023 - S.Art RJ.Zinc. Diuoivwl 1 Pwtod 3 ;UUWl2 2058 Gwt~ «/T5/20ix iZtoc. Dtuohad 0.86 5 0 H • 705532 IURS OpenOng Sarvtca* tor EPA GW" •9999.99 { iftfr fs- ILHRD-OSa SArt R3 Ztoc. Oluotmd i Parted 3 ;UUWl2 2058 GW e/2B/20TX!ZJnc. DiMotwad 1.17 S 0 L 705588 •URS Operating SWVKCI tor EPA GW -9999.99 ] S2.7 I ;.; i H 1LNRO-OS8 j S Art R3 Ztoc, Dluorvad '• Pwted 3 jUMWlB 20B1 few 3J25/1B9< .Ztoc. DruofMd 001C 5 ~0~ L HI7126B lEPAAJRS GW -9999.99 1 1 ^ i a i H jLNRD-023~T S.Art RJ Zinc. Dluolvwl } Pwtod 3 JUMW16 2081 GW S/18 nw .Zinc. OtuoNad 0.0071 5 u H 471287 1 EPAAJRS GW -9999.99 | 4. 1 • I HiLNRD-023 ~ - S Art la Zinc. Dfcsahrad ! Parted 3 uuwia 2081 GW fi/15/1991 iZlnc. DtuoNad ~ 0.0077 5 0 H 471306 ; EPAAJRS GW -999999 ,. N LNRD-023 r ...... S Art Rj Zinc, Dltutvod Panod 3 UUW16 2DB3 GW 10/29/1999; ZJnc. DIuolwd 0.00105; 5 0 L 471344 EPAAJRS 'GW .99»:» -•---•- • — r i 8 1 N ILNSM23 \ S Art R3 Zinc. Dluotvod Parted 3 UUWI6 2083 GW B/l5rZOOO;Zlnc. Otuetma 0.0017 5 u H 706018 IURS Opwatag SwWcai lor EPA GW I-B999.99 > i i LNRD-OSB {"iJ-= 1 5 SArktU.Ztoc.Dluaruad Parted 3 UUW17A 2101 GW ! 3/25/19B 1'ZJnc. Otscolwd 1.7 i- 5 u L 471363 ! EPAAJRS GW J-G89B.M ! r-^-tr ! N JLNRD423 S Art R3 Ztoc, Diuotvad Parted 3 JUHW17A 2109 CW S!zinc. D*»**d" 2.H' 5 0 H 471382 i EPAAJRS GW -9B99.9B i 1 3 ! 5 TM TtNRD-6'n 210- r.Zne. DUwAwl 0 H SArt R3 Ztoc. Diuotvod i Poitod 3 JUHWI7A GW ! 6/1* 1/1991 2.2! .___.__471401_ JEPAAJRS GW -9999.99 j t 3 ! s ! N LNRD-023 S Art R3 Zinc. Oruorwod i Pwtod 3 UUW17A 2i09 GW 1 8/1 7r»Si Zinc, Oruolvad 231 5 0 L IEPAAJRS GW -W99 W iI 5 N iLNRD-023

S Art R3.Ztoc. CUsorvad ! Pwtod 3 UUW17A 210fi GWI 6/rsnoooiZhc. o£*&* — 1.38 5 0 H 1 706106 iURSOparetogSwvtenlorEPA GW i-9999 99 ! 3 : s r N jLNRD-056 S Art R3 Ztoc. Otisorvad • Parted 3 UUW17A 2 Its GW a/3£ WOO 1.23 _Lj 706162 iURS Oparaeng Swvfcat for EPA GW J-B999.99 i : S ILNRO-OSB -_." „_ .9.. SArt R3 ZtoVoliiaivad \ Pwted 3 UUW17B ~~ " "GW M t/1999;Ztoc. Distobad ' " i.rt i EPAAJRS GW •9999.99 !• 2T» 1 t "r a i'rJ :LNRD-023 SArtR3.Ztoc.Dluo.Vad I Period 3 UUW17B 21 oa GW 91 Ztoc, Dbiohad ! 5 0 H ; 471477 IEPAAJRS GW -9999.99 3 I a i u •LNRD-023 S Art R3.Zlnc. DIuolvwJ 1 Pwtod 3 UUW17B 2 OS GW i~"67f57l9§ 2Jj T" S 0 H 471496 IEPAAJRS GW -9999.99 ' ! 3 i 8 t N LNRD-OI3 1- S Art R3 Zinc. DluolvwJ ' Pwttd 3 UUWI7Q 2 09 GW i 8/1 2.4 i 0 L 471515 lEPAAJRS GW -9999.99 | 3 i H LNRD423 S Art RS.Zlnc, Otowtvad ! Parted 3 !UUW1 ?B "j iSlcw 10O9/1 999) ZJnc. Dtsioniad 1 5 0 L 471534 'EPAAJRS "dw -999999 ' •" "" — ' -•+-- 3 t!TlHCHRMZi

! SArfc R3 Ztoc. Dluorvad ! Pwted 3 UMWI7B ~2 OS GW rJWnoOOjZInc, DruoNad l.tt i - •- 0 L ! 706252 {URS Oparatng Sarvlcaa tor EPA GW 1-9999.99 ' " ~ - - - -Hr ^ iLNRO-OSB S.ArhR3Zlnc,DI»a>vad | Pwted 3 UMW1B a 2 CW 3/2 liZJnc, Dbsohad 4JB1 5 0 L i 471553 jEPAAJRS GWt-0999.99 i • '• N TLNRD423 S Art R3 Zinc. OUsoNad I Pwtod 3 IUWW18 2 2 GW s 5Tt 8/1 99QI Ztoc. Obtutvad 3.79 S 0 H ; 471572 i EPAAJRS GW !-9B99.99 i K4-;- TS ILNRD-O23

S Art R3 Ztoc. biiMtvad | Pwtod 3 UUWI8 2 2 GW 8/i7/1999;Zlnc. Dluofrad 2.57i — 5~ 0 L 471 60S lEPAAJRS GW ;-9999.fl9 ! LNRD-023""! 3-531 — ,— I—-L?. .. -_! ?-..L 8 SAAR37tec.ataM*~~ - ~ hpWiTluuwTa-™- " " 22 GW"T 6/T5ra6oOiZlm3; OtUoind 5 0 *~?0628« :URS OfMraing S«fvtew to EPA GW 1-0999.99 j ! 3 UL i N TLNR0458 X8 ! N iLNROOSB Sicil Gukn-Ai Art Rtv Cadmium. Obscrvad i Pwnd 3 JUUVY19 i i" GW i 3Q4/l999jCadmkim, Dbwtvad ~ 0.0005} o'oos 0 471641 IEPAAJRS GW j-6999 99 " . - - _p - "N H'~v.,... ' I6l" [GWJ 5/18/199SICKlrnlum. Dbs^id "6.dioi]~ 0005 1 H 471676 ; EPAAJRS CW •9999.99 i 3 iLNRCWttJ • B Lf? — ™ " .J*JS.~™i- -^ •.— ^OiSLj ^±=J .4 — :.— J J_".L_J__.JS?*^?^ ._„_— _ . .1 \ ! i N App_E_gw_Tbl_1 o3.xls Page 14 of 15 10/22/2002 Groundwater Data for Is River Reaches 0 to 3. Dissolved cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for all data sets, a cadmium, copper, lead, and zinc data (mg/L) for CDPHE data (LNRD-068).

No groutdwalar data cumnfly «w*abl8 tor nacti 4, SundardV<*M and MO. am h unflj of mgA. For rxn- S-Sudow Monitoring W.I (SUW) U=O«|)Birtypa w

App_E_gw_Tbl_1 o3.xls Page 15 of 15 10/22/2002 Summary Statistics for Groundwater samples, by Period, in Reaches 0 to 3 and California Gulch near Arkansas River confluence.

: ; ; : :•'••: •':• • -:. '..'.'-.- . '•''• ^ 'Case ;••?£'',?•]'•&'•£."'.:'•;*. •^Period: :• •'(('.: r.-StaCht .-y'iAvg-;'; ;^ Mlr>';! '•;•'• Max.rf iHStdeY;" >MGL< 'ExCnt D.Ark RO.Cadmium, Dissolved Period 2 1 1 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.005 0 D.Ark RO.Copper, Dissolved Period 2 1 1 0.007 0.007 0.007 1.3 0 D.Ark RO.Lead, Dissolved Period 2 1 1 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0 D.Ark RO.Zinc, Dissolved Period 2 1 l_ 1 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 ^ 0 D.Ark R1. Cadmium, Dissolved Period 2 3 3 0.00333 0.0025 0.005 0.00144 0.005 0 D.Ark R1. Cadmium, Total Period 2 2 1 0.00063 0.00006 0.0012 0.00081 0.005 0 D.Ark R1. Cadmium, Total Period 3 4 2 0.00041 0.00005 0.0006 0.00025 0.005 I 0_ D.Ark R1. Copper, Dissolved Period 2 3 3 0.005 0.0025 0.01 0.00433 1.3 0 D.Ark R1 .Copper, Total Period 3 3 2 0.12733 0.009 0.35 0.19296 1.3 0 D.ArkR1.Lead, Dissolved Period 2 3 3 0.00667 0.0025 0.015 0.00722 0.015 0 D.ArkR1. Lead, Total Period 2 2 2 0.0165 0.009I 0.024 0.01061 0.015 1 D.ArkR1. Lead, Total Period 3 2 2 0.00075 0.0005 0.001 0.00035 0.015 0 D.Ark R1 .Zinc, Dissolved Period 2 3 3 0.59767 0.063 1.1 0.51926 5 0 D.Ark R2.Cadmium, Dissolved Period 2 1 1 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.005 0 D.Ark R2.Cadmium, Dissolved Period 3 1 1 0.0005 0.0005 0.0005 0.005 0 D.Ark R2.Copper, Dissolved Period 2 1 1 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 1.3 0 D.Ark R2.Copper, Dissolved Period 3 1 1 0.002 0.002 0.002 1.3 0 D.Ark R2.Lead, Dissolved Period 2 1 1 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0 D.Ark R2.Lead, Dissolved Period 3 1 1 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.015 0 3 .Ark R2.Zinc, Dissolved Period 2 1 1 0.383 0.383 0.383 5 0 D.Ark R2.Zinc, Dissolved Period 3 1 1 0.0022 0.0022 0.0022 5 0 D.Ark R3.Cadmium, Dissolved Period 2 1 1 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.005 0 D.Ark R3. Copper, Dissolved Period 2 1 1 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 1.3 0 D.Ark R3.Lead, Dissolved Period 2 1 1 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0 D.Ark R3.Zinc, Dissolved 'eriod 1 1 1 0.13 0.13 0.13 5 0 D.Ark R3.Zinc, Dissolved Period 2 1 1 0.032 0.032 0.032 5 0 D.Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv. Cadmium, Dissolved Period 2 2 2 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0 0.005 0 XCal Gulch-At Ark Riv.Copper, Dissolved Period 2 2 2 0.0205 " 0.008 0.033 0.01768 1.3 0 D.Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv.Lead, Dissolved Period 2 2 2 0.015 0.015 0.015 0 0.015 0 XCal Gulch-At Ark Riv.Zinc, Dissolved Period 2 2 2 0.9795 0.069 1.89 1.28764 5 0 O.Ark R2.Cadmium, Dissolved Period 2 2 2 0.00575 0.0025 0.009 0.0046 0.005 1 O.Ark R2.Copper, Dissolved Period 2 2 2 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0 1.3 0 O.Ark R2.Lead, Dissolved Period 2 2 2 0.015 0.015 0.015 0 0.015 0 O.Ark R2.Zinc, Dissolved Period 2 2 2 0.0305 0.025 0.036 0.00778 5 0 S.Ark R1. Cadmium, Dissolved Period 3 91 8 0.00993 0.0001 0.187 0.02321 0.005 0 S.Ark R1. Copper, Dissolved Period 3 91 8 0.00297 0.0003 0.0837 0.00905 1.3 0 S.Ark R1 .Lead, Dissolved Period 3 89 8 0.00562 0.0005 0.0162 0.00561 0.015 0 S.Ark Rl.Zinc, Dissolved 'eriod 3 91 8 4.36423 0.00045 29.7 6.59111 5 0 S.Ark R2.Cadmium, Dissolved Period 3 44 4 0.00921 0.0001 0.0359 0.01037 0.005 0 S.Ark R2. Copper, Dissolved 'eriod 3 44 4 0.00167 0.0003 0.011 0.00183 1.3 0 S.Ark R2.Lead, Dissolved Period 3 44 4 0.01064 0.0005 0.0963 0.01966 0.015 0 S.Ark R2.Zinc, Dissolved Period 3 45 4 3.12642 0.00045 9.82 3.43772 5 0 S.Ark R3.Cadmium, Dissolved Period 3 155 26 0.01843 0.0001 0.249 0.03615 0.005 0 S.Ark RS.Copper, Dissolved Period 3 153 26 0.03315 0.0003 0.442 0.06601 1.3 0 S.Ark RS.Lead, Dissolved Period 3 154 26 0.01604 0.0005 0.476 0.05213 0.015 0 S.Ark RS.Zinc, Dissolved Periods 158 26 2.35271 0.00045 16.203 3.01385 5 0 S.Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv.Cadmium, Dissolved Period 3 9 1 0.07543 0.0005 0.238 0.10267, 0.005 0 S.Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv.Copper, Dissolved Period 3 9 1 0.00619 0.00075 0.0413"} 0.013181 1.3 0 S.Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv.Lead, Dissolved Period 3 9 1 0.01336 0.0008 0.0238 0.00854 0.015 0 S.Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv.Zinc, Dissolved Period 3 9 1 19.6889 1.99 55.9 23.0209 5 0 J.Ark RS.Zinc, Dissolved Period 1 1 1 0.38 0.38|' 0.38 5 0

Case: D = Deep (DWS) 0 = Other (seep) S = Shallow (SMW) U = Depth unknown Avg, Min, Max, Stdev, MCL in mg/L Summary Statistics for Groundwater samples, all Periods, in Reaches 0 to 3 and California Gulch near Arkansas River confluence.

: : : ; :i :•'• ,':"-l • V '' "< .'i:;!... :;CaSe .-; '.- ,;; .':•••'•': ':-.V^ kf';' •'•- J^r £Tn': JStaCnt :£Avg ;; fc'i'WInl" ;^Max ?'- ,;;stdev.:: ^!MeL?:'4:ExCnt D.Ark RO. Cadmium, Dissolved 1 1 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.005 0 D.Ark RO.Copper, Dissolved 1 1 0.007 0.007 0.007 1.3 0 D.Ark RO.Lead, Dissolved 1 1 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0 D.Ark RO.Zinc, Dissolved 1 1 0.02 0.02 0.02 5 0 D.Ark R1. Cadmium, Dissolved 3 3 0.00333 0.0025 0.005 0.00144 0.005 0 D.Ark R1. Cadmium, Total 6 2 0.00049 0.00005 0.0012 0.00042 0.005 0 D.Ark R1. Copper, Dissolved 3 3 0.005 0.0025 0.01 0.00433 1.3 0 D.Ark R1 .Copper, Total 3 2 0.12733 0.009 0.35 0.19296 1.3 0 D.Ark RLLead, Dissolved 3 3 0.00667 0.0025 0.015 0.00722 0.015 0 D.Ark R1. Lead, Total 4 2 0.00863 0.0005 0.024 0.01096 0.015 1 D.Ark RLZinc, Dissolved 3 3 0.59767 0.063 1.1 0.51926 5 0 D.Ark R2.Cadmium, Dissolved 2 1 0.0015 0.0005 0.0025 0.00141 0.005 0 D.Ark R2. Copper, Dissolved 2 1 0.00225 0.002 0.0025 0.00035 1.3 0 D.Ark R2.Lead, Dissolved 2 1 0.01 0.005 0.015 0.00707 0.015 0 D.Ark R2.Zinc, Dissolved 2 1 0.1926 0.0022 0.383 0.26927 5 0 D.Ark RS.Cadmium, Dissolved 1 1 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0.005 0 D.Ark R3. Copper, Dissolved 1 1 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 1.3 0 D.Ark RS.Lead, Dissolved 1 1 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0 D.Ark RS.Zinc, Dissolved 2 2 0.081 0.032 0.13 0.0693 5 0 D.Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv.Cadmium, Dissolved 2 2 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0 0.005 0 D.Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv.Copper, Dissolved 2 2 0.0205 0.008 0.033 0.01768 1.3 0 D.Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv.Lead, Dissolved 2 2 0.015 0.015 0.015 0 0.015 0 D.Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv.Zinc, Dissolved 2 2 0.9795 0.069 1.89 1.28764 5 0 O.Ark R2. Cadmium, Dissolved 2 2 0.00575 0.0025 0.009 0.0046 0.005 1 O.Ark R2.Copper, Dissolved 2 2 0.0025 0.0025 0.0025 0 1.3 0 O.Ark R2.Lead, Dissolved 2 2 0.015 0.015 0.015 0 0.015 0 O.Ark R2.Zinc, Dissolved 2 2 0.0305 0.025 0.036 0.00778 5 0 S.Ark R1. Cadmium, Dissolved 91 8 0.00993 0.0001 0.187 0.02321 0.005 0 S.Ark R1. Copper, Dissolved 91 8 0.00297 0.0003 0.0837 0.00905 1.3 0 S.Ark RLLead, Dissolved 89 8 0.00562 0.0005 0.0162 0.00561 0.015 0 S.Ark RLZinc, Dissolved 91 8 4.36423 0.00045 29.7 6.59111 5 0 S.Ark R2.Cadmium, Dissolved 44 4 0.00921 0.0001 0.0359 0.01037 0.005 0 S.Ark R2.Copper, Dissolved 44 4 0.00167 0.0003 0.011 0.00183 1.3 0 S.Ark R2.Lead, Dissolved 44 4 0.01064 0.0005 0.0963 0.01966 0.015 0 S.Ark R2.Zinc, Dissolved 45 4 3.12642 0.00045 9.82 3.43772 5 0 S.Ark RS.Cadmium, Dissolved 155 26 0.01843 0.0001 0.249 0.03615 0.005 0 S.Ark RS.Copper, Dissolved 153 26 0.03315 0.0003 0.442 0.06601 1.3 0 S.Ark R3.Lead, Dissolved 154 26 0.01604 0.0005 0.476 0.05213 0.015 0 S.Ark RS.Zinc, Dissolved 158 26 2.35271 0.00045 16.203 3.01385 5 0 S.Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv.Cadmium, Dissolved 9 1 0.07543 0.0005 0.238 0.10267 0.005 0 S.Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv.Copper, Dissolved 9 1 0.00619 0.00075 0.0413 0.01318 1.3 0 S.Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv.Lead, Dissolved 9 1 0.01336 0.0008 0.0238 0.00854 0.015 0 S.Cal Gulch-At Ark Riv.Zinc, Dissolved 9 1 19.6889 1.99 55.9 23.0209 5 0 U.Ark RS.Zinc, Dissolved 1 1 0.38 0.38 0.38 5 0

Case: D = Deep (DWS) O = Other (seep) S = Shallow (SMW) U = Depth unknown Avg, Min, Max, Stdev, MCL in mg/L StaCnt = Station count, based on 2 meter radius APPENDIX F Mass-Balance Calculations Mass-Balance Calculations for Metals Contribution from Eroded Mine Waste

Statement of Problem

Mine-waste deposits are present within the Upper Arkansas River floodplain (500-year floodplain) and some lie along the banks of the river's main channel. The deposits located along the main-channel banks are potentially susceptible to erosion and transport by river flow, especially during bank-full flow conditions. Mine waste eroded from the banks then contributes to either the total metals load carried downstream as suspended and bed-load sediment or the dissolved metals load when metals are released from mine waste to solution. The purpose of the mass-loading calculations described below is to specifically evaluate the dissolved metals load that could be contributed to the Upper Arkansas River by erosion of mine waste from the channel banks during bank-full flow conditions.

Explanation of Approach and Assumptions

In order to evaluate the contribution of mine-waste erosion to the dissolved metals content of river water, river flow and mine-waste characteristics along the river reach between California Gulch and the bottom of Reach 3, approximately 9.5 miles downstream of California Gulch, (Site Characterization Report's Reaches 1, 2 and 3; InterFluve's [1999] subreaches 2 through 6) were described from existing sources of data. Some of the mine-waste deposits present along these river reaches are susceptible to erosion and entrainment due to channel migration (InterFluve 1999). These are also the river reaches where the locations and extent of mine-waste deposits have been delineated and mapped to date.

Mine-Waste Erosion from Channel Banks

Mine-waste deposits within the 500-year floodplain were originally mapped by USEPA (URS, 1997), and we used those maps to identify the mine-waste deposits that lie along the main-channel banks. Mine-waste deposits in contact with the main channel are on average less than 2-feet thick. We assume an average mine-waste thickness at the main-channel banks of 1 foot and also assume that the entire thickness at the banks has the potential for erosion by river flow during bank-full conditions. We also conservatively assume that mine-waste deposits from any location along the main-channel bank have equal potential to be eroded and entrained in river flow.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCRAAppendices\App_F_MassBal.doc F-l Metals Release from Mine Waste to Solution

The average metals content of each mine-waste deposit mapped along the Arkansas River, estimated from all available sample data including data for surficial samples, was used to describe the mass of metals associated with a unit mass of those mine wastes.

Metals are present in various forms within the mine-waste deposits. Previous studies of soil and mine waste in the river's floodplain have shown that cadmium, lead and zinc are primarily associated with iron and manganese oxide phases (Levy et al., 1992) and that metals are readily leached from mine waste (Smith et al., 1998). Given these observations, we assumed that the observed metals leaching from mine waste (by water) was controlled primarily by desorption from secondary mineral phases (e.g. hydrous oxides), and possibly organic matter, rather than by dissolution of the primary mineral phases (carbonates and sulfides). Secondary salts, such as soluble sulfate salts, commonly form on the upper surfaces of mine-waste deposits and have been observed on some mine wastes and other floodplain deposits along the upper Arkansas River (Levy et al., 1992; Smith et al., 1998). These salts are generally soluble in water and may also release metals when mine wastes are entrained by river water.

Work performed by Smith et al. (1998) demonstrates that lead is readily leached from the upper portions of the mine-waste deposits present along the Arkansas River. In a series of batch leaching experiments on depth-specific, mine-waste core samples, lead partitioning to water was greatest in samples from the surface layer and lowest in deeper layers. The resultant empirical partition coefficients (Kd = concentration in solid/concentration in solution) for lead, from all of the mine-waste samples evaluated including those from the surface layer, range from approximately 765 to 30,000 L/Kg. Because the mass of metals associated with the surface salts and their occurrence within the floodplain are not known, the release of metals from soluble surface salts was considered by adopting the conservative assumptions described below.

Once mine wastes are eroded and entrained by river water, we assume that distribution of metals to the dissolved phase is controlled by equilibrium partitioning rather than by precipitation and dissolution reactions. The presence of readily water-soluble forms of metals at the mine-waste surface was considered when partition coefficients were selected to describe metals release from mine waste; very conservative (low Kd values; i.e., relatively greater partitioning from solid to water) estimates of metals release were used in the mass-balance calculations. The Kd values selected are likely to be too low to accurately describe metals release from mine waste at depth within the deposits and result in over- estimation of dissolved concentrations. We also conservatively assume that once metals are released to solution they remain in solution without sorption or other removal processes retarding their transport.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_F_MassBal.doc F-2 Based on descriptions of bed sediments from the Arkansas River (Kimball et al., 1995) that contain metals transported downstream from the mine-waste deposits this is appears to be an overly conservative assumption as well.

Dissolved Metals Mass-Load Calculation

Calculation of the net metals mass load and resultant dissolved metals concentrations was performed for defined subreach.es of the Arkansas River using a simple spreadsheet (table attached).

For the purposes of these calculations, we assumed that metals are distributed between solid mine waste and the dissolved phase in accordance with equilibrium partitioning behavior once those mine wastes are eroded and entrained by river water. Dissolved-phase metals are transported conservatively, and the dissolved-metals load increases downstream in proportion to the mass of mine waste eroded by the river. The result is an estimate of the net dissolved-metals load at a location downstream of mine- waste deposits that may be contributed from the eroded mine waste.

Mine-waste erosion to river water was estimated from the total length of tailing in contact with the main channel and an estimated bank erosion rate for mine waste in contact with the main channel. The weighted average metals concentration of mine waste eroded along a specified subreach of the river was estimated by summing the average metal concentration for each tailing deposit times the proportion of total mine waste length represented by each deposit along the subreach. The mass of metals released to the dissolved phase from the mass of mine waste eroded was computed using estimates of an equilibrium partition coefficient for each metal at chemical conditions representative of Upper Arkansas River water at bank-full flow conditions. The net mass of dissolved metals contributed to the river flow and resulting net change in dissolved concentrations along the defined subreach was then computed and summed to obtain an estimate of the dissolved metal concentration increase resulting from mine-waste erosion along Reaches 1, 2 and 3.

Sources of Information/Data

1. Linear feet of mine waste in contact with main channel for each mine-waste deposit:

Maps from URS (1997) were used to delineate areas of mine-waste deposits within the river floodplain. GIS methods were used to identify and define the length of each distinct mine-waste deposit in contact with the main channel. The channel-length estimates obtained using GIS mapping methods are included on the attached table and were used in computations.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_F_MassBal.doc F-3 Average metals concentrations for each mine-waste deposit:

The average metals concentrations for each mine-waste deposit are the same as those used in the mine waste ranking analysis. All metals concentration data, regardless of depth, for each deposit was used to calculate an average for that deposit. It is not known whether the data available are representative of the actual average conditions.

Mine-waste erosion rate:

The mine-waste erosion rate at bank-full conditions was estimated using a conservative approach. A moderately high bank-erosion rate of 5.0 ft/yr, for a small area of active channel migration, was reported by InterFluve (1999). This value of 5.0 feet per year was applied for the full length of the channel, creating a much exaggerated average erosion rate for the length of the 11-mile reach. This erosion rate was used along with an estimated average thickness for mine-waste deposits of 1 foot to compute the volume of mine wastes eroded per year per foot of channel length along Reaches 1, 2 and 3 (InterFluve's subreaches 2 through 6). This estimate was then used along with an estimated bulk density for mine wastes of 1.5 Kg/L to describe the mass of mine waste eroded per unit time per linear foot of mine-waste length along the main-channel bank (6.8xlO~6 Kg/second). This value was used with the length-of-mine-waste estimates to compute the mass of mine waste eroded (per unit time) in each of the reaches evaluated on the attached table.

Discharge at various points along river at bank-full conditions:

Bank-full discharge was estimated by InterFluve (1999) at various points along the river. They report average bank-flow discharges for their subreaches 2, 3 and 4 of 300, 550 and 1057 cfs, respectively.

330 550 1057 515 n/a (792*) n/a = not available *Bank-full discharge for subreach 7 substituted for subreach 6.

Solid/water distribution coefficients

K

Davis, A., R.L. Olsen, D.R. Walker, 1991. Distribution of metals between water and entrained sediment in streams impacted by acid mine discharge, Clear Creek, Colorado, USA, Applied Geochemistry, v. 6, p. 333-348.

Dempsey, B.A. and P.C. Singer, 1980. The effects of calcium on the adsorption of zinc by MnOx(s) and Fe(OH)3(am), In Contaminants and Sediments, Vol. 2, ed., R.A. Baker, Ann Arbor, MI: Ann Arbor Science, Ann Arbor, MI, p. 333-352.

J:\Ol0004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_F_MassBaI.doc F-4 Duddridge, J.I. and M. Wainright, 1981. Heavy metals in river sediments - Calculation of metal adsorption using Langmuir and Freundlich isotherms, Environmental Pollution, v.B2, p. 387-397.

Gadde, R.R. and H.A. Laitinen, 1974. Studies of heavy metal adsorption by hydrous iron and manganese oxides, Analytical Chemistry, v. 46, p. 2022-2026.

Gardiner, J., 1974. The chemistry of cadmium in natural waters - II. The adsorption of cadmium on river muds and naturally occurring solids, Water Resources, v. 8, p. 157-164.

Levy, D.B., K.A. Barbarick, E.G. Siemer and L.E. Sommers, 1992. Distribution and partitioning of trace metals in contaminated soils near Leadville, Colorado, J. Environ. Quality, v. 21, p. 185-195.

Oakley, S.M., P.O. Nelson, and K.J. Williamson, 1981. Model of trace-metal partitioning in marine sediments, Environmental Science and Technology, v. 15, p. 474-480.

O'Connor, J.T. and C.E. Renn, 1981. Soluble adsorbed zinc equilibrium in natural waters, J. American Waterworks Association, v. 56, p. 1055-1061.

Ramamoorthy, S. and B.R. Rust, 1978. Heavy metal exchange processes in sediment water systems, Environmental Geology, v. 2, p. 165-172.

Smith, K.S., SJ. Sutley, P.H. Briggs, A.L., Meier, K.Walton-Day, 1998. Trends in water-leachable lead from a fluvial tailings deposit along the upper Arkansas River, Colorado. Proceedings Tailings and Mine Waste Conference '98, Ft. Collins, CO, Balkema Press, p. 763-768.

U.S. EPA, 1999. Understanding Variation in Partition Coefficient, Kd, Values, Prepared by U.S. EPA Office of Radiation and Indoor Air and Office of Environmental Restoration, August 1999, EPA 402-R-99-004B.

The resultant compilation is presented on the attached table titled "Kd Calculations."

Two of these sources, Levy et al. (1992) and Smith et al. (1998), provide site-specific partitioning data for mine wastes from the Upper Arkansas River floodplain and one, Davis et al. (1991), provides empirical partitioning data for suspended stream sediment in Clear Creek, central Colorado. The remaining references describe metals partitioning to sediments and soils from a range of settings. The attached table presents the Kd values found. The Kd values used for the mass-balance calculations were selected to represent the conservative (low) end of the range determined from site-specific studies. These are generally more conservative than Kd values from other sources/settings.

Results and Discussion of Uncertainties

Results are shown on the attached tables as the increase in metals concentration (micrograms/L) resulting from metals partitioning to water from eroded mine wastes occurring along the reach from California Gulch downstream to the Highway 24 bridge. The estimated increase in concentrations, or the concentrations attributable to metals release from eroded mine wastes at bank-full conditions, are

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appcndices\App_F_MassBal.doc F-5 extremely low (< 1 ug/L for cadmium, copper, lead and zinc) in comparison to the high-flow dissolved metals concentrations observed in the river at the downstream end of Reach 2 (InterFluve's subreach 4) at the Highway 24 bridge, as shown below.

Estimated Mass Loading from Tailings ,J ^'Estimated Increase in * ", •}• s ' - * ^ ^ " Concentration (fig/l^due to Mine- > t . <% ~- 'S f fr Waste Erosion from River Banks Cd ^Cu Pb ' ' Ztf-' ;ycd ** | «nci Pb Zn AR-5* 200 (8/95) 1 5 1 240 AR-5 500 (5/96) 6 11 114 1030 AR-5 500 (7/96) 0.4 2 0.3 95 0.002 0.002 0.006 0.092 AR-5 347 (5/98) 1 5 1 160 AR-5 300 (7/98) 0.4 2 0.6 70 AR-70** na (7/96) <5 <50 27 78 AR-70 na (5/96) <5 <50 <5 267 0.004 0.007 0.014 0.206 AR-70 na (6/96) <5 <50 <5 85 AR-70 na (7/96) <5 <50 <5 69 *AR-5 is a Resurrection sampling location at the top of Reach 3, approximately 0.25 miles downstream of Highway 24 Bridge above confluence with Empire Gulch. ** AR-70 is a USGS sampling location within Reach 3.

Based on these comparisons, it appears that the dissolved metals contributed to river water as a result of mine-waste erosion from the channel banks is not a significant source of metals loading in comparison to other sources.

These results are consistent with those of Walton-Day et al. (1999) who found that the dissolved metals load was not significantly changed at Arkansas River stations upstream and downstream of mine- waste deposits in Reach 3. The most significant increases in metals loads were observed during local snowmelt conditions, rather than during later high-flow conditions, suggesting that surface runoff over mine waste is more significant contributor to metals concentrations in river water than mine-waste erosion. The Walton-Day et al. (1999) study concluded that mine-waste deposits do not contribute measurable trace-element loads to the river.

References cited

InterFluve, Inc. and FLO Engineering, 1999. Fluvial Geomorphic Assessment of Upper Arkansas River, Final Report, prepared for URS Operating Services, Inc., Denver, Colorado, May 7, 1999.

Kimball, B.A., E.Callender, E.V. Axtmann, 1995. Effects of colloids on metal transport in a river receiving acid mine drainage, upper Arkansas River, Colorado, USA, Applied Geochemistry, v. 10, p. 285-306.

J:\OI0004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_F_MassBal.doc F-6 Levy, D.B., K..A. Barbarick, E.G. Siemer and L.E. Sommers, 1992. Distribution and partitioning of trace metals in contaminated soils near Leadville, Colorado, J. Environ. Quality, v. 21, p. 185-195.

Smith, K.S., S.J. Sutley, P.M. Briggs, A.L., Meier, K.Walton-Day, 1998. Trends in water-leachable lead from a fluvial tailings deposit along the upper Arkansas River, Colorado. Proceedings Tailings and Mine Waste Conference '98, Ft. Collins, CO, Balkema Press, p. 763-768.

URS Operating Services, Inc., 1997. Sampling Activities Report, Upper Arkansas Fluvial Tailings, Leadville, Colorado: Report to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Contract No. 68-W5- 0031.

Walton-Day, K., F.J. Rossi, L.J. Gemer, J.B. Evans, T.J. Yager, J.F. Ranville, and K.S. Smith, 1999. Effects of fluvial tailings deposits on soils and surface- and ground-water quality, and implications for remediation - Upper Arkansas River, Colorado, 1992-1996, U.S.Geological Survey Water Resources Investigation Report 99-4273.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_F_MassBal.doc F-7 K d C^^^Bio

Metal Reference KL Am Diss. Metal Cone. Mol. Wt. Solid Metal Cone. Langmuir Kd Kd Comments log(Umol) Uumol umol/g umol/L |ug/L g/mol umol/g mg/Kg Ukg UKg Cadmium 112 Gardiner, 1974 5.2 0.158489 2 0.09 10 0.03 3.17 317 pH = 7.3 to 8, river sediment Ramamoorthy and Rust, 1978 5.4 0.251189 31 0.09 10 0.70 77.87 7787 pH = 7.5, 36% organic matter Ramamoorthy and Rust, 1978 5.4 0.251189 17 0.09 10 0.38 42.70 4270 pH = 7.5, 1% organic matter Ramamoorthy and Rust, 1978 5.4 0.251189 10 0.09 10 0.22 25.12 2512 pH = 7.5, 2.5% organic matter. Duddridge and Wainright, 1981 4.4 0.025119 30 0.09 10 0.07 7.54 754 pH = 7.4, 3.7% organic matter Duddridge and Wainright, 1981 4 0.01 26 0.09 10 0.02 2.60 260 pH = 7.1, 1% organic matter USGS, 1999 50 pH = 8to10 USGS, 1999 12600 pH = 8to 10 Levy et a!., 1992 115to1050 Arkansas River tailings study/water soluble

Copper 63.5 Ramamoorthy and Rust, 1978 5.2 0.158489 173 0.31 20 8.64 548.37 27419 36% organic matter Ramamoorthy and Rust, 1978 5.1 0.125893 34 0.31 20 1.35 85.61 4280 1% organic matter Oakley etal., 1981 205 Iron oxide only, seawater Oakley etal., 1981 7300 Manganese oxide only, seawater Davis etal., 1991 200 Empirical for Clear Creek McKenzie, 1980 3.1 0.001259 133 0.31 20 0.05 3.35 167 Goethite only, fresh water Levy etal., 1992 130 to 5400 Arkansas River tailings/water soluble

Lead I 207.2 Ramamoorthy and Rust, 1978 5.4 0.251189 13.9 0.10 20 0.34 69.83 3492 36% organic matter Duddridge and Wainwright, 198 4.9 0.079433 20 0.10 20 0.15 31.77 1589 1 % organic carbon USGS, 1999 1950 pH = 6.4 to 8.7, 1 to 10 ug/L Pb USGS, 1999 10760 pH = 6.4 to 8.7, 1 to 10 ug/L Pb McKenzie, 1980 2.9 0.000794 85 0.10 20 0.01 1.35 68 Goethite only, fresh water McKenzie, 1980 4 0.01 2600 0.10 20 2.51 520.00 26000 Manganese oxide only, fresh water Gadde and Laltinen, 1974 4.1 0.012589 2400 0.10 20 2.92 604.28 30214 amorphous iron oxide, pH = 6 Smith etal., 1998 765 to 30,000 Arkansas River tailings/water teachable

Zinc 65.4 O'Connor and Wainwright, 1981 3.8 0.00631 180 30.58 2000 34.73 2271.45 1136 pH = 7.3, river sediment Duddridge and Wainwright, 198 4.2 0.015849 47 30.58 2000 22.78 1489.80 745 pH = 7.1 (river sediment), 1% organic carbon Duddridge and Wainwright, 198 4.7 0.050119 59 30.58 2000 90.43 5914.01 2957 pH = 7.3 (river sediment), 4% organic carbon Davis etal., 1991 26 Empirical for Clear Creek Dempsey and Singer, 1980 5.9 0.794328 170 30.58 2000 4129.54 270071.60 135036 amorphous iron oxide only, pH = 7 Levy etal., 1992 75 to 1200 Arkansas River tailings/water soluble

Table F-t Metals Loading Calculations Worksheet

Mass Bank Eroded Total Length of Fraction of Eroded/Second/ Mass of Tailing Average Tailing Total Distance Taihng Exposed Tailings Exposed Weighted Average Metals Concentration Bank-Unear- Eroded/Second Bank-Full Suspended in Mass of Metal Released (mg) to Water per Kg Dissolved Concentration (ug/L) increase Mapped Deposits Along River Bank to Bank at Bank Awnge Metals Content (mo/Kg) (mg/Kg) in Erooatte Tailing along Reach Foot along Read! Discharge Discharge River Water Metals Kd Values (at ambient pH) of Tailing in River Along Reach Mass Load (mg/sec) Increase Along Reach Feet Feet Cadmium | Copper I Lead Zinc Cadmium Copper | Lead I Zinc Kg/SeoTt Kg/Sec cfs Usec KO/L Cadmium Copper Lead I Zinc Cadmium Copper I Lead Zinc Cadmium I Copper I Lead I Zinc Cadmium Copper Lead Zinc 7081200 0 0 0.000 200 , — I Cal Gulch at Artc River 15218 0 0.000 r 200 _J Cal Gulch to AA 2733 0 0.000 1 200 I I T AA 36.39 0.050 115 160 3900 1700 6 8 196 86 AB 0 0.000 220 535 3900 1650 0 0 0 0 I AC 235.52 0.326 250 453 4883 17750 82 148 1592 5788 AO 0 0.000 115 |_ 120 520 1900 0 0 0 0 AE 0 0.000 414 698 8402 26433 0 0 0 0 AG 153.01 0.212 105 857 5400 16600 22 182 1144 3517 AH 0 0.000 95 290 "3400 2000 0 0 0 0 Al 297.35 0.412 208 88 2095 3900 86 36 862 1606 AJ 0 0.000 95 "1200 6500 2500 0 0 °1 °l AA-AI 2394 72227 1 000 195 374 3795 10996 6 80E-06 491E-03 330 93456 5 26E-07 115 130 765 75 1.68 2.85 4.95 14466 0001 0001 0.003 0.076 8.26E-03 1.40E-02 2.43E-02 7.11E-01

BB 3330 28634 1 000 85 228 5350 1135 85 228 5350 1135 680E-06 1 95E-03 330 93456 2 08E-07 115 130 765 75 0.73 174 6.98 V93 0000 0000 0.001 0.003 1 43E-03 3.39E-03 1.36E-02 2.91 E-02 1 CA 2544 0.207 115 55 5800 3100 24 11 1201 642 CC 0 0.000 85 1100 4800 4400 0 0 0 0 CD 25588 0208 517 867 9080 41000 108 181 1891 8538 CE 128.45 0105 232 282 3251 2621 24 29 340 274 CF 0 0000 120 300 8500 980 0 0 0 0 CG 0 0000 115 55 2700 440 0 0 0 0 CJ 0 0.000 338 178 8015 6615 0 0 0 0 CK 85.87 0070 100 60 1075 200 7 4 75 14 CL02 174.75 0.142 175 917 3108 16105 25 130 442 2291 CN 0 0.000 85 185 1776 1670 0 0 0 0 1 CO 0 0.000 244 956 1936 6227 0 0 0 0 CP 0 0.000 100 293 2533 1210 0 0 0 0 CR 0 0.000 111 391 1622 4383 0 0 0 0 CS 329.34 0.268 208 431 2926 9990 56 116 784 2678 CA-CS 3786 122869 1 000 88 250 1301 4982 680E-06 836E-03 330 93456 8 94E-07 115 130 765 75 0.76 1.91 170 «4* 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.059 631E-03 1.60E-02 1.42E-02 5.48E-01

FA 0 0.000 133 676 3245 6413 0 0 0 0 FB 302.5 0.088 88 848 4062 6020 8 75 357 529 FC 351.9 0.102 6020 0 0 0 615 FD 4977 0.014 460 0 0 0 7 FE 49.69 0.014 95 55 85 460 1 1 1 7 FF 114.32 0.033 305 165 2725 955 10 5 91 32 FH 0 0.000 955 0 0 0 0 FG 280.62 0.082 95 55 2300 1000 8 4 188 82 ) Fl 211.33 0.061 95 55 680 1100 6 3 42 68

FJ 469.58 0.136 230 220 9700 3200 31 30 1323 437 1 FL 6981 0.020 350 190 2700 1500 7 4 55 30 i\ | FM 565.6 0.164 270 231 5640 9350 44 38 927 1536 FN 16443 0048 95 140 1400 900 5 7 67 43 J FO 0 0.000 900 0 0 0 0 GA 0 0.000 95 285 3133 6767 0 0 0 0 I GB 0 0.000 6767 0 0 0 0 il GC 0 0.000 6767 0 0 0 0 » GE 51.11 0.015 95 210 2700 1000 1 3 40 15 1 GH 3368 0.010 95 55 350 310 1 1 3 3 Gl 3354 0.010 95 55 1600 840 1 1 16 8 GJ 59.83 0.017 840 0 0 0 15 . GK 121.97 0035 840 0 0 0 30 GL 0 0.000 203 153 6300 9600 0 0 0 0 j CM 211.46 0061 260 370 9200 9800 16 23 565 602 GN 0 0.000 9800 0 0 0 0 HA 0 0.000 95 55 3400 2900 0 0 0 0 HB 0 0.000 78 120 1350 800 0 0 0 0 HD 31 33 0.009 95 120 2500 1300 1 1 23 12 HE 3767 0.011 95 130 1100 510 1 1 12 6 HI 125.46 0036 240 130 7200 13000 9 5 262 474 HK 106.35 0.031 95 300 1600 2200 3 9 49 68 FA-HK 10081 3441 95 1 000 153 211 4021 4617 680E-06 234E-02 550 15576 1 50E-06 115 130 765 75 1 32 161 525 60(| 0002 0.002 0.008 0.091 3.09E-02 3.76E-02 1.23E-01 1.42E+00

IA 105.32 0.345 210 55 3600 750 72 19 1311 259 t 1C 0 0.000 95 130 1000 680 0 0 0 0 KK 200 0.655 148 185 2350 1250 97 121 1539 819 KL 0 0.000 228 218 4783 4360 0 0 0 0 IA-KW 9975 30532 1 000 169 140 2850 1078 680E-06 208E-03 1057 Z 29934.24 694E-08 115 130 765 75 1.46 1.07 3.72 14. I 0000 0.000 0.000 0.001 3.03E-03 222E-03 7.73E-03 2.94E-02 mg/sec icrease in load for Reac*tes 1 and 2 combinec 0.050 0073 0.183 2.739 Cal Gulch to 07083710 32299 598457 I ug/L increase at end of Reach 2 1.67E-03 2.45E-03 6.10E-03 9.15E-02 SUBREACH 4/REACH 2 I LA 0 0000 260 260 5600 12000 0 0 0 0 LB 159.24 0039 275 210 3300 10450 1073006 8.193867 128.7608 407.7424 } LC 0 0.000 374 434 4680 48320 0 0 0 0 LD 0 0000 74 226 1856 2792 0 0 0 0 LG 11895 0.029 190 200 5300 7700 5.537777 5.829239 1544748 2244257 LH 507.92 0124 48 480 3500 7800 5.973846 5973846 435.5929 9707499 LI 7.01 0002 269 345 2500 11400 0462049 0 59259 4294133 19.58125 LK 0 0.000 0 0 0 C LL 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 LM 290.18 0.071 152 425 7300 5273 10.80758 30.21857 519.0483 374.9235 LN 0 0000 0 0 0 0 LO 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 LP 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 - LQ 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 LR 0 0.000 0 0 0 C LS 0 0.000 0 0 0 C LT 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 LU 0 0.000 0 0 0 C LV 0 0.000 0 0 0 C MA 45.19 0.011 85 140 1000 300C 0.941193 1 5502 11.07286 33.21 85E MB 493.15 0121 123 242 2075 6518 14.86283 29.24232 2507348 787.6092 ME 0 0.000 0 0 0 C

Table F-2 Page 1 of 2 Metals Loading Calculations Worksheet

Mass Bank Eroded Total Length of Fraction of Eroded/Second/ Mass of Tailing Average Tailing Total Distance Tailing Exposed Tailings Exposed Weighted Average Metals Concentration Bank-Linear- Eroded/Second Bank-Full Suspended in Mass of Metal Released (mg) to Water per Kg Dissolved Concentration (ug/L) increase Mapped Deposits Along River Bank to Bank at Bank Average Metals Content (mg/Kg) (mg/Kg) in Enxtabto Tailing along Reach Foot along Reach Discharge Discharge River Water Metals Kd Values (at ambient pH) of Tailing in River Along Reach Mass Load mg/sec) Increase Alon j Reach Feet Feet Cadmium Copper Lead Zinc Cadmium Copper Lead Zinc Kg/Sec/Ft Kg/Sec cfs Usec KoA Cadmium Copper Lead Zinc Cadmium Copper Lead Zinc: Cadmium Copper Lead Zinc Cadmium Copper Lead Zinc MF 53.89 0.013 228 140 1203 11800 3.010651 1.848646 15.88515 155.8144 J MG 0 0000 0 0 0 0 I MM 0 0000 0 0 0 0 Ml 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 MJ 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 MK 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 ML 7441 0.018 2350 0 0 0 42.84662 MM 61.45 0015 2350 0 0 0 35.38402 MN 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 MP 104.21 0.026 89 170 1160 1677 2272568 434086 29.61998 4282131 ; MQ 144.02 0.035 101 313 1458 5798 3.564196 1104548 51.45147 204.606 MA 95.34 0.023 169 225 950 3765 3.94802 5256239 22.19301 87.9544 NB 307.18 0.075 95 280 2500 1900 7.15046 21.07504 188.17 143.0092 NC 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 ND 183.23 0.045 120 170 1270 640 5.387599 7.632432 57.01876 28.73386 NG 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 NH 0 0000 0 0 0 0 NH1 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 - Nl 6 0.000 0 0 0 0 NJ 7508 0.018 115 55 760 410 2.115629 1.011823 1398155 7.542678 NL 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 NN 63.66 0016 60 108 4300 2200 1247884 1.684643 6707374 34.3168 NO 176.19 0.043 85 330 3000 1500 3.669591 14.24665 129.515 64.75748 NP 8986 0.022 128 180 1950 1250 2.818343 3.963295 42.93569 27.52288 NR 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 NT1 7427 0.018 94 235 1950 2900 1.71064 4.276601 35.48669 52.77508 NT2 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 NTS 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 NU 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 OA 180.19 0.044 57 455 3150 2700 2.516651 2008906 139.0781 1192098 OB 375.86 0092 85 65 813 868 782821 5.986278 74.87453 79.93984 OC 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 OD 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 OE 37.6 0.009 221 268 3513 6912 2036093 2.469108 32.36558 6368087 , ! OF 199.63 0049 85 65 340 660 4.157786 3.179484 16.63115 32.28399 OG 7282 0.018 97 70 100 970 1.730772 1.249011 1.784301 17.30772 l ( OH 90.62 0.022 48 160 2150 1675 1.065817 3.552724 47.73973 37.19258 / Ol 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 LA-OH 125075 4081 15 1.000 10555 248.27 246978 4095 95 680E-06 2.78E-02 515 14584.8 190E-06 115 130 765 75 0.91 1 90 3.22 53", f 0.002 0004 0.006 0.103 253E-02 526E-02 895E-02 1 50E*OC END OF SUBREACH 5 OJ 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 |. OJ3 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 OK 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 PA 79.89 0.044 95 330 4050 1900 4133472 14 35838 176.2164 8266943 PC 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 | PD 6942 0038 85 103 5500 455 3213679 3.894223 207.9439 17.20263 1 P£ 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 1 PF 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 1 PG 50.93 0.028 94 170 2395 4800 2.607357 4715433 66.43212 1331416 J PJ 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 PM 0 0000 0 0 0 0 PN 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 PP 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 PX 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 QA 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 QD 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 OF 33556 0183 160 114 2431 698 29.24079 20.83406 444.2773 127.5629 QG 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 QH 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 I Ql 317.97 0.173 115 370 3100 2400 19.91512 64.07473 5368424 4156199 QJ 8758 0.048 115 190 1600 2700 5485317 9.062697 76.31745 128.7857 OK 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 J QM 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 QN 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 QO 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 OP 81.61 0.044 80 535 1900 3450 3.555759 23.77914 84.44927 153.3421 QQ 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 QR 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 QT 12958 0071 75 300 1300 120C 5.292955 21.17182 91 74455 84.68728 QV 0 0.000 0 0 C 0 QW 0 0.000 0 0 C C OX 13366 0.073 65 670 6400 230C 4.731662 4877252 465.8868 1674281 QY 0 0.000 0 0 0 0 QZ 0 0.000 0 0 0 C RA 0 0.000 0 0 C C RB 26294 0.143 65 240 3000 100C 930827 34.369 429.6124 143.2041 RC 171.61 0.093 65 300 1700 110C 607512 2803902 158.8878 1028097 RF 115.37 0063 320 520 3100 12000 20.10675 32.67346 194.7841 754003 OJ-RF 6813.75 1836.12 1.000 113.67 305.74 2933 39 2310.46 6.80E-06 1.25E-02 792 22429.44 5.57E-07 "115 130 765 75 0.98 "2733 T83 30.4 0.00~1 ~" ^Tdoi "6.002" 0.017 1.22E-02 2.91 E-02 4.78E-02 ~3.80E-6i SUBREACH 6/REACH 3 mg/sec increase in load for Reaches 1, 2 and 3 combine< 874E-02J 1.55E-01 3.20E-01 4.61 E*0( GRAND TOTAL 6118625 11901 84 ug/L increase at end of Reach : 3.90E-03 691E-03 1 43E-02 206E-01 I

Table F-2 Pane 2 of 2 APPENDIX G Baseline Considerations Baseline Considerations

Several non-mining related factors have historically impacted water, land, and associated biological resources in the Upper Arkansas River Basin. Some of these factors may continue to exert impacts on the environment today. The principal non-mining influences include flow regulation, livestock grazing, highway and railroad impacts, and timber harvest.

Reach 0: Above California Gulch

Flow Regulation

Stream flow in this reach is augmented by water imported to both Tennessee Creek and the Upper East Fork. Flow augmentation to Tennessee Creek occurs via the Ewing Ditch, Wurtz Ditch, and Wurtz Ditch Extension, while the Upper East Fork receives flow augmentation from the Columbine Ditch (URS 1998). These ditches generally augment flows into the Upper Arkansas River by as much as 15-22 % of the total streamflow. The most significant impact of flow regulation on natural river hydrology is as much a result of patterns of release as the volume of water released. Rapid fluctuations in flows, for example, will disrupt natural hydrological and geomorphological processes causing riverbank instability and substantial sedimentation. While the Bureau of Reclamation attempts to minimize rapid fluctuations in flows, URS (1998) reported a reduction in daily streamflow of more than 25% 270 times between 1970 and 1994. Currently, the Bureau of Reclamation is attempting to develop "ramping" rates for increasing and decreasing flows. However, over the past three decades, flow augmentation in this reach has likely had (not continuously but on various occasions) a significant impact on hydrological and geomorphological processes in the Upper East Fork and Tennessee Creek.

A fundamental question is the extent to which flow regulation impacts abiotic and biotic resources in riverine systems. Scheidegger and Bain (1995) studied larval fishes in the Tallapoosa River, a highly flow-regulated river, and the Cahaba River, an unregulated river, in Alabama. Dominant families were Catostomidae, Cyprinidae, Percidae, and Centrarchidae. Flow regulation appeared to: 1) reduce the abundance of larval fish in nursery habitat; 2) alter taxonomic composition at the family level; and 3) disrupt microhabitat relations seen in families occupying unregulated rivers.

Converse et al. (1998) studied subadult humpback chub (Gila cypha) densities along 24 kilometers of the Colorado River in the Grand Canyon. One of their objectives was to determine how discharge, during base flow conditions, was related to subadult humpback chub habitat conditions. They

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_G_Baseline.doc G-1 concluded the following: 1) habitat conditions varied significantly with discharge for certain shoreline types; 2) mean shoreline depth and velocity increased with increasing discharge, whereas mean cover decreased; 3) subadult chubs appear to quickly disperse and preferentially use specific shoreline types along the river corridor, while avoiding others; 4) densities were highest in vegetated shorelines, followed by talus and debris fan shorelines; and 5) consequently, higher base-flows, which occur a greater proportion of the time in the current flow regime, may reduce subadult chub habitat quality in natural habitats compared with base-flows during pre-dam conditions.

In addition to impacting fish populations and communities, flow regulation may also significantly impact invertebrate abundance, on which salmonids typically depend for most of their diet. Blinn et al. (1995) examined the effects of fluctuating discharge for lotic communities in the Colorado River below Glen Canyon Dam. Some important conclusions included: 1) Periods of daily desiccation and freezing during river fluctuation significantly limited community biomass and energy. The permanently submerged channel supported a mean annual macroinvertebrate standing crop biomass 4 times that of the varial zone. 2) Cladophora glomerata exhibited a 50% reduction in biomass after 2 days of repeated 12- hour summer exposure. Five days of repeated exposure resulted in >70% reduction in C. glomerata and >50% reduction in epiphyton biomass. The same trend continues for both algae and epiphyton biomass with increased exposure and extreme water fluctuations. 3) Recolonization by C. glomerata, Gammarus lacustris, and chironomid larvae was extremely slow (< 30% of controls after 4 months) compared with gastropod densities (equaled control cobbles within 1 week) on resubmerged cobbles that were subjected to long-term desiccation. Hence, two 12-hour exposure periods may require greater than 4 months for recovery to achieve the mass of permanently submerged benthos. 4) Discharge maintained at 793 mVs is estimated to provide nearly twice the energy in the form of macroinvertebrate biomass at Lees Ferry (15.5 ha) than flows of 142 mVs. Consequently, trout biomass was predicted to increase by 42.5 kg/ha at Lees Ferry. 5) They emphasized that Gislason (1985) demonstrated that condition factors for salmon and rainbow trout were higher during periods of stable discharge than during periods of fluctuating discharge in the Skagit River, Washington. He attributed these differences to loss of shoreline insects and habitat during the fluctuations.

Malmquist and Englund (1996) examined the effects of hydropower-induced flow regulation on mayfly richness and abundance in north Swedish river rapids. Important conclusions included: 1) rivers impacted by regulation for hydropower had significantly reduced species richness and abundance of mayflies; 2) type of regime (unregulated, reduced flow, regulated but unreduced flow) significantly influenced mayfly abundance, but not species richness; 3) heptageniids, baetids, ephemerellids and Caenis rivulorum became less abundant in response to flow reduction, and there were clear species level effects in response to flow regulation; 4) sites with high flow constancy, peaking flow, and reduced flow

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_G_Baseline.doc G-2 had lowered abundance of most species in comparison with reference sites; and 5) of 20 species occurring at both unregulated and regulated sites, 19 were significantly more common at the reference sites, whereas only one was more common at sites of regulated (but unreduced) flow.

Zhang et al. (1998) examined ecological processes affecting community structure of blackfly (Diptera: Simuliidae) larvae in 51 rapids of regulated and unregulated rivers in northern Sweden. Some important findings include: 1) Sites with high species richness and abundance were characterized by large numbers of small suspended particles (food resources), deep water color, high total phosphorus and nitrogen concentrations, high proportions of forest in the catchment, low frequencies of large flow increments, extended forest growth period, low cover of filamentous algae on the substratum, and low altitude. 2) Simuliid species richness and the total abundance at reduced-flow, regulated, sites were 25% and 50% higher, respectively than predicted. At regulated sites, the abundance of blackfly predators (spinet given) decreased by 35%, and those of assumed competitors, grazers and net-spinning caddis larvae, by 22% and 19%, respectively. 3) Particle concentrations were not significantly different between unregulated and regulated sites and they were positively related to blackfly species richness and abundance. 4) Results indicate that water flow changes greatly influence blackfly larvae. Predation pressure and competition is reduced, and recolonization after disturbance is rapid. Simuliid communities are a feature of disturbed sites and may be a useful indicator for evaluating the impact of flow regulation on river ecosystems.

Cereghino and Lavandier (1998) studied the influence of hydropeaking on distribution and population dynamics of mayflies in a mountain stream in the Pyrenees, France. They found that the lowest density and biomass was downstream of the power plant, suggesting a significant impact of hydropeaking on species abundance. For example, Rhithrogena semicolorata was abundant at all sites, but its density was reduced by 50% downstream from the plant. Below the plant, the flushing action of peaking flows substantially increased catastrophic drift effects on species abundance, with the greatest impact in autumn when the difference between natural and peak flows was greatest.

Finally, Nelson and Roline (1995) conducted a literature review and limited Arkansas River field studies in order to examine the impacts of various discharges on macroinvertebrate communities. General indications were that benthic organisms in the Arkansas River would likely not be negatively impacted by velocity increases up to 1 m/s. Higher flows and velocities, however, may negatively affect large bodied stoneflies and the case building caddisfly, which is a major source of food for trout in the Arkansas River. Data collected in the Arkansas River also indicated that increased flows causes a decrease in the abundance of caddisflies Hydroptila and Brachycentrus, large bodied stoneflies, midges (Chironomidae), and scrapers, such as the caddisfly Oligophlebodes. In contrast, Baetis mayflies and Hydropsyche

J:\0l0004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_G_Baseline.doc G-3 caddisflies appear fairly tolerant of higher flows. Some mayflies (Acentrella), the caddisfly Rhyacophila coloradensis, and net-winged midges (Blephariceridae) appear to tolerate very high flows. Nelson and Roline (1995) point out that strong negative impacts on invertebrate communities were associated with flows at least 5 times greater than baseflows, and those that rapidly changed from high to low flows. Concerns with regulated low flow impacts are likely not applicable to the Arkansas River.

Clearly, flow augmentation can substantially impact aquatic habitat conditions for both fish and invertebrates, and can exert negative direct and indirect effects on their populations and communities. In terms of Tennessee Creek and the Upper East Fork, it is likely that aquatic biota were detrimentally impacted by flow augmentation on a sporadic rather than continuous basis. While substantial short-term changes in biotic population and community structure and abundance likely occurred, it is not clear whether or not they were impacted detrimentally over the long term.

Livestock Grazing

It is unclear whether or not livestock grazing has significantly impacted the Upper East Fork and Tennessee Creek, although grazing does occur in Tennessee Park. The current vegetation community structure, dense willow thickets mixed with open grassy areas, suggests that historically it did not experience heavy livestock grazing.

Highway 24 and 91

Highway 24, traveling north from Leadville, crosses Upper East Fork, East Tennessee Creek, Tennessee Creek, runs parallel to Tennessee Creek for approximately 2 miles before crossing West Tennessee Creek, and continues north over the Continental Divide. This road heading north of Leadville was in place by 1910 (CDOT 2000) and was paved by the mid-1950s. Available literature, although scarce, suggests a strong association between unpaved roads and increased contributions of sediments to watersheds (Myers and Swanson 1996). Because this segment of the highway crosses the mainstem and three major tributaries to the Arkansas River north of Leadville, prior to paving the highway a significant amount of sediment was likely to have washed into this upper portion of the Arkansas River. However, it is unlikely that these contributions of sediment were substantial enough to cause any long-term effects on water quality and stream biota. Secondly, because this reach of the river is more than four miles upstream of the confluence of the Upper East Fork and Tennessee Creek, its impact on water quality and biota would be effectively non-existent by the time it reached the mainstem below the confluence. Finally, any sediment contributed to the river prior to paving the road would have been flushed from the system the each spring.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_G_BaseIine.doc G-4 Highway 91 continues northeast out of Leadville, following the Upper East Fork floodplain. The highway crosses the river about 2 miles upstream of the entry of Evans Gulch, continues north approximately 0.25 miles west of the river, crosses Chalk Creek, and crosses the Upper East Fork just 0.66 miles southeast of Fremont Pass before continuing north and over the Continental Divide. Highway 91 existed as a dirt road (AKA "Leadville-Breckenridge road") at least since 1910 (CDOT 2000). In 1918, the State Highway Department had designated the Climax portion of the road as State Highway 91 (Voynick 1996 and CDOT 2000). As late as 1928 it remained an unimproved, rough, dirt track closed by snow throughout the winter. By the early 1950s the highway was paved (Voynick 1996). Thus, the Upper East Fork floodplain may have received a significant amount of sedimentation runoff from the unimproved road until the early 1950s. It is important to bear in mind two things when considering potential impacts: first, the dense willow and sagebrush vegetation in the Upper East Fork floodplain between the highway and the stream provides a substantial buffer from sedimentation; and second, because the road crosses the stream at only two points up the valley, and the roadway was paved by the 1950s, it seems unlikely that there would remain any long-term effects of sedimentation.

Railroad

The railroad north of Leadville heads up the Upper East Fork basin towards Climax, and stays approximately 0.5 miles to the east of the river. The tracks finally cross the river in the extreme northeastern corner of Lake County, 1 mile southeast of Fremont Pass in San Isabel National Forest, then continues north over the Continental Divide into Summit County. The point of crossing is the only point of potential impact of the railroad on the Upper East Fork. Considering the proximity of the railroad to the river, it is unlikely that there is any significant impact on river water quality or associated aquatic biota.

At the confluence of California Gulch, the western branch of the railroad tracks continues north along the Arkansas River and Tennessee Creek. The tracks continue, on average, approximately 0.5 miles east of the river until reaching the confluence of Upper East Fork and Tennessee Creek. The tracks cross Upper East Fork and continue for the next 1.25 miles in close proximity to Tennessee Creek. Branching to the east, the tracks continue north, cross the East Fork of Tennessee Creek, and continue 3 miles north before crossing Tennessee Creek and continuing over the Continental Divide. All told, the tracks travel in close proximity to Tennessee Creek for about 4 miles: 1.25 just above Upper East Fork, and 2.75 just south of the entrance of West Tennessee Creek. To our knowledge, there is no literature concerning the impacts of railroad tracks on river water quality or associated biota. The railroad was completed July of 1880 (Voynick 1996), therefore the berm on which the tracks were built has had many

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_G_Baseline.doc G-5 decades during which to settle. Sedimentation during the construction phase of the railroad likely had the most significant impact on water quality and aquatic biota. Considering the decades since railway construction and length of time for recovery of resources potentially impacted, it seems unlikely that there are any remaining significant impacts due to the railroad bed.

Timber Harvest

It is difficult to determine the extent to which timber was harvested in the Upper East Fork drainage or Tennessee Creek. Klima and Scherer (2000) point out that timber was a necessary commodity of all mining practices, and by early in 1879 there were 30 sawmills employing about 1000 men in the Leadville area. Without more information concerning patterns of timber harvest (currently being investigated by the Leadville Ranger District of the U.S. Forest Service), impacts to water quality and aquatic biota are difficult to assess. It is important to note, however, that the trees making up the forests in both river valleys are 75-125 years old. Thus impacts due to silvicultural practices, such as sedimentation, have not been present for at least three quarters of a century, and perhaps longer. Therefore, it is unlikely that timber harvest has contributed to negatively impact the natural resources in either valley for decades.

Reach 1: California Gulch to Lake Fork

Flow Regulation

The effects of flow augmentation for this reach will be very similar to Reach 0 since there are no additional sources of water augmentation below that for Tennessee Creek. Because this segment of the river is further downstream, effects would be reduced compared with Reach 0. Therefore, it seems unlikely that flow augmentation exerts any significant influence on this portion of the Arkansas River beyond that mentioned for Reach 0.

Livestock Grazing

Klima and Scherer (2000) noted that Mexican settlers maintained cattle and sheep ranches on the Arkansas River as early as the 1830s, and that Colorado experienced a livestock boom as ranching became a formidable industry throughout the 19th century. As late as 1929 there were 8,800 cattle and horses and 102,328 sheep grazing on National Forests in the Leadville area; these numbers dropped to 758 cattle and 11,000 sheep in 1944 in the Leadville District of the San Isabel National Forest (Klima and Scherer 2000). Klima and Scherer (2000) further note that during the 1800s to the early 1900s

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_G_Baseline.doc G-6 overgrazing by livestock had occurred over much of the grass-shrub area. Because this segment of the Arkansas River is in such close proximity to the highly populated Leadville and California Gulch, it is likely that it received heavy use by cattle and sheep.

Through an extensive literature review, Fitch and Adams (1998) report on the interrelationship of livestock grazing and the health of riparian habitats and associated fish and wildlife. The authors first note that grassland and riparian ecosystems and associated fish and wildlife have evolved with use by grazing ungulates, most notably bison. The grazing strategy of bison was likely to disperse throughout various landscape types, unlike domestic livestock that have an affinity for water and tend to linger for long periods around riparian habitats. In pre-settlement, there was grazing followed by a period of rest, and prairie riparian communities evolved under such a regime for millennia.

Fitch and Adams (1998) point out that unmanaged livestock grazing (i.e., releasing livestock into an area without any planned riparian growing season rest or measures designed to protect vegetation health along the stream or on its floodplain) appears to always result in overuse of riparian areas, impairment of plant species vigor, and physical damage to the channel and banks. They noted that if livestock were allowed to freely graze, they would spend a disproportionate amount of time in riparian areas — 20 to 30 times longer than expected based on the limited extent of the riparian area. Kauffman and Krueger (1984) reviewed 64 papers, Platts (1991) reviewed 21 papers, and Ohmart (1996) reviewed similar references including 30 newer works. Fitch and Adams summarized the results of these three authors and concluded that inappropriate livestock management results in overuse and subsequent degradation of riparian and stream systems in the following ways:

• There are effects on stream channel morphology, the shape and quality of the water column, and soil stability and structure in the riparian zone. Streams become laterally or vertically unstable. The water column is altered by increasing water temperatures, nutrients, and suspended sediments, and by altering timing and volume of flow. Soil compaction on the floodplain from hoof action decreases infiltration rates and leads to increased runoff and accelerated erosion and sedimentation rates.

• There are considerable effects on vegetation, resulting in decreased vigor and biomass, and an alteration of species components, especially trees and shrubs.

• There are decreases in fish and wildlife species numbers following overgrazing of riparian areas.

Belsky et al. (1999) summarized peer-reviewed empirical papers and reviews of the biological and physical effects of livestock on Western rivers, streams, and associated riparian areas. Where there

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_G_Baseline.doc G-7 was a paucity of data, non-peer-reviewed reports also were used, usually from government documents or symposia. All conclusions were based on what seemed to be the consensus of experts in the field. The following summaries for fish, invertebrates, and various aspects of riparian and instream habitat were extracted from a more complete summary table in Belsky et al. (1999).

Fish

Higher water temperatures increase salmonid mortality by breaking down physiological regulation of vital processes such as respiration and circulation, and negatively affect fish spawning, rearing, and passage. Greater water turbidity, increased siltation and bacterial counts, lower summer flows, low dissolved oxygen in the water column, and intragravel environment reduce fish survival. Damage to spawning beds, less protective plant cover, fewer insects and other food items, stream bank damage, decreased hiding cover, and reduced resistance to water-boumed diseases all contribute to fish mortality. All lead to a loss of salmonids and other cold-water species, loss of avian and mammalian predators, and replacement of cold-water, riparian species with warm-water species.

Invertebrates

Higher water temperatures from loss of shade, lower dissolved oxygen, and increased fine sediments reduce plant detritus, while increasing algal biomass for food. These factors cause loss of invertebrate species that require cleaner and colder waters and coarser substrates, increase in algae feeders, fewer palatable species, less food for higher trophic levels, and reduced litter breakdown.

In terms of water quality, grazing generally caused an increase in nutrient concentrations, bacterial protozoa, sediment load and turbidity, and water temperature. Regarding stream channel morphology, there was an increase in channel depth, width, and fine sediments, and a decrease in channel stability during floods, streambank stability, number and quality of pools, and quality and quantity of streambank undercuts. Effects on hydrology include increased overland flow, peak flow, and floodwater velocity, a decrease in summer and late-season flows, and a reduced water table. Instream vegetation is generally impacted by an increase in algae and a decline in abundance of higher plants (submersed and emergent). Streambank vegetation generally experiences a decline in herbaceous cover, biomass, productivity, and native diversity. Declines are also noted for overhanging vegetation and tree and shrub biomass and cover. Vegetation structure becomes simplified, plant age-structure becomes even-aged, and plant succession impeded. In terms of riparian zone soils, there is an increase in bare ground, erosion (wind, water and ice) and compaction, and a decrease in litter layer, infiltration, and fertility.

J:\0 l0004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_G_Baseline.doc G-8 Rothrock et al. (1998) examined land use patterns and biointegrity in the Blackfoot River watershed of Montana. Benthic macroinvertebrate samples were collected in August 1995 to examine the linkage between land use, water quality, and aquatic biointegrity in seven tributaries of the Blackfoot River watershed, Montana. The tributaries represented silvicultural (timber harvesting), agricultural (irrigated hay and livestock grazing) and wilderness land uses. The wilderness stream had the highest aquatic biointegrity. Two agricultural streams had the largest estimated soil erosion and sediment delivery rates, the greatest habitat impairment from nonpoint source pollution, and the most impoverished macroinvertebrate communities. It was clear that livestock grazing had the largest negative impact on stream health; however, timber harvesting also had significant negative impacts on soil erosion and sediment transport.

Given the clearly documented impacts of livestock grazing on riverine habitats, an important question is to what extent these systems, once significantly impacted, recover ecologically. Myers and Swanson (1996) studied long-term aquatic habitat restoration on Mahogany Creek, Nevada. Livestock was excluded from the heavily grazed Mahogany Creek watershed from 1976 to 1990 while rotation of rest grazing on its tributary, Summer Camp Creek, was allowed. Both streams improved since 1976 after cessation of heavy, season-long grazing. Stability and tree cover increased while sedimentation decreased regardless of grazing treatment. Myers and Swanson (1996) suggest this illustrates that long-term recovery is consistent with rotation of rest grazing where rest occurred nine of 14 years. However, the streambank stability decrease due to flooding after two years of grazing suggests that additional rest for Summer Camp Creek at the beginning of the study may have been necessary. Sheep grazing after several additional years of recovery did not apparently have detrimental effects on Summer Camp Creek. Some variables did not improve due to other management practices, initial conditions, or climatic perturbations. For instance, fine sediment decreased overall, but accumulations during low flow coincided with roads that act as a source of and conduit for fine sediments. Significant improvements to these streams may result from a reduction in roads and crossings.

Brejda (1997) examined changes in chemical and physical properties of soil following 18 years of protection from grazing in an Arizona chaparral. Important conclusions were: 1) results indicated higher levels of silt and clay, increased concentrations of organic C, total N, and soluble bases, and a reduction in bulk density with 18 years of protection from grazing; 2) differences in the concentrations of organic C, total N, and soluble bases indicate that some recovery in soil fertility has occurred with 18 years of protection from grazing. However, there has been no recovery of perennial grasses and forbs in the openings between the chaparral shrubs; 3) changes in soil physical and chemical properties following disturbance may be species dependent; and 4) improvements in soil physical and chemical properties within the exclosure did not result in large increases in plant biomass in the bioassay, indicating that they

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_G_Baseline.doc G-9 provided only a small increase in nutrient availability to plants. Furthermore, a very heterogeneous pattern in soil properties, characterized by large differences between soils under shrub canopies compared to open areas between shrubs, was evident within the exclosure and in the grazed area, indicating the presence of a degraded ecosystem. Thus, it was concluded that the improvements in soil properties observed within the exclosure represent only an upward trend within a stable new threshold of lower productivity, not a slow return to a climax of more homogeneous and greater soil fertility. The slow recovery in soil properties and herbaceous vegetation observed at this site suggests that significant improvement in site productivity will not occur on a practical time scale without substantial intervention by land managers.

Similarly, Yates et al. (2000) examined grazing effects on plant cover, soil, and microclimate in Australian woodlands, discussing important implications for restoration. Vegetation and soil surveys were conducted in three woodlands with a history of regular grazing, and in three woodlands with a history of little or no grazing. Grazing was associated with a decline in native perennial cover, an increase in exotic annual cover, reduced litter cover, reduced soil cryptogam cover, loss of surface soil micro topography, increased erosion, changes in the concentrations of soil nutrients, degradation of surface soil structure, reduced soil water infiltration rates, and changes in near ground and soil microclimate. Rates of soil water infiltration in heavily grazed woodlands were half that in rarely grazed/ungrazed woodlands. Furthermore, soils in the grazed woodland were significantly warmer than in the ungrazed woodland with temperatures exceeding 40° C in the summer. This was likely due to loss of foliage and litter cover leading to an increase in the exposure of the soil surface to radiation and compaction, facilitating the rapid conduction of heat through the soil, and resulting in higher daytime and lower night-time temperatures. The loss of foliage and litter cover and increased daytime temperatures were likely to cause an increased loss of water through evaporation from the soil surface.

In terms of restoration, Yates et al. (2000) conclude that livestock grazing changes conditions and disrupts the ecosystem regulatory processes, causing a loss of scarce resources from within remnant woodlands ~ resources which maintain the natural biological diversity unique to these woodlands. Consequently, attempts to restore plant species diversity and community structure in degraded woodlands are unlikely to succeed without the repair of the dysfunctional ecosystem processes. An essential component of restoration will be strategies that capture resources, increase their retention, and improve microclimate in remnant woodlands.

Clearly livestock grazing may have substantial, and sometimes irreversible, impacts on aquatic ecosystems and associated biota. If recovery is possible, it may take decades for these systems to regain ecosystem functions responsible for their long-term viability as suitable habitat for fish, wildlife and

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_G_Baseline.doc G-10 plants. While livestock grazing has doubtlessly impacted this stretch of the Arkansas River valley historically, livestock interests in this area have greatly diminished over the past several decades. Most likely, since they have received no known aids to restoration, these once overgrazed areas have recovered to a somewhat less productive state than they were originally.

Highway 24

There are approximately 4 miles (6400 meters) of railroad tracks and approximately 3.5 miles (4947 meters) of Highway 24 running through the designated 500-year flood plain of the 11-mile reach. The maximum distance between the river and Highway 24 is 3257 feet (987 meters), and between the river and railroad track is 2303 feet (698 meters). Both the Highway and railroad tracks cross the river at some point. The highway first meets the 500-year flood plain, and could potentially have a constraining influence, acting as a hydraulic barrier to the river, approximately 1500 feet north of the Highway 24 Bridge. Consequently, it is not likely that Highway 24 has had any significant impact on aquatic resources associated with the Arkansas River in this reach.

Railroad

The railroad track extends south about 3 miles, located approximately 0.5 mile east of the eastern edge of the designated 500-year floodplain, before intersecting the Arkansas River. Consequently, the railroad tracks likely have had no significant impact on this stretch of the river.

Timber Harvest

This reach of the Arkansas River valley was heavily used historically in terms of agricultural and livestock production, and it is likely that substantial timber harvest took place as well. Klima and Scherer (2000) reported that during the 1800s to the early 1900s much of the mixed conifer was harvested and burned, surface soils were severely disturbed leaving them susceptible to erosion, and, in many areas, the only tree species that regenerated were lodgepole pine or aspen. However, Klima and Scherer (2000) point out that the BLM and USFS determined that following this heavy-impact mining era, fire suppression, reforestation, and traditional timber management practices have lead to a successful recovery of much of the forested area.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_0_Baseline.doc G-11 Reach 2: Lake Fork to Highway 24 Bridge

Flow Regulation

In addition to flow augmentation mentioned above for Reach 0, substantial flow augmentation to the Arkansas River occurs via Lake Fork Creek south of Turquoise Lake. Turquoise Lake is augmented by water transported from the Colorado River Basin by the Homestake Tunnel, the Boustead Tunnel, and the Busk-Ivanhoe Tunnel. Flow augmentation on Lake Fork and Lake Creek has dramatically increased flood events, resulting in substantial flood events (1965, 1970, 1972, and 1978) that did not occur on adjacent non-regulated streams (URS 1998). During 1993, 80% of the time flows released from Turquoise Lake were increased 50-90% by flow augmentation.

Consequently, this reach of the Arkansas River has been substantially impacted by flow regulation for the past several decades, and will continue to be impacted in the future. Potential impacts associated with flow regulation to abiotic and biotic components of riverine ecosystems apply to this section of the Arkansas River as well. Flow regulation can greatly impact aquatic habitat conditions for fish and invertebrates, and can exert negative direct and indirect effects on their populations and communities. In terms of this section of the Arkansas River, it is likely that water quality and aquatic biota were detrimentally impacted by flow regulation on a less sporadic basis than in Reaches 0 and 1, although not on a continuous basis. The impacts of flow regulation to population and community characteristics of biota within this reach have likely had a more long-term effect than for the reaches above; however, the discontinuous nature of extremely high flow augmentations over the years suggests that fish and macroinvertebrate populations and communities experience infrequent displacement downstream. When displacement does occur, healthy source populations upriver likely will recolonize within 90 days, but may take as long as up to a year under extremely high flow augmentation conditions. Nevertheless, it seems likely that except on rare occasion, biotic communities will be able to bounce back after perturbations associated with flow regulation.

Livestock Grazing

It is difficult to separate this reach from that of Reach 1 in terms of impacts due to livestock grazing. Based on historical accounts of livestock grazing in the Arkansas River valley in the Leadville area in general (Klima and Scherer 2000), this reach was likely occupied by large cattle and/or sheep ranches and experienced substantial overgrazing not significantly different from Reach 1. This area currently experiences low to high density cattle grazing. Uncontrolled grazing coupled with flow augmentation and the presence of mine-waste deposits has led to eroding streambanks in some reaches of

J:\010004\Task3- SCR\Appendices\App_G_Baseline.doc G-12 this section. However, in 1999, the Lake County Soil Conservation District and the Natural Resource Conservation Service initiated a riparian fencing and rotational grazing program on portions of this reach.

Highway 24

The first point at which the highway meets the 500-year flood plain, and could potentially have any sort of constraining influence, acting as a hydraulic barrier to the river, is approximately 1500 feet north of the Highway 24 Bridge. The natural flow of the river would likely take it across the highway approximately 500 feet north of the bridge.

Railroad

The railroad track first enters the designated 500-year floodplain approximately 3 miles downstream of the confluence with California Gulch, where it cuts almost due south through the middle of the floodplain. For about 2000 feet, while traveling within the designated floodplain, it appears that the railroad track has acted as a hydrological barrier, constricting the path of the river to the western side along the track. Although the track travels within the designated floodplain for .5 miles, it travels along the eastern edge for about .33 miles before entering at the north, and travels along the western edge of the marked floodplain boundary for approximately .66 miles after exiting the marked boundary just south of the Highway 24 bridge. Because the marked boundary is an arbitrary designation with the floodplain extending well beyond this conservatively marked perimeter along much of its length, this entire length (.5 + .33 + .66 miles) was included in the distance the track travels within the designated 500-year flood plain.

Timber Harvest

Similar to the impacts of livestock grazing for this reach, the impacts of timber harvest do not substantially differ from those experienced by Reach 1. That is, historically, the upper portion of the 11- mile reach of the Arkansas River valley, closest to Leadville and, therefore, mining and smelting operations, was likely heavily logged throughout the 1800s and early 1900s, until recovery took place through a series of management practices implemented by the BLM and the USFS. It is likely that this reach has long since recovered from these early silvicultural practices that seriously impacted ecosystem function.

J:\010004\Task3-SCR\Appendices\App_G_Baseline.doc G-13 Reach 3: Highway 24 Bridge to Constriction Downstream of County Road 55

Flow Regulation

As mentioned under Reach 2, substantial flow augmentation to the Arkansas River occurs south of Turquoise Lake via Lake Fork Creek. There is no additional source of flow augmentation between Highway 24 bridge and County Road 55. Therefore, this reach should not significantly differ from Reach 2 with respect to impacts of flow regulation. Impacts may be slightly less since sediments contributed to the Arkansas River at the confluence with Lake Fork would have had more opportunity to settle out, improving water quality as one goes further downstream from the major initial source of sedimentation. However, extremely high flows will contribute sediments in this reach, and will displace macroinvertebrates and fish as in Reach 2.

Consequently, this reach of the Arkansas River has been substantially impacted by flow regulation for the past several decades, and will continue to be impacted in the future. It seems likely that, except on rare occasion, biotic communities will be able to recover following perturbations associated with flow regulation.

Livestock Grazing

It is difficult to differentiate this reach from that of Reaches 1 or 2 in terms of impacts due to livestock grazing. Historical accounts of livestock grazing in the Arkansas River valley in the Leadville area in general suggest that this reach was likely occupied by large cattle and sheep ranches and experienced substantial overgrazing not significantly different from Reaches 1 and 2. In recent history, this segment has received moderate to high density grazing. Much of this segment is currently under a riparian fencing and rotational grazing program. Unrestricted livestock grazing, augmented flows, and mine-waste-deposits have created highly erodible banks in some portions of this segment.

Highway 24

Approximately 1500 feet south of the Highway 24 bridge, the highway exits the 500-year flood plain and extends southward for approximately 2 miles before re-entering the western edge of the floodplain. It then runs parallel to the western edge of the floodplain for approximately 4500 feet, but does not appear to have any constraining influence. The point at which Highway 24 re-enters the floodplain on the western edge and could possibly act as a hydraulic barrier, thus constraining the river, is

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_G_Baseline.doc G-14 approximately .5 miles south of County Road 55 at Kobe. At this point, natural topography forces the highway and river close together for a few hundred feet, after which the flood plain re-opens.

Railroad

The track extends due southeast of the Highway 24 Bridge, and re-enters the 500-year flood plain approximately .5 miles north of County Road 55 at Kobe. Until the narrow constriction of the floodplain due to natural topography, the track runs along the western edge of the floodplain about .5 miles south of County Rd. 55 and does not appear to constrict the path of the river.

Timber Harvest

It is likely that timber harvesting in this reach, in contrast with Reaches 1 and 2, was less intense and damaging to the Arkansas River resources. Because local soil conditions begin to change in terms of soil moisture, forests local to Reach 3 are comparatively sparse and sagebrush more dominant compared with Reach 1 and 2 upstream. While it is possible that significant timber harvest did occur in the reach, it seems highly unlikely that ecological impacts historically were as significant as further upstream. It is unlikely, therefore, that impacts to this reach by timber harvest were significant sources of ecological degradation.

Reach 4: Constriction Downstream of Cty. Rd. 55 to Two-Bit Creek

Flow Regulation

There is no additional source of flow augmentation between County Road 55 and Two-Bit Creek. Therefore, impacts are likely less in this reach compared with Reach 3 since sediments contributed to the Arkansas River at the confluence with Lake Fork would continue to settle out, and water quality would continuuunuuuce tiou luipiuvimprovce uuwiiaucmdownstreamu frouuimu thuie miuainitiail auui^sourcce uofi bcumicuicuiuiisedimentation. nIt seems luicilikely thatu , except on rare occasion during extremely high flow augmentation, biotic communities will be able to recover following perturbations associated with flow regulation.

Livestock Grazing

It is likely that this reach experienced historical livestock grazing impacts similar to Reach 1-3. In recent history, this segment has received moderate to high density grazing. Much of this segment is currently under the riparian fencing and rotational grazing program described above. Unrestricted

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_G_Baseline.doc G-15 livestock grazing, augmented flows, and mine-waste deposits have created highly erodible banks in some portions of this segment.

Highway 24

Although the flood plain widens again just south of the constriction at Kobe, both the highway and railroad tracks run parallel the western edge of the flood plain. While the river meanders along the eastern edge of the floodplain, apparently unconstrained, for the next 1.5-2 miles, historically, it is possible that the highway and/or the railroad tracks constrained the river to the eastern portion of the floodplain, acting as hydraulic barriers. It is not clear by examining the aerial photos whether or not the river could flow to the western side of the highway or railroad tracks.

Railroad

South of the narrow constriction the track continues to run parallel to Highway 24 for about 1.5 miles, along the western edge of the floodplain to the end of the 11-mile reach. As mentioned above, historically, it is possible that the highway and/or the railroad tracks constrained the river to the eastern portion of the floodplain acting as hydraulic barriers—although aerial photos reveal no such evidence.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_G_Baseline.doc G-16 LITERATURE CITED

Belsky, A.J., A. Matzke, and S. Uselman. 1999. Survey of livestock influences on stream and riparian ecosystems in the western United States. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 54: 419-431.

Blinn, D. W., J. P. Shannon, L. W. Stevens, and J. P. Carder. 1995. Consequences of fluctuating discharge for lotic communities. Journal of the North American Benthological Society 14(2):233- 248.

Brejda, J.J. 1997. Soil changes following 18 years of protection from grazing in Arizona chaparral. The Southwestern Naturalist 42:478-487.

Cereghino, R. and P. Lavandier. 1998. Influence of hypolimnetic hydropeaking on the distribution and population dynamics of Ephemeroptera in a mountain stream. Freshwater Biology 40:385-399.

Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT). 2000. Personal Communication. Denver, CO.

Converse, Y. K., C. P. Hawkins, and R. A. Valdez. 1998. Habitat relationships of subadult humpback chub in the Colorado River through Grand Canyon: spatial variability and implications of flow regulation. Regulated Rivers: Research & Management 14:267-284.

Edwards, E. D. and A. D. Huryn. 1996. Effect of riparian land use and contributions of terrestrial invertebrates to streams. Hydrobiologia 337:151-159.

Fitch, L and B.W.Adams. 1998. Can cows and fish co-exist? Canadian Journal of Plant Science 78: 191- 198.

Gislason, J. C. 1985. Aquatic insect abundance in a regulated stream under fluctuating and stable diel flow patterns. North American Journal of Fisheries Management 5:39-46.

Kauffman, J.B. and Krueger, W.C. 1984. Livestock impacts on riparian ecosystems and streamside management implications: a review. Journal of Range Management 37: 430-438.

Klima, K., and B. Scherer. 2000. DRAFT: Baseline Ecosystem Setting Characterization of the Leadville Area. Natural Resource Management Department, Colorado Mountain College. Leadville, CO.

Malmquist, B. and G. Englund. 1996. Effects of hydropower-induced flow perturbations on mayfly (Ephemeroptera) richness and abundance in north Swedish river rapids. Hydrobiologia 341:145- 158.

Myers, TJ, and S. Swanson. 1996. Long-term aquatic habitat restoration: Mahogany Creek, Nevada, as a case study. Water Resources Bulletin 32:241-252.

Nelson, S. M., and R. A. Roline. 1995. Aquatic Macroinvertebrate Communities and Probable Impacts of Various Discharges, Upper Arkansas River. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation. Technical Memorandum No. 8220-95-4.

Ohmart, R. D. 1996. Historical and present impacts of livestock grazing on fish and wildlife resources in western riparian habitats. In P.R.Krausman (ed.) Rangeland Wildlife. The Society for Range Management, Denver, CO.

Penczak, T. 1995. Effects of removal and regeneration of bankside vegetation on fish population dynamics in the Warta River, Poland. Hydrobiologia 303:207-210.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_G_Baseline.doc G-17 Platts, W.S. 1991. Livestock grazing. In W.R.Meehan (ed.) Influences of forest and rangeland management on salmonid fishes and their habitats. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, MD. Special Publication 19.

Rabeni, C. G., and M. A. Smale. 1995. Effects of siltation on stream fishes and the potential mitigating role of buffering riparian zone. Hydrobiologia 303:211-219.

Rothrock, J.A., P.K. Barten, and G.L. Ingman. 1998. Land use and aquatic biointegrity in the Blackfoot River watershed, Montana. Journal of the American Water Resources Association 34:565-581.

Scheidegger, K. J., and M. B. Bain. 1995. Larval distribution and microhabitat use in free-flowing and regulated rivers. Copeia 1: 125-135.

URS Operating Services, Inc. 1998. Fluvial Geomorphologic Assessment of Upper Arkansas River. By: Inter-Fluve, Inc., Bozeman, MT, and FLO Engineering, Inc., Breckenridge, CO.

Voynick, S.M. 1996. Climax: the History of Colorado's Climax Molybdenum Mine. Mountain Press Publishing Company, Missoula, MT.

Yates, C. J., D. A. Norton, and R. J. Hobbs. 2000. Grazing effects on plant cover, soil and microclimate in fragmented woodlands in southwestern Australia: implications for restoration. Austral Ecology 25:36-47.

Zhang, Y., B. Malmquist, and G. Englund. 1998. Ecological processes affecting community structure of blackfly larvae in regulated and unregulated rivers: a regional study. Journal of Applied Ecology 35:673-686.

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_G_Baseline.doc G-18 APPENDIX H Upper Arkansas River Mine-Waste Deposit Ranking Upper Arkansas River Basin Mine Waste Deposit Ranking APPENDIX H

All Deposits - Sorted by Total Class Score.

Notes: Mass of chemical in deposit based on assumed bulk density of 100 pounds per cubic fool for deposit matenal. Mass of chemical in deposit calculated from average metal concentration and average deposit volume. The EPA START reports listed maximum deposit concentrations, the mass calculations in this table are based on average concentrations The EPA START deposit areas and volumes have been refined using CIS derived deposit areas

CLASS NAME CLASS 1 CLASS 2 CLASS 3 Vegetation Cover Good (> 50% Cover) Fair (10-50% Cover) Poor(< 10% Cover) Erosion Potential Isolated Flood plain In contact with Arkansas River Deposit Volume Small (< 10.000 cu h) Medium (10.000-50.000 cu It) Large (> 50.000 cu ft) Zinc Concentration Low (< 1 .000 ppm Zn) Medium (1.000-5.000 ppm Zn) High (> 5,000 ppm Zn)

Total Class Score Is computed from the sum of Vegetation Class Score + Erosion Potential Class Score + Deposit Volume Class Score + Zinc Concentration Class Score

TOTAL CLASS SCORE PRIORITY 10,11,12 HIGH 7,8.9 MODERATE 4,5.6 LOW

Biosolids Treatment Status: Treatment 1998 indicates that EPA applied a treatment to the deposit in 1998 Description Biosolids * lime (100dl/a each)

Treatment 1999 Indicates that EPA applied a treatment to Hie deposit in 1999 Code Description BSP-LI Biosolids pellets * lime COMP-LI Compost + lime COW-BS-LI Cow manure compost+biosolids compost + lime COMP-LI Compost + lime

Treatment 2000: Indicates that EPA applied a treatment to the deposit in 2000 Code Description PROP Proposed

Zinc Cone Estimated from Number Depth Deposit Cd Cu Pb Deposit Zn of Depth Depth Depth Depth Estimate Deposit Deposit Deposit Volume CdConc CdMass Cone Cu Cone Cu Mass Cone PbConc PbMass Cone ZnConc Listed Zn Mass Cone veg Erosion Volume Cone Total Overall Rank in Deposit Deposits Area Mm Max Avg Num (if da ta Volume Mm Volume Max Volume Avg Avg Avg Avg Num Avg Avg Num Avg Avg Num Avg (if no data Avg Num Class Class Class Class Class Treatment Treatment Treatment Deposit Rank Reach Group in Group Re ach (sq ft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Points unavai able) (cu ft) (cuft) (cuft) (cuyd) (mg/kg) (pounds) Points (moAg) (pounds) Points (mg/kg) (pounds) Points (mg/kg) available) (pounds) Points pHrr in pHmax Score Score Scorti Score Score Priority 1998 1999 2000 Group 1 1 CD 1 71.571 00 1.8 1.0 9 0 125.249 71.571 2.651 517 3.698 3 867 6.203 3 9,080 64.986 3 41.000 293.440 3 3 3 3 3 12 HIGH BSP-LI CD 2 2 CL 2 106.026 0.0 27 1.5 13 0 282.735 154.281 5.714 175 2.700 4 917 14.142 6 3.108 47.956 6 16.105 248,470 6 3 3 3 3 12 HIGH BS-LI CL 3 3 AC 1 31.137 0.0 1.3 07 11 0 -• 38,922 20.286 751 250 507 3 453 918 4 4,883 9,905 4 17.750 36,008 4 3 3 2' 3 11 HIGH COW-BS-LI AC

4 4 AE 1 103.280 0.0 2.5 1.4 18 0 258.200 146.313 5.419 414 6.057 5 698 10.218 6 8.402 122.928 6 26,433 386.755 6 2 3 3 t 3 11 HIGH COW-BS-LI AE 5 5 CO 1 102.011 00 2.5 08 33 0 255.028 83.464 3.091 244 2.040 8 956 7.977 15 1,936 16.155 16 6,227 51.973 20 3 2 3 ' 3 11 HIGH BS-LI CO 6 6 CS 1 38.414 00 26 1.6 22 0 99.237 60.386 2.237 208 1.258 3 431 2.603 5 2.926 17.668 5 9.990 60,326 5 2 3 3 " 3 11 HIGH BSP-LI CS 10 7 AB 1 16.685 0.2 40 1.9 7 2,781 66.739 32178 1.192 220 708 2 535 1.722 2 3,900 12,549 2 1.650 5,309 2 3 3 2 2 10 HIGH AB 11 8 AD 1 34.977 1.4 1 4 1.4 1 49.550 49.550 49.550 1.835 115 570 1 120 595 1 520 2.577 1 1,900 9,415 1 3 3 2 2 10 HIGH COW-BS-LI AD 12 9 CA 1 38.204 0.0 23 0.7 9 0 85.960 28 123 1.042 115 323 1 55 155 1 5.800 16.311 1 3,100 8.718 1 3 3 2 2 10 HIGH BSP-LI CA 13 10 CE 1 24.146 00 23 0.8 11 0 56,342 19.756 732 232 458 3 282 557 8 3.251 6.423 7 2,621 5.179 8 3 3 2 2 10 HIGH BSP-LI CE 14 11 CJ 1 20.947 0.5 1.7 1.0 5 10.473 34.912 20.947 776 338 707 2 178 372 2 8,015 16.788 2 6.615 13,856 2 2 3 2 3 10 HIGH BSP-LI CJ 28 12 AA 1 1 4.259 08 35 2.1 3 3.549 14.906 8.991 333 115 103 1 160 144 2 3.900 3.506 2 1,700 1.528 2 3 3 1 2 9 MODERATE AA 29 13 AG 1 22,257 0.1 1 8 0.5 12 2,782 38.950 11.129 412 105 117 2 857 953 3 5.400 6.009 3 16.600 18,473 3 3 1 2 3 9 MODERATE AG 30 14 Al 1 1 25,455 0.2 2.2 1.1 8 4,242 55.152 29.167 1.080 208 605 2 88 255 2 2,095 6.110 2 3,900 11,375 2 2 3 2 2 9 MODERATE Al 31 15 BB 1 11,714 0.0 2.2 0.8 4 0 25.380 9.517 352 85 81 1 228 217 2 5,350 5.092 2 1,135 1.080 2 3 3 1 2 9 MODERATE BB 32 16 CC 5 16.792 0.8 1.5 1.0 3 12.594 25.188 16.792 622 85 143 1 1.100 1,847 1 4,800 8.060 1 4,400 7.389 1 3 2 2 2 9 MODERATE CC 33 17 CN 1 17.415 0.5 25 1.7 7 8,707 43,537 29.024 1.075 85 247 1 185 537 3 1.776 5.156 3 1,670 4.847 3 3 2 2 2 9 MODERATE BS-LI CN 57 18 AH 1 14.066 05 1.3 0.9 2 7.033 18.754 12.893 478 95 122 1 290 374 1 3,400 4.384 1 2.000 2,579 1 2 2 2 2 8 MODERATE AH 58 19 CK 1 13.351 1 8 23 2.2 4 24.477 31.152 28.927 1,071 100 289 2 60 174 2 1.075 3.110 2 200 579 2 2 3 2 1 8 MODERATE BSP-LI CK 59 20 CP 1 5.698 0.1 0.2 0.1 2 475 950 712 26 100 7 2 293 21 3 2.533 180 3 1.210 86 4 2 3 1 2 8 MODERATE BSP-LI CP 60 21 CR 39.091 0.0 2.3 0.9 25 0 87.955 36,876 1,366 111 410 4 391 1,443 7 1.622 5.980 6 4.383 16,162 7 2 2 2 2 8 MODERATE BSP-LI CR 104 22 CG 12.959 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 6.480 6,480 6.480 240 115 75 1 55 36 1 2.700 1.749 1 440 285 1 3 2 1 1 7 MODERATE CG 135 23 AJ 9.580 0.3 12 0.7 2 2.395 11,177 6.786 251 95 64 1 1.200 814 1 6,500 4.411 1 2.500 1.697 1 2 1 1 2 6 LOW AJ 149 24 CF 5.329 0.5 0.5 0.5 1 2.665 2,665 2.665 99 120 32 1 300 80 1 8.500 2.265 1 980 261 1 1 2 1 1 5 LOW BSP-LI CF Reach 1 Subtotals

TOTAL of Zinc Cone TOTAL Estimated TOTAL TOTAL MAX AVG TOTAL TOTAL of of TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL from TOTAL AVG AVG Number Number MINI of of of of Depth MIN of MAX of TOTAL of Deposit AVG of TOTAL of ofCd AVG of TOTAL of ofCu AVG of TOTAL of ofPb AVG of Deposit TOTAL of ofZn AVG AVG of AVG of Of of of of TOTAL Depth Depth Depth Depth Estimate (if Deposit Deposit Deposit Volume Cd Cone Cd Mass Cone CuConc Cu Mass Cone PbConc PbMass Cone Zn Cone Listed Zn Mass Cone of Veg Erosion Volume Cone Total TOTAL of TOTAL of TOTAL of Deposit Indiv. Area Min Max Avg Num data Volume Min Volume Max Volume Avg Avg Avg Avg Num Avg Avg Num Avg Avg Num Avg (if no data Avg Num MIN of MAX of Class Class Class Class Class Treatment Treatment Treatment Groups Deposits (sqft) (ft) (1) (ft) Points unavailable) (cu ft) (cuft) (cuft) (cuyd) (mg/kg) (pounds) Points (mg/kg) (pounds) Points (mg/kg) (pounds) Points (mg/kg) available) (pounds) Points pHmin pHmax Score Score Score Score Score 1998 1999 2000 24 29 785.364 0.0 40 1 i 213 0 0.0 282.735 886.814 32.845 177 21.322 55 446 52 354 82 4.228 491.730 81 7.271 0 1.185.790 88 NA NA 254 2.54 1.96 221 925 3 12 0

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_H_mwd_rank.xls Table: Deposit 1 of 4 10/24/2002 Zinc Cone Estimated from Number Depth Deposit Cd Cu Pb Deposit 7n of Depth Depth Depth Depth Esti nate Deposit Deposit Deposit Volume CO Cone CdMass Cone CuConc Cu Mass Cone PbConc PbMass Cone ZnConc Listed Zn Mass Cone Veg Erosion Volume Cone Total Overall Rank in Deposit Deposits Area Mm Max Avg Num (if data Volume Min Volume Max Volume Avg Avg Avg Avg Num Avg Avg Num Avg Avg Num Avg (if no data Avg Num Class Class Class Class Class Treatment Treatment Treatment Deposit Rank Reach Group in Group Reach (sqft) (ft) (ft) (t) Points unava lable) (cu It) (cuft) (cuft) (cuyd) (mg/kg) (pounds) Points (mg/Vg) (pounds) Points (mg/kg) (pounds) Points (mg/kg) available) (pounds) Points pHrrtin pHmax Score Score Score Score Score Priority 1998 1999 2000 Group 15 1 FA 1 2 50.873 00 08 0.3 18 0 38,154 13,507 500 133 180 3 676 913 8 3.245 4.383 8 6.413 8.661 8 2 3 2 3 10 HIGH FA 16 2 FB 1 2 107.628 00 08 0.3 28 0 80.721 33,329 1.234 88 294 3 848 2.826 5 4,062 13.538 5 6,020 20,064 5 2 3 2 3 10 HIGH FB 17 3 HI 1 2 21.338 07 1.3 1.0 3 14.226 26,673 21.931 812 240 526 1 130 285 1 7,200 15,790 1 13.000 28.510 1 2 3 2 3 10 HIGH HI 34 4 FC 1 2 12,693 0.0 08 03 11 0 10.578 3,750 139 6,020 FB 2,258 0 2 3 1 3 9 MODERATE FC 35 5 FM 1 2 27.726 00 20 05 18 0 55.453 12,965 480 270 350 4 231 300 4 5,640 7.312 5 9,350 12.122 4 1 3 2 3 9 MODERATE FM 36 6 GN 1 2 1.988 03 0.3 03 1 497 497 497 18 9.800 GM 487 0 2 3 1 3 9 MODERATE GN 37 7 HK 1 2 13.439 0.5 1 0 09 5 6,720 13.439 11.647 431 95 111 1 300 349 1 1.600 1.864 1 2.200 2,562 1 2 3 2 2 9 MODERATE HK 38 8 KK 1 2 9,052 0.0 0.4 02 2 0 3.772 1,886 70 148 28 2 185 35 2 2,350 443 2 1.250 236 2 3 3 1 2 9 MODERATE KK 61 9 FG 1 2 2,417 0.1 0.1 01 1 302 302 302 11 95 3 1 55 2 1 2.300 69 1 1.000 30 1 2 3 1 2 8 MODERATE FG 62 10 FJ 1 2 14.152 0.0 1.5 06 7 0 21.227 7.918 293 230 182 1 220 174 1 9.700 7.681 1 3.200 2,534 1 2 3 1 2 8 MODERATE FJ 63 11 GA 1 2 2.032 0.0 0.7 0.4 6 0 1.355 790 29 95 8 3 285 23 2 3.133 248 3 6,767 535 3 1 3 1 3 8 MODERATE GA 64 12 GB 1 2 391 1.3 1.5 14 2 521 587 554 21 6.767 GA 375 0 1 3 1 3 8 MODERATE GB 65 13 GC 1 2 1.574 1 0 1,574 58 6,767 GA 1.065 0 1 3 1 3 a MODERATE GC 66 14 GL 1 2 3.532 0.0 1.5 0.7 5 0 5.299 2.590 96 203 52 2 153 40 2 6.300 1.632 2 9.600 2.487 2 2 2 1 3 8 MODERATE GL 67 15 GM 1 2 2.609 0.0 07 0.3 3 0 1,739 652 24 260 17 1 370 24 1 9.200 600 1 9.800 639 1 1 3 1 3 8 MODERATE GM 68 16 HD 1 2 2.703 01 07 04 4 225 1.802 1.182 44 95 11 1 120 14 1 2.500 296 1 1.300 154 1 2 3 1 2 8 MODERATE HD 69 17 IA 1 2 6.634 08 1.0 09 3 4.976 6.634 5.713 212 210 120 1 55 31 1 3.800 2.171 1 750 428 1 3 3 1 1 8 MODERATE IA 70 18 1C 1 2 13.378 0.4 2.0 1.1 5 5,574 26.756 14.493 537 95 138 1 130 188 1 1.000 1.449 1 680 986 1 2 3 2 1 8 MODERATE 1C 71 19 KL 1 2 37.250 00 3.0 1.5 6 0 111.749 56.909 2.108 228 1,299 3 218 1.238 6 4.783 27.222 6 4,360 24.812 5 1 2 3 2 8 MODERATE KL 105 20 FF 1 2 18.698 0.0 0.7 02 6 0 12.465 4,285 159 305 131 2 165 71 2 2.725 1,168 2 955 409 2 2 3 1 1 7 MODERATE FF 106 21 FH 1 2 533 02 0.2 02 1 89 89 89 3 955 FF 8 0 2 3 1 1 7 MODERATE FH 107 22 Fl 1 2 1.114 0.0 1.0 0.4 3 0 1.114 402 15 95 4 1 55 2 1 680 27 2 1.100 44 2 1 3 1 2 7 MODERATE Fl 108 23 FL 1 2 884 0.7 0.7 0.7 1 590 590 590 22 350 21 1 190 11 1 2.700 159 1 1,500 88 1 1 3 1 2 7 MODERATE FL 109 24 FN 1 2 5,928 0.0 20 09 6 0 11,856 5.516 204 95 52 1 140 77 1 1.400 772 1 900 496 1 2 3 1 1 7 MODERATE FN 110 25 FO 1 2 5.279 1 0 5.279 196 900 FN 475 0 2 3 1 1 7 MODERATE FO 111 26 GE 1 2 3.523 1.0 1.3 1.2 4 3,523 4.698 4,111 152 95 39 1 210 86 1 2.700 1.110 1 1,000 411 1 1 3 1 2 7 MODERATE GE 112 27 GH 1 2 3.014 0.0 1.0 0.7 5 0 3,014 2,110 78 95 20 1 55 12 1 350 74 1 310 65 1 2 3 1 1 7 MODERATE GH 113 28 HA 1 2 12.873 0.5 1.0 07 3 6.436 12.873 9.297 344 95 88 1 55 51 1 3.400 3.161 1 2,900 2.6% 1 2 2 1 2 7 MODERATE HA 114 29 HB 1 2 1,099 0.0 03 0.2 3 0 366 244 9 78 2 2 120 3 2 1.350 33 2 800 20 2 2 3 1 1 7 MODERATE HB 115 30 HE 1 2 6.981 0.1 0.5 03 4 582 3.490 1.818 67 95 17 1 130 24 1 1.100 200 1 510 93 1 2 3 1 1 7 MODERATE HE 136 31 FD 1 2 1.759 0.1 0.7 04 2 147 1,172 659 24 460 FE 30 0 1 3 1 1 6 LOW FD 137 32 FE 1 2 957 0.3 0.3 03 3 239 239 239 9 95 2 1 55 1 1 85 2 1 460 11 2 1 3 1 1 6 LOW FE 138 33 Gl 1 2 9.414 0.5 0.8 0.6 4 4.707 7.845 5.491 203 95 52 1 55 30 1 1.600 879 1 840 461 1 1 3 1 ' 1 6 LOW Gl 139 34 GJ 1 2 588 0.1 0.1 0.1 1 74 74 74 3 840 Gl 6 0 1 3 1 1 6 LOW GJ 140 35 GK 1 2 1.884 0.1 0.8 0.5 3 157 1,570 994 37 840 Gl 84 0 1 3 1 1 6 LOW GK Reach 2 Subtotals TOTAL of Zinc Cone TOTAL Estimated TOTAL TOTAL MAX AVG TOTAL TOTAL of of TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL from TOTAL AVG AVG Number Number MIN of of of of Depth MIN of MAX of TOTAL of Deposit AVG of TOTAL of ofCd AVG of TOTAL of ofCu AVG of TOTAL of ofPb AVG of Deposit TOTAL of ofZn AVG AVG of AVG of of of of of TOTAL Depth Depth Depth Depth Estimate (if Deposit Deposit Deposit Volume Cd Cone CdMass Cone Cu Cone CuMass Cone PbConc PbMass Cone ZnConc Listed ZnMass Cone of Veg Erosion Volume Cone Total TOTAL of TOTAL of TOTAL of Deposit Indiv Area Min Max Avg Num data Volume Min Volume Max Volume Avg Avg Avg Avg Num Avg Avg Num Avg Avg Num Avg (if no data Avg Num MIN of MAX of Class Class Class Class Class Treatment Treatment Treatment Groups Deposits (sqft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Points unavailable) (cuft) (cuft) (cuft) (cuyd) (mg/kg) (pounds) Points (mg/kg) (pounds) Points (mg/kg) (pounds) Points (mg/kg) available) (pounds) Points pHmin pHmax Score Score Score Score Score 1998 1999 2000 35 35 405.936 00 30 06 177 2 0.0 111.749 233.389 8.644 153 3.746 41 200 6.811 SO 3.266 177.186 53 3.438 9 114.345 52 NA NA 1.66 2.91 1.23 191 7.71 000

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_H_mwd_rank.xls Table: Deposit 2 of 4 10/24/2002 Zinc Cone Eslinlated frc»m Number Depth Deposit Cd Cu Pb Defnsit Zn of Depth Depth Depth Depth Eslifnate Deposit Deposit Deposit Volume Cd Cone CdMass Cone CuConc Cu Mass Cone PbConc PbMass Cone Zn Cone Listed Zn Mass Cone Veg Erosion Volume Cone Total Overall Rank in Deposit Deposits Area Min Max Avg Num (if c ata Volume Min Volume Max Volume Avg Avg Avg Avg Num Avg Avg Num Avg Avg Num Avg (if no data Avg Num Class Class Class Class Class Treatment Treatment Treatment Deposit Rank Reach Group in Group Reach (sqft) (It) (ft) (ft) Points unava lable) (cu ft) (cult) (cuft) (cuyd) (mg/kg) (pounds) Points (mg/kg) (pounds) Points (mg/kg) (pounds) Points (mg/kg) avai able) (pounds) Points pHmin pHmax Score Score Score Score Score Priority 1998 1999 2000 Group 7 1 LB 1 3 12.796 0.0 2.3 09 3 0 29.857 11.019 408 275 303 2 210 231 2 3.300 3,636 2 10.450 11,514 2 3.03 4.52 3 3 2 3 11 HIGH PROP LB 8 2 MB 1 3 31.728 0.0 1.9 1.1 10 0 60.813 33.844 1.253 123 415 4 242 819 5 2.075 7,023 4 6.518 22.059 5 3 3 2 3 11 HIGH BS-LI COMP-LI MB 9 3 MQ 1 3 40.307 1.0 3.5 21 15 40,307 141.075 85,765 3.176 101 866 3 313 2.680 4 1.458 12.500 4 5.798 49.726 5 3.56 5.45 2 3 3 3 11 HIGH BS-LI MQ 18 4 LI 1 3 11.214 0.0 1.7 1.0 5 0 18.691 11.401 422 269 307 2 345 393 2 2,500 2.850 2 11.400 12.998 3 4.06 5.24 2 3 2 3 10 HIGH PROP LI 19 5 LN 1 3 45.985 00 2.0 0.9 14 0 91.971 41.880 1.551 575 2,406 4 455 1,906 4 11,525 48.266 4 34.973 146,464 4 2.16 4.86 3 2 2 3 10 HIGH PROP LN 20 6 LV 1 3 11.041 0.3 2.7 1.5 7 2.760 29.443 16.299 604 301 490 4 533 868 4 2.673 4.356 4 16,728 27.264 4 2.13 5.54 3 2 2 3 10 HIGH PROP LV 21 7 Nl 1 3 69,734 00 30 1.0 18 0 209.202 70.057 2.595 128 899 3 58 405 2 4.293 30.078 3 2.308 16.166 4 3 2 3 2 10 HIGH COMP-LI Nl 22 8 OA 1 3 46,416 0.8 1.8 1.2 7 34.812 85.096 55,257 2.047 57 312 2 455 2,514 2 3.150 17.406 2 2.700 14,920 2 2.14 3.76 2 3 3 2 10 HIGH OA 23 9 OE 1 3 31.890 02 32 1.2 11 5.315 100.986 37.689 1.396 221 831 5 268 1.011 6 3.513 13.241 6 6.912 26,049 6 391 533 2 3 2 3 10 HIGH OE 24 10 PG 1 3 61,832 05 25 0.8 7 30,916 154.580 51.527 1.908 94 484 2 170 876 2 2,395 12.341 2 4.800 24.733 2 2.53 4.64 3 2 3 2 10 HIGH PG 25 11 QD 1 3 51,794 0.0 22 0.9 10 0 112.221 46.183 1.710 147 677 3 93 427 2 2.117 9.775 3 2.197 10.145 3 3 3 2 2 10 HIGH QD 26 12 QN 1 3 45.672 0.0 24 1.2 13 0 110.375 55.041 2.039 201 1.108 4 330 1.816 4 1.638 9.013 4 3.763 20.709 4 3 2 3 2 10 HIGH QN 27 13 RB 1 3 27.182 0.0 1.3 06 5 0 33.977 15.856 587 65 103 1 240 381 1 3.000 4.757 1 1.000 1.586 1 2.78 2.78 3 3 2 2 10 HIGH BS-LI RB 39 14 LK 1 3 17.765 0.0 1.1 0.4 6 0 19.245 7.649 283 84 64 2 643 492 3 2.433 1.861 3 3.133 2.397 3 2.45 4.08 3 3 1 2 9 MODERATE PROP LK 40 15 LM 1 3 16.377 0.5 2.0 1.3 5 8.189 32.754 20.744 768 152 315 3 425 882 4 7,300 15.143 4 5,273 10,938 4 3.23 5.29 1 3 2 3 9 MODERATE PROP LM 41 16 LO 1 3 20.349 0.0 34 1.2 7 0 69.525 23.498 870 128 300 2 487 1.144 3 3,133 7.363 3 6.200 14,569 3 3.42 4.81 2 2 2 3 9 MODERATE PROP LO 42 17 LQ 1 3 5.906 0.0 22 1.0 6 0 12.797 6.152 228 99 61 2 377 232 3 4,125 2.538 4 6.525 4,014 4 2.66 5 3 2 1 3 9 MODERATE PROP LQ 43 18 LS 1 3 43.272 0.0 32 1.3 14 0 137.029 57.181 2.118 185 1.055 4 345 1.973 4 4,121 23.566 4 3.664 20.951 5 2.36 5.13 3 1 3 2 9 MODERATE PROP LS 44 19 MM 1 3 11.533 1 0 11,533 427 2.350 MJ 2.710 0 2 3 2 2 9 MODERATE MM 45 20 NB 1 3 35.496 00 14 0.7 6 0 50.286 25.143 931 95 239 2 280 704 2 2,500 6.286 2 1.900 4.777 2 2 3 2 2 9 MODERATE COMP-LI NB 46 21 NG 1 3 44,046 00 3.0 1 4 12 0 132.137 62.398 2.311 90 562 2 58 359 2 245 1.529 2 1.710 10.670 2 2 2 3 2 9 MODERATE COMP-LI NG 47 22 NO 1 3 6.757 1.2 2.9 21 8 7,883 19.708 14,147 524 85 120 1 330 467 1 3.000 4.244 1 1.500 2.122 1 2 3 2 2 9 MODERATE NO 48 23 NP 1 3 10.469 0.0 1.3 05 10 0 13.959 5.060 187 128 65 2 180 91 2 1.950 987 2 1.250 633 2 3 3 1 2 9 MODERATE NP 49 24 NT 3 3 14.780 0.0 07 0.4 6 0 9.853 6.158 228 94 58 2 235 145 2 1.950 1.201 2 2.900 1.786 2 3.84 5.48 3 3 1 2 9 MODERATE NT 50 25 OB 1 3 34.155 03 33 1 4 16 11.385 113.851 47,141 1.746 85 401 1 65 306 1 813 3.830 4 868 4.090 4 3 3 2 1 9 MODERATE OB 51 26 OH 1 3 3,708 1.1 1.1 1.1 2 4,017 4,017 4,017 149 48 19 1 160 64 2 2.150 864 2 1.675 673 2 2.48 5.03 3 3 1 2 9' MODERATE OH 52 27 Pf 1 3 1.908 0.0 0.8 0.4 2 0 1.590 795 29 48 4 1 70 6 1 100 8 1 1.000 80 1 4.71 4.71 3 3 1 2 9 MODERATE PF 53 28 QF 1 3 99.367 0.0 1.9 0.7 19 0 190.453 71,910 2.663 160 1.151 3 114 818 4 2,431 17.480 6 698 5.016 6 2 3 3 1 9 MODERATE QF 54 29 OG 1 3 18.165 0.0 2.0 1.0 12 0 36.330 18.165 673 105 191 2 290 527 2 2,450 4,450 2 1,585 2.879 2 3 2 2 2 9 MODERATE OG 55 30 QV 1 3 4.933 1.8 2.5 2.1 3 9.044 12.333 10.415 386 174 182 3 227 236 3 4.733 4.930 3 12,667 13.192 3 3.9 5.09 1 3 2 3 9 MODERATE QV 56 31 QW 1 3 1.698 1.4 3.0 23 3 2,406 5.095 3.916 145 128 50 2 293 115 3 1.240 486 3 6.000 2,349 3 3.99 4.93 2 3 1 3 9 MODERATE QW 72 32 LA 1 3 6.217 0.4 0.8 0.6 2 2,590 4,662 3,626 134 260 94 1 260 94 1 5,600 2.031 1 12.000 4,352 1 1.4 1.4 3 1 1 3 8 MODERATE PROP LA 73 33 LC 1 3 44.388 0.0 2.3 05 16 0 103.572 24,275 899 374 908 5 434 1.054 5 4.680 11.361 5 48.320 117,296 5 1.79 5.05 2 1 2 3 8 MODERATE PROP LC 74 34 LD 1 3 21.649 0.0 0.8 0.4 6 0 18.041 8.419 312 74 62 2 226 190 5 1,856 1.563 5 2.792 2.351 5 3.45 5.6 3 2 1 2 8 MODERATE PROP LD 75 35 LP 2 3 15,794 0.0 12 0.5 8 0 18.426 8.390 311 119 100 2 280 235 2 1,950 1.636 2 14.800 12,418 2 2.88 4.69 3 1 1 3 8 MODERATE PROP LP 76 36 MA 1 3 1.049 1.2 1.3 1.3 2 1,224 1,399 1.312 49 85 11 1 140 18 1 1,000 131 1 3,000 393 1 2 3 1 2 8 MODERATE MA 77 37 ME 1 3 38.398 0.1 1.8 0.6 10 3.200 67.196 22.399 830 75 168 1 120 269 1 3.200 7.168 1 880 1.971 1 3 2 2 1 8 MODERATE BS-LI COMP-LI ME 78 38 MF 1 3 1,130 1.3 1.7 1.4 3 1.506 1,883 1.632 60 228 37 2 140 23 3 1,203 196 3 11,800 1.926 3 1 3 1 3 8 MODERATE MF 79 39 Ml 1 3 10.170 0.0 3.0 1.4 7 0 30.511 14.529 538 85 123 1 65 94 1 1.600 2.325 1 380 552 2 3 2 2 1 8 MODERATE COMP-LI Ml BO 40 ML 1 3 3,223 0.7 0.7 0.7 3 2,149 2.149 2,149 80 2,350 MJ 505 0 2 3 1 2 8 MODERATE ML 81 41 MP 1 3 4,800 0.0 2.5 1.7 5 0 12.001 8,000 296 89 71 2 170 136 2 1.160 928 3 1.677 1,341 3 3.18 4.49 2 3 1 2 8 MODERATE BS-LI MP 82 42 NA 1 3 4,039 1.3 3.0 22 4 5.385 12.117 8,919 330 169 151 2 225 201 2 950 847 2 3.765 3,358 2 2.61 4 2 3 1 2 8 MODERATE NA 83 43 NC 1 3 12.628 0.8 2.2 1.4 7 9.471 27.360 17,288 640 57 98 2 290 501 2 1,600 2,766 2 1.870 3,233 2 305 3.81 2 2 2 2 8 MODERATE NC 84 44 ND 1 3 21,324 1.1 3.8 2.1 7 23,101 81.743 45,187 1.674 120 542 1 170 768 1 1,270 5,739 2 640 2,892 2 2 3 2 1 8 MODERATE ND 85 45 NH 2 3 35,811 0.0 1.8 0.8 12 0 65.654 27,356 1.013 172 471 5 180 493 5 2.400 6,565 5 7,740 21.174 5 2 1 2 3 8 MODERATE COMP-LI " NH 86 46 NN 1 3 28.835 0.0 1.0 0.3 15 0 28.835 9.291 344 80 74 2 108 100 2 4.300 3.995 2 2.200 2.044 2 2 3 1 2 8 MODERATE NN 87 47 NR 1 3 28.071 1.0 3.0 1.6 9 28.071 84.212 46.265 1,714 48 222 1 480 2.221 2 2,275 10.525 2 1.825 8.443 2 3.56 3.99 2 2 2 2 8 MODERATE NR 88 48 NU 1 3 16,169 03 1.7 1.0 8 5.390 26,948 15,495 574 79 122 2 195 302 2 2,250 3.486 2 820 1.271 2 2.1 2.97 2 3 2 1 8 MODERATE NU 89 49 OC 3 3 19.865 0.0 0.8 0.4 9 0 16,554 6,989 259 65 45 1 230 161 1 4.000 2.796 1 3.900 2,726 1 4.58 4.58 2 3 1 2 8 MODERATE OC 90 SO OD 1 3 8.601 0.2 1.5 0.8 6 1.434 12.902 7,048 261 124 87 2 300 211 2 3.100 2.185 2 1.145 807 2 2.26 4.09 2 3 1 2 8 MODERATE OD 91 51 OG 1 3 11.498 1.5 2.0 1.7 3 17,247 22,996 19.164 710 97 186 1 70 134 1 100 192 1 970 1.859 1 5.47 5.47 2 3 2 1 8 MODERATE OG 92 52 Ol 2 3 3.301 1.0 1.0 1.0 2 3,301 3.301 3,301 122 250 83 2 690 228 2 1.950 644 2 17.100 5,646 2 378 4.94 2 2 1 3 8 MODERATE Ol 93 53 OK 1 3 4.154 0.0 0.8 0.4 3 0 3,462 1.500 56 65 10 1 330 50 1 3,200 480 1 1,100 165 1 323 323 3 2 1 2 8 MODERATE OK 94 54 PA 1 3 20,972 0.1 3.0 1.5 16 1,748 62.916 32.113 1,189 95 305 2 330 1,060 2 4,050 13.006 2 1.900 6.102 2 1 3 2 2 8 MODERATE PA 95 55 PJ 1 3 16,063 0.5 2.0 1.1 10 8,032 32,127 17.937 664 87 155 3 337 604 3 2.900 5,202 3 8,467 15.187 3 2 1 2 3 8 MODERATE PJ 96 56 PP 1 3 16,506 0.3 2.0 1.0 12 4.127 33,013 15.704 582 93 145 2 65 102 2 4.050 6,360 2 1,785 2.803 2 2 2 2 2 8 MODERATE PP 97 57 QH 1 3 14.237 0.3 18 1.0 6 4.746 26.101 14,830 549 138 204 2 215 319 2 3.600 5.339 2 1,850 2.744 2 2 2 2 2 8 MODERATE QH 98 58 01 1 3 20.075 0.0 1.2 0.6 12 0 23.421 12.686 470 115 146 1 370 469 1 3,100 3,933 1 2,400 3.045 1 1 3 2 2 8 MODERATE Ql 99 59 QJ 1 3 1,289 0.9 1.0 1.0 2 1,181 1.289 1.235 46 115 14 1 190 23 1 1.600 198 1 2,700 333 1 2 3 1 2 8 MODERATE QJ 100 60 OP 1 3 17.283 0.0 1.6 0.5 6 0 27.365 9.122 338 80 73 2 535 488 2 1.900 1,733 2 3.450 3.147 2 2 3 1 2 8 MODERATE OP 101 61 OT 1 3 7.009 0.9 1 3 1.0 5 6,425 8,762 7,243 268 75 54 1 300 217 1 1.300 942 1 1.200 869 1 2 3 1 2 8 MODERATE OT 102 62 RA 1 3 45.263 0.3 1.2 0.7 6 15,088 52.807 33,319 1,234 412 1,372 3 513 1.710 3 "" . 2.200 7,330 3 29.667 98.845 3 3.07 4.12 2 1 2 3 8 MODERATE BS-LI RA 103 63 RC 1 3 3,662 0.3 0.8 0.5 2 916 3.052 1,984 73 65 13 1 300 60 1 1,700 337 1.100 218 1 3.65 3.65 2 3 1 2 8 MODERATE RC 116 64 LG 1 3 352 0.7 0.7 0.7 1 235 235 235 9 190 4 1 200 5 1 5,300 125 7.700 181 1 1.48 1.48 2 1 3 7 MODERATE LG 117 65 LH 1 3 16.287 0.0 0.5 0.2 6 0 8,144 3.619 134 48 17 1 480 174 1 3,500 1,267 7.800 2.823 1 5.3 5.3 2 1 1 3 7 MODERATE PROP LH 118 66 LT 1 3 2.970 0.2 1.1 07 5 495 3,218 1,931 72 48 9 1 70 14 1 370 71 1,200 232 1 3.99 3.99 2 2 1 2 7 MODERATE PROP LT 119 67 MN 1 3 5,183 0.3 0.3 0.3 1 1.296 1,296 1.296 48 75 10 1 46 6 1 1.600 207 15.000 1.944 1 1 2 1 3 7 MODERATE MN 120 68 NJ 1 3 4.088 0.0 0.6 0.4 4 0 2,385 1.618 60 115 19 1 55 9 1 760 123 410 66 1 2 3 1 1 7 MODERATE NJ 121 69 NL 1 3 14,145 0.0 2.5 1.5 7 0 35.362 21.722 805 115 250 1 55 119 1 " "1.250 2,715 2 415 901 2 2 2 2 1 7 MODERATE COMP-LI NL 122 70 OF 1 3 15.103 0.1 1.9 0.6 8 1,259 28,947 9,754 361 85 83 1 65 63 1 340 332 1 660 644 1 2 3 1 1 7 MODERATE OF 123 71 OJ 3 3 3,802 00 1.5 0.6 5 0 5,703 2,281 84 272 62 5 414 94 5 6.360 1.451 5 9,567 2.182 6 1.26 5.26 2 1 1 3 7 MODERATE OJ 124 72 PC 1 3 17.831 0.0 2.3 10 10 0 40.121 17.980 666 85 153 1 65 117 1 2.100 3,776 2 625 1,124 2 2 2 2 1 1 7 MODERATE PC 125 73 PD 1 3 6.011 0.0 2.8 1.6 12 0 16,531 9.434 349 85 80 1 103 97 2 5.500 5.189 2 455 429 2 2 3 1 1 7 MODERATE PD 126 74 PE 1 3 5,720 0.1 2.5 1.2 5 477 14.300 6,864 254 65 45 1 760 522 1 10.000 6.864 1 3.700 2,540 1 4.65 4.65 2 2 1 2 7 MODERATE" PE 127 75 PN 1 3 5,390 0.2 2.7 1.3 9 898 14.373 7.087 262 85 60 1 65 46 1 93 66 1 2.400 1.701 1 2 2 1 2 7 MODERATE PN 128 76 PX 1 3 24.276 0.0 2.1 1.0 15 0 50,576 24,816 919 145 360 2 505 1.253 2 6.150 15,262 2 5.100 12.656 2 1 1 2 3 7 MODERATE PX 129 77 QA 1 3 10.065 0.3 1.5 0.8 6 2,516 15.098 7,549 280 105 79 2 123 92 2 1.570 1,185 2 655 494 2 3 2 1 1 7 MODERATE QA 130 78 OK 1 3 7,344 03 2.0 1.1 9 1,836 14.687 7.752 287 115 89 1 280 217 1 2,400 1,860 1 780 605 1 3 2 1 1 7 MODERATE QK 131 79 00 1 3 31.962 0.0 0.8 0.4 12 0 26.635 13,096 485 85 111 1 65 85 1 3,000 3.929 1 1.400 1,833 2 2 1 2 2 7 MODERATE QO 132 80 OX 1 3 3,786 2.0 2.3 2.1 3 7,572 8.834 8,098 300 65 53 1 670 543 1 6.400 5.183 1 2.300 1,863 1 3.38 3.38 1 3 1 I 2 7 MODERATE OX 133 81 QY 1 3 3,510 0.3 0.8 0.5 3 1,170 2.633 1,658 61 48 8 1 430 71 1 7.600 1.260 1 5.900 978 1 471 471 2 1 1 3 7 MODERATE QY 134 82 QZ 1 3 1.687 0.3 0.3 0.3 2 422 562 492 18 190 9 1 270 13 1 7,200 354 1 3,400 167 1 1.47 1.47 2 2 1 2 7 MODERATE QZ J.\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_H_mwd_rank.xls Table: Deposit 3 of 4 10/24/2002 Zinc Cone Estimated from Number Depth Deposit Cd Cu Pb Deposit Zn of Depth Depth Depth Depth Estimate Deposit Deposit Deposit Volume Cd Cone CdMass Cone Cu Cone CuMass Cone PbConc PbMass Cone Zn Cone Listed ZnMass Cone Veg Erosion Volume Cone Total Overall Rank in Deposit Deposits Area Mm Max Avg Num (if data Volume Mm Volume Max Volume Avg Avg Avg Avg Num Avg Avg Num Avg Avg Num Avg (if no data Avg Num Class Class Class Class Class Treatment Treatment Trea men! Deposit Rank Reach Group in Group Reach (sq ft) (1) (ft) (ft) Points unavailable) (cuft) (cuft) (cuft) (cuyd) (mg/kg) (pounds) Points (mg/kg) (pounds) Points (mg/kg) (pounds) Points (mg/Xg) available) (pounds) Points pHnlin pHmax Score Score Score Score Score Priority 1996 1999 2000 Group 141 83 LL 1 3 5.224 0.5 O.B 0.7 2 2.612 4.354 3,483 129 74 26 2 287 100 3 3.767 1.312 3 830 289 3 2.74 3.22 2 2 1 1 6 LOW PROP LL 142 84 LR 1 3 1.155 1.3 1.3 1.3 1 1.444 1,444 1.444 53 48 7 1 470 68 1 9.900 1.429 1 1.800 260 1 3.81 3.81 1 2 1 2 6 LOW LR 143 85 MG 1 3 22,661 0.0 O.B 0.4 7 0 16.996 9,172 340 300 275 1 170 156 1 3.300 3.027 1 930 853 1 2 2 1 1 6 LOW COMP-LI MG 144 86 MH 1 3 6.835 0.0 1.0 0.6 5 0 6.835 4.329 160 92 40 3 188 82 3 4.233 1.832 3 2,557 1.107 3 2 1 1 2 6 LOW COMP-UI MH 145 87 MJ 1 3 9.04B 0.3 03 0.3 3 2,262 2.262 2.262 84 80 18 2 79 18 2 4,150 939 2 2.350 532 2 2 1 1 2 6 LOW COMP-LI MJ H6 68 MK 1 3 9.943 0.3 1.3 0.5 5 2.486 12.429 5.137 190 75 39 1 170 87 1 6.900 3.545 1 2.900 1.490 1 2 1 1 2 6 LOW COMP-LI MK 147 89 PM 1 3 1.114 0.3 0.5 0.4 5 279 557 446 17 75 3 1 46 2 1 830 37 1 780 35 1 2 2 1 1 6 LOW PM 148 90 QR 1 3 9.954 0.1 1 B 0.9 B 830 18.250 8.606 319 115 99 1 55 47 1 4,700 4,045 1 950 818 1 2 2 1 6 LOW OR 150 91 LU 1 3 504 0.7 0.7 0.7 1 336 336 336 12 48 2 1 210 7 1 1,500 50 1 590 20 1 2.43 2.43 1 2 1 5 LOW LU 151 92 QM 1 3 4.094 13 2.5 1.9 6 5,459 10.235 7,960 295 75 60 1 210 167 1 1,200 955 1 960 764 1 2 1 1 5 LOW QM 152 93 QQ 1 3 4.385 0.9 09 0.9 1 4.019 4,019 4,019 149 75 30 1 46 18 1 2.000 804 1 940 378 1 1 2 1 5 LOW QQ 153 94 RF 1 3 2.429 3.0 3.0 30 1 7.287 7.287 7.287 270 320 233 1 520 379 1 3.100 2.259 1 12.000 8.744 1 5.47 5.47 0 0 3 4 LOW RF Reach 3 Subtotals TOTAL of Zinc Cone TOTAL Estimated TOTAL TOTAL MAX AVG TOTAL TOTAL of of TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL from TOTAL AVG AVG Number Number MINoI of of of Depth MIN of MAX of TOTAL of Deposit AVG of TOTAL of ofCd AVG of TOTAL of ofCu AVG of TOTAL of ofPb AVG of Deposit TOTAL of ofZn AVG AVG of AVG of of of of of TOTAL Depth Depth Depth Depth Estimate (if Deposit Deposit Deposit Volume CdConc CdMass Cone CuConc CuMass Cone PbConc PbMass Cone ZnConc Listed ZnMass Cone of Veg Erosion Volume Cone Total TOTAL of TOTAL of TOTAL of Deposit Indiv. Area Min Max Avg Num data Volume Min Volume Max Volume Avg Avg Avg Avg Num Avg Avg Num Avg Avg Num Avg (if no data Avg Num MIN of MAX of Class Class Class Class Class Treatment Treatment Treatment Groups Deposits (sqft) (ft) («) («) Points unavailable) (cuft) (cuft) (cuft) (cuyd) (mg/kg) (pounds) Points (mg/kg) (pounds) Points (mg/kg) (pounds) Points (mg/kg) available) (pounds) Points pHmin pHmax Score Score Score Score Score 199B 1999 2000 94 103 1.638612 00 38 10 654 1 00 209.202 1.578 311 58.456 129 22.516 172 258 40.093 187 3.059 736.825 198 4.926 2 866.842 206 1.26 5.60 214 224 154 206 799 6 12 16

GRAND TOTALS AND AVERAGES

TOTAL of Zinc Cone TOTAL Estimated TOTAL TOTAL MAX AVG TOTAL TOTAL of of TOTAL TOTAL TOTAL from TOTAL AVG AVG Number Number MIN of of of of Depth MIN of MAX of TOTAL of Deposit AVG Of TOTAL of OfCd AVG of TOTAL of OfCu AVG of TOTAL of of Pb AVG of Deposit TOTAL of ofZn AVG AVG of AVG of of of of of TOTAL Depth Depth Depth Depth Estimate (if Deposit Deposit Deposit Volume Cd Cone Cd Mass Cone Cu Cone Cu Mass Cone Pb Cone Pb Mass Cone Zn Cone Listed Zn Mass Cone of Veg Erosion Volume Cone Total TOTAL of TOTAL of TOTAL of Deposit Indiv. Area Min Max Avg Num data Volume Min Volume Max Volume Avg Avg Avg Avg Num Avg Avg Num Avg Avg Num Avg (if no data Avg Num MIN of MAX of Class Class Class Class Class Treatment Treatment Treatment Groups Deposits (sqft) (ft) (ft) (ft) Points unavailable) (cuft) (cu ft) (cu ft) (cu yd) (mg/kg) (pounds) Points (mg/kg) (pounds) Points (mg/kg) (pounds) Points (mg/kg) available) (pounds) Points pHmin pHmax Score Score Score Score Score 1998 1999 2000 153 167 2.829.911 00 40 09 1.044 3 0 282.735 2.698.514 99945 153 47.586 268 301 99.259 319 3.517 1.405.741 332 5.212 11 2.166.976 346 126 560 2.11 2.57 1.58 206 8.32 9 24 16

J:\010004\Task 3 - SCR\Appendices\App_H_mwd_rank.xls Table: Deposit 4 of 4 10/24/2002 APPENDIX I Surface Water Figures Arkansas River Basin Ark R5, Periods 1,2,3

• Detects o Non Detects • PeriodBreak

001

OOOQ . _j oonft - D) E n on? . "5 n 006 • > o wM u.uun Q0o5 . 5 - 0004 - _3 EOQ03 - T> (0 • O n 002 •

0001 • *•« !*• « i 0 - ^C 1360 -865 B70 S75 980 flSS -B90 B95 2000 rittA

lample Media Flow Period Parameter Units vu r Surface Water | | All Flows | [ Cadmium, Dissolved | | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 49 0.00015 0.004 0.001246 0.001106 JL Sources Station Count Source Count

LNRD-001, 015, 055

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R5, Periods 1,2,3

• Detects o NonDetects PeriodBreak

0.1

0.09

0.08

0.07 O) E _ 0.06 5 ,2 0.05

I 0.04

0.03 O 0.02

0.01

04- •860 •865 •870 B75 •880 S85 •890 B95 2000 Date

Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

Surface Water | | All Flows ] | Cadmium, Total | | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 22 0.00034 0.00349 0.001009 0.000795

Sources Station Count Source Count

LNRD-015, 055

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R5, Periods 1,2,3

« Detects o NonDetects PeriodBreak

0.1

0.09

D)

1 0.04 o> Q. O O 0.02

0.01

•B60 -965 -B70 975 B80 B85 -090 fi95 2000 Date

Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

Surface Water | \ All Flows | | Copper, Dissolved | | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 37 0.0003 0.244 0.01037 0.039576

Sources Station Count Source Count

LNRD-001, 015, 055

Records off chart

Date StandardValue ResultID 11/28/1979 0.244 15196

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R5, Periods 1,2,3

_ . ._ r « Detects o NonD

0 1ft .

0 16 •

'T 0 14 • ^) ^ n 19 -

1 01-

a> 008 • & a. yO u00-u6o •

004 -

nn? - •* 0 - •B60 965 -870 S75 -B80 B85 B90 fi95 2000 n_t_

I Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

"j Surface Water | | All Flows ~| | Copper, Total | [ mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 22 0.0014 0.015 0.004231 0.002998

Sources Station Count | 1 | Source Count

LNRD-015, 055

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R5, Periods 1,2,3

• Detects ° NonDetects - PeriodBreak

004*} -

004 •

^ 0035 • E '— ' 001 • TJ — o 025 . wVI « on? • •o" 55 noi"5 • _i nm -

nnrvi - • • *_ n . 4ft 4 tf A •B60 •B65 •B70 B75 •B80 BBS B90 B95 2000 Date

iSample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

Surface Water | | All Flows | | Lead, Dissolved | | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 47 0.00013 JL 0.0035 0.000871 0.000664 Sources Station Count L Source Count LNRD-001, 015, 055

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin ArkRS, Periods 1,2,3

• Detects o NonDetects PeriodBreak

0.5

0.4

0.35

0.3

S

0.15

0.1

O-l- €60 965 1970 «75 B80 -B85 990 -B95 2000 Date

Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

Surface Water | | All Flows | | Lead, Total | | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 22 0.001 0.045 0.008177 0.00917

Sources Station Count Source Count

LNRD-015, 055

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin ^ Ark R5, Periods 1,2,3 r • Detects o NonD<

A ^

— •

E ~— -3 .

2,r o * -° iMn Q« ^5 - o" N 1'5 1 .

n ^ - •

n . '*& •B60 B65 -B70 •B75 B80 B85 B90 -995 2000 rv,*«

I Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

| Surface Water] | All Flows | | Zinc, Dissolved | | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 50 0.00005 0.568 0.0806 0.123324

Sources Station Count Source Count

LNRD-001, 015, 055

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R5, Periods 1,2,3

• Detects o NonDetects • PeriodBreak

5

4.5

4

*

m

0 C 1.5

0.5

•B60 S65 •B70 S75 fl80 •B85 B90 •B95 2000 Date

ISample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

[Surface Water | [ All Flows | [ Zinc, Total | | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 22 0.052 0.692 0.224409 0.158326

Sources Station Count Source Count

LNRD-015, 055

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin ^ Ark R6, Periods 1,2,3 . . r » Detects o NonD

n OOQ .

000ft •

n> E 0 007 -

"m 0 OOfi • > 0 (/(A) U.VU000O5 • 5 - noo4 -

_3 E nom - •o ra OOOOODOOOOOO 0 O n nn? . • o .« t . • — 0 001 - v^y^v •''& 0- w50 B65 B70 •B75 «80 «85 B90 flQS 2000 n_4._

(Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units | Surface Water | | All Flows | | Cadmium, Dissolved | | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 538 0.00005 0.029 0.000479 0.0017 JL Sources Station Count | 12 | Source Count

LNRD-001, 010, Oil, 015, 031, 055 Records off chart

Date StandardValue ResultID 5/6/1998 0.029 394569 5/6/1998 0.025 394738

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R6, Periods 1,2,3

« Detects o NonDetects PeriodBreak

0.1

0.09

0.07 0) 0.06

0.04

<0 O 0.02

0.01

0- B60 965 B70 fl75 B80 B85 B90 •B95 2000

| Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

~\ Surface Water | | All Flows ~| | Cadmium, Total | | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 560 0.00005 0.028 0.000842 0.001908

Sources Station Count 10 Source Count

LNRD-001, 010, Oil, 015, 055

Records off chart 0

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R6, Periods 1,2,3

F _ . ._ . • Detects o NonDc

fi 1

n OQ

n rw

?"ni n c\7

TI nnfi o S u.un (v*o w n rw . 0 0 a n n^ » o o nro « * A A1

llJtmaoapaajP* n - « :. .V4 B60 •965 B70 •875 S80 S85 990 B95 2000 Date

I Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

| Surface Water | [ All Flows | | Copper, Dissolved | | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 486 0.0001 0.138 0.002614 0.0065

Sources Station Count 11 Source Count

LNRD-001, 010, Oil, 015, 031, 055

Records off chart 1

Date StandardValue ResultID 11/11/1991 0.138 151010

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R6, Periods 1,2,3

F • « Detects ° NonDt

ft 9 -,

ft 1ft • •

0 1fi .

""T1 n 14 -

^ ft 17 - "55 "K 01-

Q. Q. * • 0

« • 002 - /i i • Lx n . *• ^ B60 -865 fl70 "875 "880 B85 B90 B95 2000 Date

Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

| Surface Water | | All Flows | | Copper, Total ] | mg/L

Min Max Avg Std Dev 507 0.0005 0.175 0.004278 0.009288 [ Sources Station Count | 10 | Source Count

LNRD-001, 010, Oil, 015, 055

Records off chart 0

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R6, Periods 1,2,3

» Detects o NonDetects PeriodBreak

0.05

=3, 0-035

0.03

•§ 0.025 M (A

T> 10

0.01

0.005

•B60 -B65 -B70 fl75 B80 B85 "690 •B95 Date

I Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

| Surface Water| | All Flows | | Lead, Dissolved | | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 479 0.0001 0.031 0.000809 0.001691

Sources Station Count 13 Source Count

LNRD-001, Oil, 015, 031, 055

Records off chart 0

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R6, Periods 1,2,3

• Detects o NonDetects • PeriodBreak

0.5

0.45

0.4

-. O-35

cO> 0.n3o

TJ,- 0.2 ra o> 0.15

0.1

0.05 ' * • 1 04— • • -B60 965 •B70 •B75 •880 B85 B90 •B95 2000 Date

Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

Surface Water | | All Flows | | Lead, Total | | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 472 0.0005 0.043 0.004437 0.007685

Sources Station Count [_ 10 Source Count

LNRD-001, Oil, 015, 055

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R6, Periods 1,2,3 I • Detects o NonDetects PeriodBreak 5

4.5

4

i2 5 M lit

O c N

0.5 '«:

B60 -B65 -B70 B75 B80 -B85 S90 •B95 2000 Date

ISample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

| Surface Water) | All Flows | | Zinc, Dissolved | | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 496 0.00001 0.82 0.088794 0.099556

Sources Station Count 12 Source Count

LNRD-001, 010, Oil, 015, 031, 055

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R6, Periods 1,2,3

• Detects o NonDetects PeriodBreak

4.5

3.5

O)

£ 2.5 o » 2

N 1.5

0.5

B60 B65 •B70 B80 •B85 B90 B95 2000 Date

Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units TcSurfaci e Water All Flows | | Zinc, Total | | mg/L | • Min Max Avg Std Dev 519 0.005 0.115684 0.116253

Sources Station Count 10 Source Count

LNRD-001, 010, Oil, 015, 055

Records off chart 0 Y

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R7, Periods 1,2,3

• Detects o Non Detects • PeriodBreak

0.01

0.009

_ 0.008

p 0.007

"S 0.006

O (A (A 0.005 5 »-- 0.004 _ E 0.003 ra 0.002

0.001

•B60 B65 -B70 •B75 S80 S85 B90 Date

I Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

| Surface Water | | All Flows | | Cadmium, Dissolved^ | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 262 0.00005 0.066 0.000511 0.004068 J[

Sources Station Count L Source Count LNRD-001, Oil, 031

Records off chart

Date StandardValue ResultID 4/26/1994 0.066| 202803

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R7, Periods 1,2,3

• Detects o NonDetects PeriodBreak

009 •

OHft -

—1 007 • D) >— 006 - ~!a *rf O 005 •

§ 004 • E "O nog . n U-UJ O 002 -

nm - • 00 , «» n - • A tilA** fc^i 1 "* •B60 B65 •870 B75 •880 •885 •B90 S95 2000 Date

I Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

| Surface Water) | All Flows | | Cadmium, Total | | mg/L |

Win Max Avg Std Dev 283 0.00005 0.01 0.000675 0.001251 Sources Station Count L Source Count UMRD-001, Oil, 031

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R7, Periods 1,2,3

• Detects o NonDetects PeriodBreak

0.1

0.09

0.08

0.07

•a 0.06

0.05

. 0.04

oa 0.03 o 0.02

0.01

•B60 965 •870 •875 •980 B85 990 •995 2000 Date

(Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

| Surface Water | | All Flows | | Copper, Dissolved ] | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 236 0.0001 0.049 0.002699 0.004659

Sources Station Count | 4 | Source Count

LNRD-001, Oil, 031

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R7, Periods 1,2,3

F « Detects o NonD<

09 -

0 1H .

n IK j

*—• n 14 . "ro £ n 1? •

1 01

Q. Q. ? nnfi . «»

no? . t ^ v • • ^ N* * rfXM^U &, ^ n . * **^ &J»4J»J -960 •865 •870 •B75 S80 B85 B90 •B95 2000 Date

I Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

"| Surface Water | | All Flows ~| | Copper, Total | | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 244 0.0005 0.06 0.005759 0.007733

Sources Station Count Source Count

LNRD-001, Oil, 031

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R7, Periods 1,2,3

» Detects o NonDetects • PeriodBreak

OO4S •

nn4 .

=J n nvOJi5 - ^> °-

' 003 • T3 • —5 n 09^ . v> w Q"~ 0 02 - •o 5 ooi1)- _i « nm - » « « nons - t • ^>"""*j2^-»^ n. n *^t S60 •865 •B70 975 •B80 •885 •890 B95 2000 Date

(Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

Surface Water) | All Flows | | Lead, Dissolved ] | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 240 0.0005 0.026 0.001524 0.002928

Sources Station Count Source Count

LNRD-001, Oil, 031

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R7, Periods 1,2,3

• Detects ° NonDetects PeriodBreak

0.5

0.45

0.4

~ 0.35

f 0.3

$ 0.25 o 0.2

0.15

0.1

0.05

0+- •B60 965 -B70 1375 •880 •B85 •B95 2000 Date

(Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

| Surface Water] | All Flows | | Lead, Total | | mg/L |

Win Max Avg Std Dev 247 0.0005 2.721 0.016507 0.173032

Sources Station Count L Source Count LNRD-001, Oil, 031

Records off chart

Date StandardValue ResultID 5/23/1995 2.721 160663

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R7, Periods 1,2,3 ^r « Detects o NonDf

e:

4 ^ H

1

O)

"""* ^ - •o

So5 0 " w Q'JI ^9 . O c 1 5 N 1 .

0 "5 •

»* Aj.A^fc A^^ ii • 0 - •• *--• •860 B65 B70 B75 B80 -885 B90 -895 2000

n«4A

[Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

Surface Water [ | All Flows | | Zinc, Dissolved | | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 241 0.004 0.19 0.04546 0.02986 J[

Sources Station Count Source Count LNRD-001, Oil, 031

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R7, Periods 1,2,3

• Detects o NonDetects PeriodBreak

4.5

3.5

« 2.5 O

O

N 1.5

0.5

•860 •865 970 •875 •D80 B85 -890 2000 Date

ISample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

1 Surface Water"] | All Flows "| | Zinc, Total | | mg/L | Min Max Avg Std Dev 275 0.005 0.67 0.10109 0.084307

Sources Station Count | 4 | Source Count

LNRD-001, Oil, 031

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R8, Periods 1,2,3

Detects o Non Detects • • PeriodBreak

0.01

0.009

_ 0.008

g 0.007

"% 0.006

«-- 0.004

E 0.003 •o ra O

0.001 00 00 0- -B65 B70 975 B80 -B85 B90 fl95 2000 Date

ISample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

| Surface Water | | All Flows | | Cadmium, Dissolved ] | mg/L

Win Max Avg Std Dev 516 0.00005 0.01 0.000219 0.000559

Sources Station Count | 10 \ Source Count

LNRD-001, Oil, 031

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R8, Periods 1,2,3

• Detects ° NonDetects • PeriodBreak

0.1

0.09

0.07 o>

5 o

=j 0.04 E ra O 0.02

0.01

-960 B65 B70 B75 •985 B90 •B95 2000 Date <»Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units ToSurface Water | | All Flows | | Cadmium, Total | | mg/L | Min Max Avg Std Dev 594 0.00005 0.049 0.000714 0.002358

Sources Station Count Source Count

LNRD-001, Oil, 031

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R8, Periods 1,2,3

« Detects o NonDetects PeriodBreak

0.1

0.09

0.08

o> 0.07

0.06 0)

0.05

0.04

a. 0.03 o O 0.02

0.01

O-l- B60 •B65 B70 •B75 «80 «85 990 •B95 2000 Date

I Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

| Surface Water] | All Flows \ \ Copper, Dissolved | | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 466 0.0001 0.039 0.001952 0.002904

Sources Station Count Source Count

LNRD-001, Oil, 031

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R8, Periods 1,2,3

« Detects o NonDetects PeriodBreak

0.2

0.18

0.16

• 0.14

. 0.12

•§ 0.1

« 0.08 o. Q. O O 0.06

0.04

0.02

fl60 965 B70 •B75 •880 B85 B90 2000 Date

ISample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

"| Surface Water | | All Flows ~| | Copper, Total | | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 552 0.0005 0.18 0.00609 0.01201

Sources Station Count Source Count

LNRD-001, Oil, 031

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R8, Periods 1,2,3

» Detects o NonDetects • PeriodBreak

0.045

0) E 0.03

•5 0.025

0.01

0.005

•860 •B65 B70 •875 •B80 S85 •D90 •B95 2000 Date

Isample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

| Surface Water| | All Flows | | Lead, Dissolved | | mg/L

Min Max Avg Std Dev 514 0.0005 0.1677 0.001468 0.007758

Sources Station Count 11 Source Count

LNRD-001, Oil, 031

Records off chart

Date StandardValue ResultID 3/22/1996 0.1677 157799

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R8, Periods 1,2,3

« Detects o NonDetects PeriodBreak

0.5

£ 0.3

« 0.25 •2 -,- 0.2 ra 0.15

0.1

0.05

O-l— •B60 965 B75 •B80 B85 2000 Date

Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

| Surface Water~| | All Flows ~"| | Lead, Total | | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 559 0.0005 0.2 0.006725 0.015251 J Sources Station Count Source Count LNRD-001, Oil, 031

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R8, Periods 1,2,3 r • Detects o NonD<

A. -

5 35- 0) J b *-* •». •o 2 — 9 S • 0 ^ ° (A (A '

C 1 K N

n ^ .

0< it — — ^ 0 - ^ ^fcti^!^it B60 fl65 -B70 •B75 680 B85 B90 -B95 2000 rv>»n

Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

Surface Water | | All Flows [ | Zinc, Dissolved \ \ mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 457 0.001 0.226 0.037475 0.02905

Sources Station Count | 8 | Source Count

LNRD-001, Oil, 031

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R8, Periods 1,2,3

• Detects o NonDetects PeriodBreak

5

4.5

4

0 c 1.5

0.5

•D60 -B65 -870 fl75 980 •B85 B90 S95 2000 Date

mple Media Flow Period Parameter Units Surface Water) | All Flows | | Zinc, Total | | mg/L | f-. Min Max Avg Std Dev 574 0.003 0.86 0.093717 0.102489 J[ Sources Station Count Source Count

LNRD-001, Oil, 031

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R9, Periods 1,2,3 4 • Detects o NonDetects PeriodBreak \J.\J I •

n OOQ .

n nnft

O) E n fin? .

"5 n fififi . "o JJw>) nU.UU nnO^ 5 - n nn^ . _3 E n nm . •o (0 O n f\O9

A nn-i

OOSDO OO O O tmn ^^BOOIQDIO^BOC^. n - t_jf ^ ^ "\ n»|f7* B60 •865 B70 B75 •B80 •B85 •B90 •B95 2000 Date

| Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

Surface Water | | All Flows | | Cadmium, Dissolved [ | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 131 0.00005 0.004 0.000515 0.000771

Sources Station Count | 3 \ Source Count

LNRD-011, 031

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin ArkR9, Periods 1,2,3 r * Detects o NonDc D • *JD b.

n 1 .

nnft -

—i nn? • D>

o nn6; -

5 nn/i - E 're un-Uim3 . 0

nm - * * * M^ p amk. n - o Vnnmtw •^^ 0 sftl^^ B60 965 •B70 B75 B80 •B85 990 •995 2000 Date

ISample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

~\ Surface Water | | All Flows ~"| | Cadmium, Total | | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 129 0.00005 JL 0.01 J[ 0.001351 0.001919 Sources Station Count Source Count

LNRD-011, 031

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R9, Periods 1,2,3

« Detects o Non Detects • PeriodBreak

0.1

0.08

0.07

-O 0.06

". 0.04

Q.

O O 0.02

0.01

O-l- -965 -B70 •B75 -B80 fi85 B90 -995 2000

ISample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

| Surface Water | | All Flows | | Copper, Dissolved | | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 136 0.0001 0.034 0.004425 0.005618 JL Sources Station Count Source Count

LNRD-011,031

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R9, Periods 1,2,3

r « Detects ° NonD<

n 9 -,

n iw .

0 1fi •

*"- n 1/1 .

c n 19 . "5 « n 1 - i-

m 008 - O. a. » ® nofi -

nru . • « «* nn9 - / »•*. *•*^ :Jbf n . * * orfMo W • 3rV -B60 B65 •B70 •B75 •B80 •B85 B90 •B95 2000 Date

Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

1 Surface Water~| | All Flows "| | Copper, Total | | mg/L

Min Max Avg Std Dev 120 0.0015 0.07 0.010231 0.01188

Sources Station Count | 4 | Source Count

LNRD-011, 031

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R9, Periods 1,2,3

F » Detects o NonD<

OfW -

004S -

nru -

•s- U.U.3n rn<5; .

— n noc . (0 .2 •o ? n niR . » • * 001 -

m • t ° n . o * mgf orn^p S60 •B65 B70 •B75 •B80 •B85 •B90 •995 2000 Date

} Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

| Surface Water| | All Flows | | Lead, Dissolved | | mg/L

n Min Max Avg Std Dev 130 0.00025 0.069 0.001899 0.006363

Sources Station Count | 3 | Source Count

LNRD-011, 031

Records off chart

Date StandardValue ResultID 6/25/1980 0.069 241196

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R9, Periods 1,2,3

_ . ._ . r « Detects o NonD

0 *5

OAR .

04 -

OT5 -1

? 0 1 •

o "o m —^ rf\^ • • ^ n 1 . • nn"i .

0- * J^k Lk8fji ^ .«*•-. s30 965 B70 fi75 B80 fl85 B90 -995 2000 rVk^A

[Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

| Surface Water] | All Flows | | Lead, Total | | mg/L | Min Max Avg Std Dev r^ \< \\ 120 0.0005 0.019755 0.092598

Sources Station Count | 4 | Source Count

LNRD-011, 031

Records off chart

Date StandardValue ResultID 12/11/1991 168448

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin 1> Ark R9, Periods 1,2,3 w • Detects o NonD<

4 t\ -

4 •

5o>" 35•** .

"""" ^ . TJ So O "5 (0 w> Q'«!? ^0 • O c 15- N 1'5

•1 .

0 ^ •

0 - ^* * » telt * TIT* S60 B65 B70 •B75 980 •B85 -B90 •B95 2000 rv.i~

| Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

| Surface Water| | All Flows | | Zinc, Dissolved | | mg/L |

Win Max Avg Std Dev 130 0.001 9.6 0.189753 1.129426

Sources Station Count L Source Count LNRD-011, 031

Records off chart

Date StandardValue ResultID 6/19/1969 9.6 246292 10/16/1968 6.4 246183 3/17/1969 6 246252

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin ArkR9, Periods 1,2,3

• Detects o NonDetects • PeriodBreak

4.5

3-5

2.5

o c N 1.5

0.5

•B60 •D65 •B70 S75 B80 2000 Date

imple Media Flow Period Parameter Units

Surface Water | | All Flows | | Zinc, Total | | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 123 0.005 0.79 0.099146 0.123896

Sources Station Count Source Count

LNRD-011, 031

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R10, Periods 1,2,3

• Detects o NonDetects PeriodBreak

nni

0009 . _j nnnft - O) E n r\r\7 .

"5 n nnfi - "o j/inj U.UUn ne3w . 5 - nnrtd - _3 E nnm - •o n O fi rvrvp .

nnm - _^_ a • »t** ^..jj^ n - ^ ^ -B60 B65 B70 fl75 fl80 «85 S90 fl95 2000 Date

Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

Surface Water | | All Flows [ | Cadmium, Dissolved | | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 236 0.00005 0.024 0.00106 0.002341 ][ Sources Station Count Source Count

LNRD-001, Oil, 031

Records off chart

Date StandardValue ResultID 7/19/1985 0.024 344402 7/19/1985 0.021 344415

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R10, Periods 1,2,3

« Detects o NonDetects Period Break

n 1 -,

000 .

nnA -

-J 007- o> *~* nnfi . "35 o nns -

5 nrvd • E "O rino . (0 u-uo O nn9 -

001 •

0 . ^ £ jT -|.0. «50 965 S70 975 B80 fi85 -B90 •895 2000 Date

Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

Surface Water| | All Flows | | Cadmium, Total ] | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 215 0.00005 0.01 0.002318 0.00283 JL

Sources Station Count | 5 \ Source Count

LNRD-001, Oil, 031

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R10, Periods 1,2,3

« Detects o NonDetects PeriodBreak

0.1

0.09

0.08

0> 0.07

•O 0.06

8 0.05 ° 0.04

oa 0.03 O 0.02

0.01

04- B60 965 970 975 980 •885 990 995 2000 Date

Sample Media Flow Period Parameter

Surface Water"") | All Flows ~| | Copper, Dissolved | | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 214 0.0002 0.013 0.002161 JL 0.001846 Sources Station Count Source Count

LNRD-001, Oil, 031

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R10, Periods 1,2,3

_ . ._ . •F • Detects ° NonD<

0°

n 1R .

n ifi -

-—• * n id. . ^> E 0 19 -

1 01-

0> 008 • Q. Q. O 006 • • OO4 - • • nr»9 . t *

0- 9&s^iU*^. ^1^^» •a50 fl65 B70 «75 B80 B85 B90 B95 2000 Date

Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

Surface Water | | All Flows | | Copper, Total | fmg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 223 0.0005 ][ 0.43 0.007344 0.028992 Sources Station Count Source Count

LNRD-001, Oil, 031

Records off chart

Date StandardValue ResultID 6/11/1990 0.43 10608

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R10, Periods 1,2,3

» Detects o NonDetects PeriodBreak

noR -,

HOAR -

004 •

-gc;, nU.UJ msO - E *""* HIT* . •o % M (0 » « nn? -

TJ i? 001S- _l 001 - «• « nnn^ - • «» i «U * • • «• • »& . A « iV n . «» itnMMM m ^ mA 050 -B65 -B70 S75 -880 •B85 fl90 •B95 2000 Date

Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

Surface Water ] | All Flows | | Lead, Dissolved | | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 232 0.00025 0.022 0.001655 0.002035

Sources Station Count Source Count

LNRD-001, Oil, 031

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R10, Periods 1,2,3

• Detects o NonDetects PeriodBreak

n R -,

ftA^ .

ft A. .

ft *V> - _l |> 03-

"*5 ftO* . £ •o u09-* - (0 0) — ' n 1*1 -

0 1 - « 006 - * « . n - 9**** f -n Ar«f — -^ • *^^fc^»*^i^^ «30 B65 -870 B75 "880 •B85 -B90 B95 2000 Date

Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

Surface Water) | All Flows | | Lead, Total | | mg/L |

Win Max Avg Std Dev 216 0.0005 0.08 0.004015 0.006399

Sources Station Count Source Count

LNRD-001, Oil, 031

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R10, Periods 1,2,3 «> • Detects o NonDetects PeriodBreak

4.5

0)

d)

Iw " M

O N

0.5

0-1— •960 S65 -B70 •B75 B80 -B85 -990 -B95 2000 Date

Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

Surface Water | | All Flows | [ Zinc, Dissolved | | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 201 0.0005 0.12 0.010528 0.014209

Sources Station Count Source Count

LNRD-001, Oil, 031

Records off chart

8/26/2002 Arkansas River Basin Ark R10, Periods 1,2,3

• Detects o NonDetects PeriodBreak

5

4.5

4

-. 3-5 _J

1 3 5 2.5

u c N 1.5

1

0.5

•B60 B65 •870 B75 •B80 985 •B90 B95 2000 Date

Sample Media Flow Period Parameter Units

Surface Water] | All Flows | | Zinc, Total | | mg/L |

Min Max Avg Std Dev 241 0.001 0.515 0.017133 0.035346

Sources Station Count Source Count

LNRD-001, Oil, 031

Records off chart

8/26/2002 APPENDIX J Terrestrial White Paper UPPER ARKANSAS RIVER BASIN SITE CHARACTERIZATION REPORT - SUPPORTING ANALYSIS: CHARACTERIZATION OF THE POTENTIAL FOR INJURY TO MAMMALIAN WILDLIFE TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 PATHWAYS 2 2.1 Conceptual Model 2 3.0 SUMMARY OF AVAILABLE DATA 3 4.0 CHARACTERIZATION OF POTENTIAL INJURY 5 4.1 Small Mammals 6 4.1.1 Histopathology 6 4.1.2 Metal Concentrations in Tissues 8 4.1.3 Conclusions - Small Mammals 10 4.2 Large Mammals 11 4.2.1 Characterization of Potential Injury -Concentration-Based Benchmarks for Forage 13 4.2.2 Characterization of Potential Injury - Estimated Metal Ingestion Rates. 13 4.2.3 Conclusions - Large Mammals 15 5.0 REFERENCES 17 1.0 INTRODUCTION

This paper supplements analysis of potential injury to mammalian wildlife presented in the Site Characterization Report (SCR) prepared for the 11-Mile Reach of the Upper Arkansas River Basin near Leadville, Colorado. The Consulting Team (CT) was tasked with reviewing the existing data for the 11- Mile Reach and describing injuries to natural resources based upon that information. This supplemental analysis is consistent with the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) Work Plan for the SCR and considers the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) regulations [43 CFR 11].

According to NRDA regulations [43 CFR 11.62(f)(3)], determining injury to biological resources, including mammalian wildlife, must be based on establishing a statistically significant difference in response levels between the population in the study area and that of a control area. The regulations also define specific categories of injury for biological resources and state that injury determination must be based on measurement methodologies that are capable of demonstrating the specific biological response under consideration. For the 11-Mile Reach, there are limited data that allow for direct determination of injury to mammalian wildlife. Because there are limitations in the amount and extent of injury-specific data, the existing information is combined with data from the nearby California Gulch Superfund Site and information from the ecotoxicological literature to characterize the potential for injury to mammals using a weight-of-evidence approach consistent with ecological risk assessment methodologies (e.g., USEPA 1997b). In general, this includes evaluation and comparison of known and estimated exposure of wildlife to ecotoxicological benchmarks corresponding to known levels of toxicity. This approach is consistent with the goals of the MOU, and the approach that the CT has taken in the SCR. This paper describes available information that is applicable to characterizing the potential for adverse effects in mammals, and summarizes the potential for injury in response to a series of questions from the MOU Parties (see Attachment A). 2.0 PATHWAYS

2.1 Conceptual Model

A conceptual model describes the sources of contamination and the pathways by which resources of concern could be exposed to contaminants. A complete pathway, which results in an exposure, does not necessarily constitute an injury to natural resources as defined in DOI's NRDA regulations. The exposure must elicit an effect or response which can be measured and which is statistically different between the study area and a control area.

Conceptual models for exposure of mammals in the 11-Mile Reach have been described in two ecological risk assessments (ERAs) (Woodward Clyde 1993; USEPA 1997a). The primary sources of contamination in the 11 -Mile Reach are mining and mineral processing wastes from the Leadville mining district. ERAs have shown that the primary chemicals of concern in the 11-Mile Reach are the metals cadmium, lead, and zinc.

Historically, California Gulch has been a major pathway for transport of solid and soluble forms of the metals to downgradient areas; including the Arkansas River. Periodic flooding has resulted in deposition of mine wastes along the river. In addition, floodplain soils may have been affected by overland runoff and irrigation of pasturelands with contaminated water. Mammals may be exposed to metals through direct contact with mine wastes or secondarily through contaminated surface water, soil, or sediment; or through ingestion of forage or prey that may have accumulated metals from biotic and abiotic sources. Injuries to surface water, soil, sediment and vegetation that comprise habitat for mammalian wildlife are described and evaluated in the SCR.

The frequency and duration of contact with contaminated media are important in characterizing the potential for injury to mammalian wildlife. Habitat quality and availability in contaminated areas are major factors affecting the frequency and duration of contact. This is especially true for large, mobile species such as elk, deer, and coyotes that range over large areas and may spend only a portion of their time in the area of concern. Smaller, less mobile species such as rodents (e.g., mice and voles) and lagomorphs (e.g., rabbits) range over smaller areas and may contact contaminated media more frequently. 3.0 SUMMARY OF AVAILABLE DATA

Information available to characterize the potential for injury to mammals includes histopathological data for small mammals in the 11-Mile Reach, data on target organ metal concentrations, and metal concentrations in exposure media (e.g. soil, water, vegetation). In addition, similar data are available from nearby areas in the California Gulch Superfund Site (but outside the 11- Mile Reach), and information from the ecotoxicological literature can be used to characterize the potential for injury based on exposure estimates.

Site-specific information from the 11-Mile Reach and the upstream reference area (Reach 0) includes: • Histopathological analyses of vole and short-tailed weasel tissue samples from Reaches 0 and 2 (WCC 1993); • Metal concentrations in kidney and liver tissue from small mammals (WCC 1993); and • Metal concentrations in vegetation, soil, and water in Reaches 1, 2, and 3 (Keammerer 1987; Levy et al. 1992; WCC 1993).

Data from outside the 11-Mile Reach, but within the nearby California Gulch Superfund Site include: • Histopathological analyses of mouse, vole, and chipmunk tissue samples from several locations with varying levels of mine waste contamination (WCC 1993; Stoller 1996); • Metal concentrations in kidney and liver tissue from small mammals (WCC 1993; Stoller 1996); and • Metal concentrations in vegetation, soil, and water (WCC 1993; Stoller 1996).

Data available from the scientific literature include ecotoxicological benchmarks for:

• Metal concentrations in mammalian tissues from laboratory and field studies; • Metal concentrations in mammalian tissues associated with specific effects; • Metal intake rates [i.e., Toxicity Reference Values (TRVs)]; and • Metal concentrations in forage and prey items.

The above information is used to help evaluate whether metal concentrations in mammal tissues or abiotic media in the 11-Mile Reach are consistent with nearby conditions for which more data on injury are available. In some cases, the data from the California Gulch Superfund Site reflect higher metal concentrations and bioavailability than in the 11-Mile Reach, and represent a reasonable worst-case scenario. The characterization is further supported by literature-based ecotoxicological benchmarks that correspond to known levels of toxicity and/or injury.

Data on metal content and histopathology in larger mammals (e.g. elk, deer, fox) are lacking for the 11-Mile Reach. However, data on injury to small mammals are available to help characterize the potential for injury to larger species that are more mobile and spend less of their life cycles in the 11-Mile Reach. 4.0 CHARACTERIZATION OF POTENTIAL INJURY

The CT's characterization of the potential for injury to mammals follows a weight-of-evidence approach consistent with DOI's NRDA regulations and EPA's ecological risk assessment methodologies. Histopathological data from the 11-Mile Reach and from Reach 0 are used to directly assess injury to small mammals. The histopathologic data is important because the presence of lesions in biological tissues associated with contaminants exposure is specifically identified as an injury in the NRDA regulations [43 CFR 11.62(f)(4)(vi)(D)]. Because there is a limited amount of injury-specific data, other types of data are used as supporting weight-of-evidence to evaluate the uncertainty associated with the small histopathological data set.

Metal concentrations in kidney and liver samples are compared to ecotoxicological benchmarks that are associated with known levels of histopathological or physiological dysfunction. Internal organ and soft tissue malformation and histological lesions are the most common metals effects reported in the literature and associated with benchmark values. Several recently published secondary sources report benchmark values for wild mammals that are based on comprehensive reviews of field and laboratory studies (Hoffman et al. 1995; Beyer et al. 1996; Eisler 2000; Shore and Rattner 2001). A large number of laboratory and field studies were reviewed and it was determined that the majority of the literature is consistent with the benchmarks and associated effects presented in these secondary sources. Of the studies reviewed, most of the mammalian studies, which evaluated metals exposure and accumulation, were conducted on mining impacted sites and are therefore appropriate for consideration in the Upper Arkansas River Basin (UARB).

To further evaluate the level of uncertainty associated with limited histopathological data, metal concentrations in vegetation, small mammals, soil, and water are used to estimate the rate at which wildlife may ingest metals while feeding and drinking. These estimates are compared to TRVs, which are intake rates corresponding to known toxicological effects or lack thereof (EPA 1993, 1997b; Eisler 2000).

In addition to data collected from the 11-Mile Reach, information from California Gulch and the scientific literature are used to help evaluate the potential for injury to mammals in the 11-Mile Reach. Because of the proximity to mine-waste tailings and smelter residues, data from California Gulch reflect higher metal concentrations and greater bioavailability than conditions in the 11-Mile Reach and, therefore, represent a worse case scenario that can be used as a point of comparison. The characterization was further developed by comparing non-injury specific data from both the 11-Mile Reach and California Gulch to literature-based ecotoxicological benchmarks that correspond to known levels of toxicity and/or injury. This includes benchmarks comparable to metal concentrations in tissues as described above, as well as dose-based (i.e., intake) benchmarks that are commonly used in ERAs.

4.1 Small Mammals

4.1.1 Histopathology

WCC (1993) sampled small mammals from locations in Reach 2, the California Gulch Superfund Site outside the 11-Mile Reach, and nearby reference areas along Tennessee Creek and the upper Arkansas River (Reach 0). Approximately 28 tissues from each of 36 animals were examined histologically using light microscopy. From Reach 2, WCC collected four southern red-backed voles (Clethrionomys gapperi), two long-tailed voles (Microtus longicaudatus^and two short-tailed weasels (Mustela ermined) for histological analysis. Samples from Reach 0 included four red-backed voles and five long-tailed voles.

The sampling locations in Reach 2 were irrigated pastures downstream of the confluence of California Gulch with the Arkansas River and reflect contamination from deposition of mine wastes, floodwater, and/or irrigation water. Data on soils and vegetation indicate that the animals were potentially exposed to elevated metal concentrations in soil and vegetation. The animals were collected from sites where mean metal concentrations in floodplain soils were 36 ppm cadmium, 968 ppm copper, 4,665 ppm lead, and 6,055 ppm zinc, representing some of the highest concentrations along the 11-Mile Reach. To a lesser extent, concentrations of the same metals were elevated in vegetation.

As noted, data from WCC (1993) are directly applicable to characterizing injury in the 11-Mile Reach. Besides the direct applicability for evaluating injury, these data were collected from an area of confirmed mine waste with contamination-level metal concentrations and from potentially mixed sources/transport mechanisms. In addition, vegetation from the area contains elevated metal concentrations creating a true metals exposure scenario. The data set also includes samples from reference areas of similar habitat.

Results of WCC's histologic analysis indicated no abnormal histopathology or injury that could be attributed to metals exposure. Although the kidney is the primary site of toxic action of cadmium,

6 WCC did not submit kidneys for histopathology from any of the animals collected. Based on the experience of the pathologist who conducted these analyses (Dr. Terry Spraker, Colorado State University), lesions associated with cadmium exposure would not be expected at the tissue concentrations found in these animals (T. Spraker, Pers. Comm.). This conclusion (that tissue lesions would not be expected to occur at the cadmium concentrations present in vole kidney tissues from Reaches 0 and 2) is also supported by the ecotoxicological literature (Cooke and Johnson 1996; Eisler 2000; Ma and Talmage 2001).

WCC (1993) also collected liver and kidney samples from areas on the Superfund Site (St. Josephs Cemetery and Hamm's Mill) in which soils metal concentrations were higher than those found in the 11-Mile Reach. Cadmium, lead, and zinc concentrations in kidney and liver samples from these Superfund Site locations were equal to or higher than concentrations from Reach 2. Despite the higher concentrations in soils and equivalent or higher concentrations in tissues, kidney and liver samples from the Superfund Site locations did not exhibit abnormal histopathology that could be attributed to metal toxicity. This supports the view that there is low risk of this type of injury for small mammals in the 11- Mile Reach, Based on this information, the absence of kidney histologic analysis is not critical to evaluating small mammal injury for the WCC data set.

Histopathological analyses of small mammal liver and kidney tissue are also available from Upper California Gulch (Stoller 1996). Upper California Gulch is part of the Superfund Site and contains soils, mill tailing and waste rock with varying metal concentrations. Sample locations included uplands as well as locations containing fluvial tailings deposits and waste rock in riparian areas. A total of twenty-five animals including primarily least chipmunks (Eutamias minumus) and deer mice (Peromyscus maniculatus), but also a southern red-backed vole and a long-tailed vole were collected from locations representing a wide range of metal contamination. Animals were collected directly from waste rock and tailing piles; from locations near, but not on waste piles; and from sites remote from waste piles in the study area and reference area (Iowa Gulch). In samples from all locations, results indicated "minimal" to "slight" occurrence of lesions. Neither the frequency nor intensity of lesions was correlated with proximity to mine waste deposits. These results indicate that these animals showed no signs of histopathological injury due to metals exposure.

Limitations affecting use of the WCCs (1993) histopathological data include low sample number (6 animals) and lack of data from other locations in the 11-Mile Reach. In addition, small mammal data from Reach 2 are for herbivorous vole species only. The Stoller (1996) data are not from the 11-Mile Reach, but samples were collected from a gradient of contamination including animals inhabiting waste rock piles with high metal concentrations (cadmium over 100 ppm, lead over 40,000 ppm, and zinc over 15,000 ppm); as well as areas of nearby soils with lower metal concentrations. The histopathology results can be used in conjunction with data on metal concentrations in liver, kidney, soils, and vegetation in the weight of evidence approach to characterize the potential for injury. Limitations on use of the Stoller (1996) data include the lack of samples from the 11-Mile Reach and the lack of data from species other than granivorous/herbivorous species.

Insectivorous species such as shrews, may accumulate more cadmium than granivores (seed eaters) and herbivores (vegetation eaters) because terrestrial insects (their main dietary component) generally accumulate higher cadmium concentrations than vegetation (Cooke and Johnson 1996). Several shrew species potentially occur in the Upper Arkansas River Valley. WCC (1993) captured 3 montane shrews (Sorex monticolus) during their small mammal trapping effort to determine relative abundance, but they did not capture any shrews when they sampled for tissue collection.

4.1.2 Metal Concentrations in Tissues

It is generally accepted that diagnosis of metals poisoning as cause of death is established through a synthesis of necropsy observations, pathological findings, and tissue concentrations. Death (from metal poisoning) cannot be diagnosed on the basis of tissue concentrations only, but metal poisoning can be diagnosed from concentrations if sufficient data exist from the same or related species showing a relation between illness and concentrations (Franson 1996). Metal concentrations in biological tissues are not a direct measure of injury endpoints cited in DOI's NRDA regulations. However, toxicological studies of metal exposure have resulted in estimates of tissue metal concentrations that are correlated with histological effects and/or adverse physiological and biochemical effects. These types of effects are specific injury categories cited in the NRDA regulations. Thus, benchmark concentrations can be used in conjunction with tissue concentrations in samples from the site and reference areas to support the direct measures of injury and further characterize the potential for injury due to metals exposure. Metals are not degraded by metabolism; therefore, measure of metal concentrations in target organs is a relatively direct measure of exposure. As noted above, kidney and liver are important sites of metal toxicity in vertebrates. Therefore, data on metal residues in kidney and liver can be used to characterize the risk of adverse effects and the potential for injury. Benchmark levels cited in the following discussion were taken from 1996 summaries of scientific literature on cadmium and lead toxicity in small mammals (Cooke and Johnson 1996, Ma 1996). For cadmium, Cooke and Johnson (1996) recommend 100 mg/Kg (wet wt) (350 mg/Kg dry wt) as critical concentration in kidneys of small mammals. No analogous recommendations for cadmium in liver tissue were provided since the kidney is the primary target organ in cadmium toxicity. For lead, Ma (1996) cites concentrations of 6 to 10 mg/Kg (dry wt) in kidney and 2.5 to 5 mg/Kg (dry wt) in liver as no-observed- adverse-effects levels (NOAELs) for effects ranging from changes in the somatic organ index to reproductive effects.

Data on metal residues in small mammal kidney and liver samples from Reach 0 and Reach 2 are available from WCC (1993). For Reach 2, there are individual and composite liver and kidney samples from voles and short-tailed weasels (Table 1). For Reach 0, there are kidney and liver composite samples from voles only (Table 2). Ideally, composite samples represent an average value of those individuals making up the composite sample. However, the variability around that average value is unknown as is the case with the composite samples submitted by WCC (1993). As with the histopathology studies, chemical residue data are also available from other sampling locations in California Gulch outside the 11- Mile Reach (WCC 1993; Stoller 1996). Data are available for red-backed voles, long-tailed voles, deer mice, and least chipmunks from locations representing a wide range of metal concentrations in soils.

Kidney cadmium concentrations in small mammals did not exceed NOAEL, lowest observed, adverse effect level (LOAEL), or critical concentrations associated with injury in small mammals (Figure 1). Maximum cadmium concentrations in kidneys from Reach 0 or Reach 2 did not approach the 350 mg/Kg (dry wt) critical concentration identified by Cooke and Johnson (1996). The maximum cadmium concentration identified in Reach 2 was 39 mg/Kg dry wt. (11.1 mg/Kg wet wt), while the maximum concentrations from the entire WCC study was 69 mg/Kg dry wt. (19.7 mg/Kg wet wt) (WCC 1993, Table 7-15). The maximum cadmium concentration in surface soils co-located with small mammal samples was approximately 55 mg/Kg. By contrast, the maximum cadmium concentration in chipmunk kidneys from Upper California Gulch was 119 mg/Kg dry wt. (34 mg/Kg wet wt.) and was associated with concentrations in surface soil of less than 15 mg/Kg (Stoller 1996, Figure 3-8).

These results indicate that maximum cadmium concentrations in small mammals from Reach 2, and from the overall Superfund site do not exceed the recommended threshold concentrations for physiological and histopathological effects (Cooke and Johnson 1996). In addition, the results suggest that overall cadmium bioavailability from soils and plant materials may be less along the 11-Mile Reach than in some areas of the Superfund Site.

Lead concentrations in liver and kidney also did not exceed concentrations associated with ecologically important effects (Figure 2). The maximum concentration in kidney and liver was approximately equal to NOAEL-based concentrations for sublethal effects. Lead was detected in only one of three liver samples collected from Reach 0 and Reach 2 (Detection Limit <0.5 mg/Kg)(WCC 1993).

Limitations of chemical residue data from the WCC (1993) study are similar to those cited for histopathology. The sample size for 11-Mile Reach is small, and samples are not available from segments downstream of Reach 2. However, the samples represent maximal, or near maximal exposures for the 11- Mile Reach.

Only herbivorous voles were included in the WCC samples, and only granivorous/herbivorous chipmunks were collected from Upper California Gulch. Small mammals with more insectivorous diets, such as shrews, might be expected to accumulate greater amounts of cadmium (Cooke and Johnson 1996; Ma and Talmage 2001). Based on data from the literature, cadmium accumulation in shrew kidneys can be more than 25 times that of herbivorous rodents (Cooke and Johnson 1996). Tissues from the captured shrews in the 11-Mile Reach were not analyzed, but concentrations 25 times that of vole kidneys would exceed Cooke and Johnson's critical levels for adverse effects on renal function and structure, and may be consistent with a positive injury determination. However, the literature also indicates that in comparison to rodents, shrews may be more resistant to cadmium exposure through a greater metallothionein-related detoxication capacity of the target organs (i.e., liver and kidney) (Shore and Douben 1994; Cooke and Johnson 1996; Eisler 2000; Ma and Talmage 2001). Therefore, literature-based benchmarks used for rodents may not be appropriate for insectivores such as shrews and it is unclear whether the concentrations present at the site cause injury to shrews.

4.1.3 Conclusions - Small Mammals

Data are available for directly evaluating injury to small mammals in the 11-Mile Reach, although sample sizes are small and geographical coverage is limited. Six samples of voles are available from Reach 0 and Reach 2. Overall, histopathological analyses of these samples show no injury to small

10 mammals in either Reach 0 or Reach 2. While the kidney is the primary organ associated with cadmium toxicity in mammals, kidneys were not analyzed for histopathology in samples collected from Reach 0 or Reach 2. The small sample size, limited geographical coverage, and lack of kidney histological analysis creates some uncertainty in the data; however, this uncertainty is reduced by the following:

(1) Metal concentrations in kidney and liver samples from Reach 2 samples did not exceed benchmarks associated with physiological and histopathological effects; (2) Samples from the Superfund Site (areas of potentially higher exposure) also did not contain metal concentrations in excess of benchmarks and; (3) Samples from the Superfund site (areas of potentially higher exposure) did not exhibit liver or kidney histopathology, which could be related to effects from metals exposure.

The results from each of these three data sets are consistent with each other and support the results reported by WCC (1993). While none of these data sets alone are sufficient to evaluate injury, the weight-of-evidence provided by one injury-specific data set and three supporting data sets lends more confidence to the overall injury assessment.

Species with more insectivorous diets, such as shrews, may have higher exposures due to higher dietary cadmium concentrations, but data are not available for direct evaluation of these species. Existing literature indicates that benchmarks appropriate for rodents may not be appropriate for insectivores, as insectivores appear to be more tolerant of increased metals exposure.

The apparent lack of effects on individual small mammals receiving maximal or near-maximal metals exposure indicates a corresponding lack of injury to local populations in the 11-Mile Reach. Additional samples would reduce the uncertainty in evaluating potential injury, but may not significantly aid in restoration planning for the 11-Mile Reach (see SCR).

4.2 Large Mammals

Tissue metal data and histopathology analyses for larger mammals (e.g., elk, deer, fox) are not available for the 11-Mile Reach. However, the potential for injury to large mammals was characterized by evaluating exposure through the comparison of metal concentrations in forage and estimates of metal intake rates to benchmarks values. In addition, data on injury to small mammal populations was used to

11 help evaluate the potential for injury to larger species that are more mobile and spend less of their life- cycles in the 11-Mile Reach. Because small mammals have a relatively small home range, they are likely to receive a more constant exposure to contaminated media. The 11-Mile Reach is a ribbon of habitat within the Upper Arkansas River Basin and it is expected that larger mammals will migrate through and may spend periods of time there. However, large mammal exposure will be considerably less as compared to that of small mammals.

Generally, data for direct measurement of injury to large mammals are not available, and characterizing the potential for injury is more difficult and uncertain. In the absence of data on histopathology or metal residues in tissues, the potential for injury can be estimated using risk assessment techniques in which the intake of metals is calculated and compared to benchmark intakes of known toxicity to the receptor or similar species. Data on metal content in food and other ingested materials is used along with estimates of the daily intake of each medium (Alldredge et al. 1974; EPA 1993, 1997; Beyer etal. 1994).

Large mammals of greatest concern in the 11-Mile Reach are elk (Cervus elaphus) and mule deer (Odecoileus hemionus). Elk and mule deer use the 11-Mile Reach seasonally during fall and winter, but migrate to higher elevations in spring and summer. However, a few individuals may remain through spring and summer. Elk feed both by grazing on grasses and forbs, and browsing on woody vegetation (Fitzgerald 1994). Deer are primarily browsers, but opportunistically feed on grasses and forbs (Fitzgerald 1994). Ungulates could be exposed to metals in forage plants, incidentally ingested soils, and, to a lesser extent, in surface waters. Data on metal content of grasses, forbs, and shrubs (e.g., willows) are available from Reach 0, 1, 2 and 3; grass and forb data are available from more downstream areas. Vegetation data are from Keammerer (1987) and were collected from locations in the floodplain, but distinct from mine waste deposits. Soils in these areas contain elevated metals concentrations, which tend to decrease with distance downstream from Reach 1.

Carnivorous mammals such as the coyote (Canis latrans), red fox (Vulpes wipes), North American badger (Taxidea taxus), and short-tailed weasel (Mustela ermined) also inhabit the 11-Mile Reach. Individual fox and coyote occupy large areas ranging from several hundred to over 3,000 hectares (USEPA 1993; Fitzgerald 1994). Badgers and weasels have more restricted home ranges and individual may spend a large proportion of their time in the 11-Mile Reach. Coyotes, badgers, fox, and weasels are primary carnivorous, feeding on small mammals and birds. Small mammal whole-body data from California Gulch (Stoller 1996; USEPA 1997a) and other mine sites suggest that metals are not

12 effectively translocated to the primary prey of these species, thus bioaccumulation is low limiting the potential for metals exposure to predators.

The potential for injury can be characterized by comparing the potential metals exposure of large mammals to ecotoxicologically-based benchmarks. This was conducted using two approaches: (1) comparing metal concentrations in forage plants to benchmarks from the scientific literature and (2) estimating daily intake of metals from forage foods and soils, and comparing the intakes to TRVs which represent rates corresponding to known levels of toxicity and injury (EPA 1993, 1997b, Eisler 2000).

4.2.1 Characterization of Potential Injury -Concentration-Based Benchmarks for Forage

There are few ecotoxicological benchmarks available for wild ungulates, therefore, benchmark metal concentrations recommended for ruminant wildlife and livestock forage or feed are used (Table 3). The most complete data set available for chemical concentrations in vegetation in the 11-mile reach is that of Keammerer (1987). Metal concentrations in vegetation for Reaches 0, 1,2, and 3 are shown in Table 4. Except for lead, metal concentrations tended to be higher in forbs than in grasses. Mean metal concentrations were less than benchmarks for all metals except cadmium. Mean cadmium concentration exceeded the lowest benchmark of 0.5 mg/Kg for livestock (NAS 1980; Church 1988; Eisler 2000) in all reaches, including Reach 0. Cadmium exceeded the no-effects criterion (3-5 mg/Kg) in only Reach 3, and concentrations did not exceed those associated with mild renal dysfunction (10 mg/Kg) in any reach.

Cadmium concentrations in vegetation, especially forbs, were not significantly higher in Reach 1 or 2 than in Reach 0. Forb cadmium concentrations were highest in Reach 3, but differences may not be significant. These results suggest that concentrations in the downstream sampling locations are not different from Reach 0 (Figure 3), and that the corresponding potential for injury from cadmium in vegetation does not differ from baseline conditions represented by Reach 0.

4.2.2 Characterization of Potential Injury - Estimated Metal Ingestion Rates

The potential for injury to large mammals was characterized using standard risk assessment methodology to estimate the ingestion of metals in food and incidentally ingested soils (USEPA 1993, 1997b). The ingestion rates were then compared to TRVs representing known levels of potential toxicity and injury. The characterization was phased, starting with a screening-level analysis (USEPA 1997b),

13 which includes conservative assumptions about exposure (i.e., ingestion) and toxicity (i.e., most sensitive endpoints) in order to minimize the chance of underestimating the potential for injury.

The potential for injury was characterized for mule deer to represent grazing/browsing ungulates. Mule deer were selected because they feed on a variety of vegetation types in the area and may remain in the valley lowland for longer periods of time than elk, which migrate to higher elevations for a large proportion of the year. Mule deer food and incidental soil ingestion rates were taken from the scientific literature:

• Food ingestion rate: 0.02 Kg food/Kg bw/day (Alldredge et al. 1974) • Soil ingestion rate: 0.0004 Kg soil/Kg bw/day (Beyer et al. 1994)

Conservative assumptions about bioavailability and contact rate were also used:

• Assuming that 100 percent of metal ingested in food is absorbed (i.e., 100 percent bioavailability) • The receptor obtains 100 percent of food and incidentally ingested soil from the 11 -Mile Reach

Both of these assumptions tend to overestimate exposure since only a small fraction of ingested metals is generally absorbed from the intestinal lumen (Klaassen 1995; Cooke and Johnson 1996; Eisler 2000), and individual animals are unlikely to feed exclusively in the 11-Mile Reach.

Estimated ingestion rates were compared to the following NOAEL-based TRVs:

• Cadmium: 0.27 mg/Kg bw/day (Sutou et al. 1980 as cited in Sample et al. 1996) • Lead: 5 mg/Kg bw/day (Horwitt and Cowgill 1971) • Zinc: 45 mg/Kg bw/day (Schlicker and Cox 1968 as cited in Sample et al. 1996)

Risk of adverse effect was characterized using the hazard quotient approach (HQ)(USEPA 1997b). The HQ is the ratio of estimated site exposure to the TRY (i.e. [site exposure] / [TRY]). An HQ greater than 1 indicates site exposures that exceed the TRY. NOAELs represent concentrations below those expected to elicit adverse effects; the threshold exposure for inducing effects is higher than the NOAEL and lies between it and the LOAEL. Since the TRVs used in this characterization are based on NOAELs for sublethal systemic or reproductive effects and chronic exposure durations, an HQ less than 1 is indicative of conditions under which no effects are expected. The conservatism of using NOAEL-

14 based TRVs is compounded by that associated with the exposure estimation methods (i.e., 100 percent bioavailability, 100 percent site use).

Exposures and risk were estimated for ingestion of cadmium, lead, and zinc in Reaches 0, 1,2, and 3. The exposure point concentrations in forage plants and soil were assumed to be the mean +1 standard error for each reach (Tables 4 and 5). Since the exposure and risk estimates are based on conservative, screening-level assumptions, this approach is consistent with the methods used to characterize injury to plants in floodplain soils.

Calculations and HQs are shown in Table 6, and HQs are summarized in Figure 4. No HQs exceeded 0.6 for any metal or reach, indicating that exposures are not expected to exceed NOAELs. This result can be further interpreted as indicating a very low likelihood of injury to ungulates feeding in the 11-Mile Reach, and an even lower likelihood of significant injury or adverse effects on local populations.

4.2.3 Conclusions - Large Mammals

Data on metal concentrations in vegetation suggest that ruminant herbivores such as mule deer and elk are at some risk from cadmium concentrations in vegetation that exceed the lower range of recommended levels (0.5 mg/Kg) for livestock (NAS 1980; Church 1988; Eisler 2000). However, Church (1988) also indicates that cattle are not affected by cadmium concentrations of 3-5 mg/Kg, suggesting that this range may be more appropriate for characterizing injury. Although cadmium concentration tend to be higher in samples from downstream reaches, cadmium concentrations in grasses and forbs from Reach 1, 2, and 3 are not significantly higher than Reach 0 samples, suggesting that the risk of injury in downstream reaches may not be greater than baseline. Estimations of cadmium intake from ingestion of forage and soils from each reach do not exceed NOAEL-based TRVs for mammals, even when conservative screening-level assumptions are used to estimate intake.

Results from small mammals data also suggests that risk of injury to large mammals is minimal. Small mammals occupy much more restricted home ranges than larger, more mobile species. Therefore, individuals that occupy contaminated areas experience much longer duration exposures. The lack of effects observed in small mammals from Reach 2 and the Superfund site suggests that larger species are not at risk.

15 As noted above, this approach is not a direct measure of injury to large mammals. Rather, it helps characterize the potential for injury based on application of general toxicological information to site conditions. Conservative assumptions were used in the exposure and risk estimation process to minimize the likelihood that the risk of injury is underestimated. The effects of this conservatism are illustrated by comparing the estimates of exposure and risk generated by EPA in the site wide ERA (USEPA 1997), to the actual effects described in this document. EPA's assessments shows hazard indices between 10 and 100 in Reach 1 and 2. However, the exposure assessment presented above, combined with information on small mammals, is not consistent with significant risk to mammalian wildlife in the 11-Mile Reach.

Taken together, these results suggest that individual ruminants are not likely to be injured in the 11-Mile Reach unless they feed exclusively in the areas of highest contamination. Elk and deer populations that utilize the 11-Mile Reach are not likely to be injured due to the small proportion of the 11-Mile Reach that is covered by mine wastes and the fact that they do not continually utilize the contaminated areas.

16 5.0 REFERENCES

Alldredge, A.W., J.F. Lipscomb, and F.W. Wicker. 1974. Forage intake rates of mule deer estimated with fallout cesium-137. J. Wildl. Manage. 38:508-816.

Beyer, W.N., G Heinz, and A. W. Redmond-Norwood (Editors). 1996. Environmental Contaminants in Wildlife: Interpreting Tissue Concentrations. SETAC Special Publication Series. Lewis Publishers. Beyer, W.N., E.E. Connor, and S. Gerould. 1994. Estimates of soil ingestion by wildlife. J. Wildl. Manage. 58:375-382.

Church, D.C. 1988. The Ruminant Animal-Digestive Physiology and Nutrition. Prentice Hall, New Jersey.

Cooke, J.A. and M.S. Johnson. 1996. Cadmium in small mammals. In: Environmental Contaminants in Wildlife: Interpreting Tissue Concentrations. Beyer, W.N., G.H. Heinz, and A.W. Redmon- Norwood (eds.). SETAC Special Publication Series. Lewis Publishers.

Eisler, R. 2000. Handbook of Chemical Risk Assessment: Health Hazards to Humans, Plants, and Animals. Volume 1 Metals, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 738 pp.

Eisler, R. 1985. Cadmium hazards to Fish, Wildlife, and Invertebrates: A Synoptic Review. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Report 85(1.2) 46 pp.

Eisler, R. 1988. Lead Hazards to Fish Wildlife And Invertebrates: A Synoptic Review. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Report 85 (1.14) 134 pp.

Eisler, R. 1993. Zinc Hazards to Fish Wildlife And Invertebrates: A Synoptic Review. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Biological Report 10, 106 pp.

Fitzgerald, J.P., C.A. Meaney, and D.M. Armstrong. 1994. Mammals of Colorado. Denver Museum of Natural History, University Press of Colorado 467 pp.

Franson, J.C. 1996 . Cadmium in small mammals. In: Environmental Contaminants in Wildlife: Interpreting Tissue Concentrations. Beyer, W.N., G.H. Heinz, and A.W. Redmond-Norwood (eds.). SETAC Special Publication Series. Lewis Publishers.

Hoffman, D.J., B.A. Rartner, G.A. Burton Jr., J. Cairns Jr. (Editors). 1995. Handbook of Ecotoxicology. CRC Press Inc., Boca Raton, Florida.

Horwitt, M.K., and C.R. Cowgill. 1931. The effects of ingested lead on the organism: H. Studies on the dog. J. Pharmacol. Exper. Therapy. 66:289-301.

Keammerer, W. 1987. Vegetation Studies in the Upper Arkansas River. Unpublished data collected for Asarco.

Levy, D. E., K.A. Barbarick, E.G. Seimer, L.E. Somers. 1992. Distribution and Partitioning of Trace Metals in Contaminated Soils Near Leadville, CO. J. Environ. Quality 21:185-195.

17 Ma, W., and S. Talmage. 2001. Insectivora. In: Ecotoxicology of Wild Mammals. Shore, R.F. and B.A. Rattner (eds.)- pp!23-158. Ecological and Environmental Toxicology Series. John Wiley and Sons LtD, West Sussex, England.

Ma, W. 1996. Lead in mammals. In: Environmental Contaminants in Wildlife: Interpreting Tissue Concentrations. Beyer, W.N., G.H. Heinz, and A.W. Redmon-Norwood (eds.). pp. 281-296. SETAC Special Publication Series. Lewis Publishers.

NAS. 1980. Mineral Tolerance of Domestic Animals. National Academy of Sciences, Washington D.C. 577pp.

Klaasen, C.D. 1995. Casarett and Doulls Toxicology, the Basic Science of Poisons, 5th edition. McGraw- Hill Health Professions Division.

Sample, B.E., D.M. Opresko, and G.W. Suter II. 1996. Toxicological benchmarks for wildlife. 1996 revision. Prepared for the US Department of Energy by Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc. ES/ER/TM-86/R3.

Schlicker, S. A. and D. H. Cox. 1968. Maternal dietary zinc, and development and zinc, iron, and copper content of the rat fetus. J. Nutr. 95: 287-294.

Shore, R.F. and B. A. Rattner (Editors). 2001. Ecotoxicology of Wild Mammals. John Wiley and Sons, West Sussex, England.

Shore, R.F. and P.E.T. Douben. 1994. The Ecotoxicological Significance of Cadmium Intake and Residues in Terrestrial Small Mammals. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, 29:101-113.

Spraker, T. 2001. Personal Communication with Dr. Terry Spraker, Pathologist, Veterinary Teaching Hospital, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO.

Sutou, S., K. Yamamoto, H. Sendota, and M. Sugiyama. 1980. Toxicity, fertility, teratogenicity, and dominant lethal tests in rats administered cadmium subchronically. I. Fertility, teratogenicity, anddominant lethal tests. Ecotoxicol. Environ. Safety. 4:51-56.

S.M. Stoller Corporation, 1996. Screening Level Ecological Risk Assessment, Operable Unit No. 4, California Gulch Superfund Site. Prepared for Resurrection Mining Company, December 19, 1996.

USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1993. Wildlife Exposure Factors Handbook. Volume II. " USEPA/600/R93/187b, Office of Research and Development, Washington, D.C.

USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1997a. Ecological Risk Assessment for the Terrestrial Ecosystem, California Gulch NPL Site. Prepared for USEPA by Roy F. Weston, Inc. and Terra Technologies. January.

USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1997b. Ecological Risk Assessment Guidance for Superfund: Process for Designing and Conducting Ecological Risk Assessments. Environmental Response Team, Edison, NJ. Interim Final. June 5, 1997.

WCC (Woodward Clyde Consultants). 1993. Terrestrial Ecosystem Evaluation Report California Gulch Site, Leadville, Colorado. Prepared for ASARCO Inc., Denver, CO.

18 ATTACHMENT A QUESTIONS FROM THE MOU PARTIES REGARDING TERRESTRIAL WILDLIFE

1. Clarify difference between literature benchmarks indicating injury and literature benchmarks indicating risk of injury, (i.e. : the difference between tissue residues that results in effects vs. soil/vegetation residues that pose a risk of injury) 2. Explain how the existing small mammal data can be used as an indicator of overall mammalian population health (i.e. based on small mammal life history, they could represent a worst-case scenario for all mammals) or explain if such an extrapolation is not appropriate. 3. Discuss the representativeness of using the existing small mammal data (primarily herbivores) to extrapolate to other small mammals (i.e. insect!vores). 4. Explain the selection and application of specific benchmarks and why they are applicable to the Upper Arkansas River Basin. 5. Explain how the actual injury data is used in conjunction with benchmarks. 6. Present the range of benchmark values considered, their effects, and the basis for choosing specific ones. 7. Potential shortcomings of Woodward-Clyde not having sent the kidneys from the small mammal study to the pathologist 8. Discussion of other factors that affect/influence metals exposure and (i.e., species, home range, diet, etc) 9. How will soil ingestion by mammals be evaluated as a route of exposure? 10. Explain why co-location of Woodward-Clyde samples is a legitimate (conservative ?) approach

19 Table 1. Number and Type of Vole and Short-Tailed Weasel Tissue Samples from Reach 2 (WCC 1993).

Number of Number of Number of Total Total number Tissue Individual Composite Individuals in Each Number of of Samples Samples Samples Composite Sample Animals vole Liver 2 1 4 3 6 Kidney 1 1 4 2 5 short- tailed weasel Liver 2 0 0 2 2 Kidney 2 0 0 2 2 Table 2. Number and Type of Vole Tissue Samples from Reach 0 (WCC 1993).

Number of Number of Number of Total Total number Tissue Individual Composite Individuals in Each Number of of Samples Samples Samples Composite Sample Animals Liver 0 3 10,10,6 3 26 Kidney 0 3 10,10,6 3 26 Table 3. Recommended Metal Concentrations in Forage Protective of Wildlife and Livestock (units mg/Kg)

Metal and Criterion Use Concentration Reference Cadmium 'Maximum tolerated1 ruminants 0.5 Church (1988) Maximum exposure w/o effect ruminants 3-5 it ii Mild renal dysfunction small mammals 10 Cooke & Johnson (1996)

Lead Recommended levels horses <80 Eisler(1988) cattle <200

Zinc Recommended range for livestock 45-60 Eisler(1988) Maximum tolerated calves 500 (DW) adult cattle 1,000(DW) Table 4 Plant Tissue Metal Concentrations for Grasses and Forbs (reported on a dry-weight basis) from Sites Sampled along the Arkansas River ' Cadmium Copper Lead Zinc Reach (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) n3 Grasses1 Forbs2 Grasses Forbs Grasses Forbs Grasses Forbs 0.8 3.8 5.1 11.2 0.1 2.9 82 255 0 (±1.3) (+0.87) (+0.6) (+3.9) (+0) (+1.6) (+17.3) (+72) 9 2.2 4.6 4.6 10.3 12.2 19.8 153 248 1 (+0.2) (+1.4) (+0.4) (±2) (+5.2) (+8.3) (+71) (+74) 7 1.6 3.4 4.9 7.7 9 13.1 147 186 2 (±0.9) (±3.5) (±1.8) (±4-8) (±7) (±24) (±223) (+315) 8 1.6 6.4 6.4 18.9 4.5 0.1 239 394 3 (±0.4) (±1.1) (±0.6) (±1-6) (±2.8) (±0) (±79) (±98) 8

'Means and standard errors (±1 s.e.) for sites sampled in 1987.

The dietary concentration of cadmium that has been set as the maximum tolerable level for ruminants is 0.5 mg/kg (Church 1988). This concentration is exceeded for both grasses and forbs. This is most likely a result of the generally higher mineralization and metal content associated with soils in this region and does not translate to an injury to terrestrial trust resources. True toxicity to ruminants can only be determined with diet, physiological, and pathological studies of grazing animals. 3 n = number of samples

Table 5 Soil Metal Concentrations (total) for Sites Sampled along the Arkansas River' Cadmium Copper Lead Zinc i Reach (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) (mg/kg) n Total Total Total Total 3.3 29.9 238 428 0 (±0.57) (±7.3) (±45) (±75) 9 13.5 192 3,142 1 3,990 (±5.7) (±115) (+1,212) (+2,385) 7 15.4 51.4 675 1180 2 (+3.9) (±15) (+241) (±451) 8 7.4 58.5 626 959 3 (±2-9) (±31) (+435) (+407) 8 1 Means and standard errors (±1 s.e.) for sites sampled in 1987 by Keammerer. 2 n = number of samples

App J tables_and figsrev.xls Tble 4&5 10/29/2002 Table 6. Screening Level Exposure and Risk Estimates for Cadmium, Lead, and Zinc by Mule Deer, Upper Arkansas River Drainage Study Area

Vegetation Soil Water Risk Estimate •o 0 S S ro ce TJ - » -n <= „ S. 8s; c ^ ™ 'o ~>i <° •>; O •- ,-* O 52 m O Wl ^ O fc -^ =5 II =5 f U_ 0> ^ U_ ° -^ UD « 5 y) J3 I It 11 1 Total Intake c 1* 1 c f - ~ '3 c o> o o> 'S — ru ^ 5 o S "B o ro (mg/kg (mg/kg o? §o> rapi ra.S o ? 5 ^ 2 DI o c If =s | i 1 .1 IJ Intak e fro m F (mg/k g bw/d a Intak e fro m W (mg/k g bw/d a Chemical O.H' u.^ u_ u_co O <£• t/) -H- u_ O CD Intak e fro m S (mg/k g bw/d a O i- > v - ffi bw/day) bw/day) HQ

REACH 0 Cadmium 4.7 0.02 100% 100% 0.09 3.87 0.0004 100% 100% 0.002 0.0006 0.1 100% 100% 0.000 0.10 0.27 0.4 Lead 4.5 0.02 100% 100% 0.09 283 0.0004 100% 100% 0.1 0.001 0.1 100% 100% 0 0.20 5 0.04 Zinc 327.0 0.02 100% 100% 6.5 503 0.0004 100% 100% 0.2 0.03 0.1 100% 100% 0.003 6.74 45 0.1

REACH 1 Cadmium 6.0 0.02 100% 100% 0.12 19.2 0.0004 100% 100% 0.01 0.002 0.1 100% 100% 0.000 0.13 0.27 0.5 Lead 28.1 0.02 100% 100% 0.6 5202 0.0004 100% 100% 2.1 0.02 0.1 100% 100% 0.002 2.65 5 0.5 Zinc 322.0 0.02 100% 100% 6.4 5527 0.0004 100% 100% 2.2 | 0.8 0.1 100% 100% 0.08 8.73 45 0.2

REACH 2

Cadmium 6.9 0.02 100% 100% 0.14 19.3 0.0004 100% 100% 0.01 0.0008 0.1 100% 100% 0.000 0.15 0.27 0.5

Lead 37.1 0.02 100% 100% 0.7 916 0.0004 100% 100% 0.4 0.004 0.1 100% 100% 0 1.11 5 0.2 Zinc 501.0 0.02 100% 100% 10.0 1631 0.0004 100% 100% 0.7 0.2 0.1 100% 100% 0.02 10.69 45 0.2

REACH 3

Cadmium 7.5 0.02 100% 100% 0.15 10.3 0.0004 100% 100% 0.004 0.0001 0.1 100% 100% 0.000 0.15 0.27 0.6 Lead 0.10 0.02 100% 100% 0.00 1061 0.0004 100% 100% 0.4 0.008 0.1 100% 100% 0.001 0.43 5 0.09

Zinc 492.0 0.02 100% 100% 9.8 1366 0.0004 100% 100% 0.5 0.2 0.1 100% 100% 0.02 10.41 45 0.2 1 Mean + 1 standard error from Table 2 2 From Table 3. 3 Values are mean total concentrations for low flow, 1994 to present (Period 3) Figure 1. Cadmium Residues in Kidney Samples from the Upper Arkansas River Area

Effects-based benchmarks from Cooke & Johnson (1996) shown as horizontal lines. 800 -i

700 - LOAEL (proteinuria in rodents)

C- 600 -I

500 -

en LOAEL (tubular dysfunction in rodents) 400 - 03 Critical Cone. c 300 - u o 0 200 NOAEL (proteinuria, cell necrosis in rodents)

100

L

Reach 0 Reach 1 (max) Upper Cal Glch (max from (mean+sd) (WCC 1993) contaminated area) (WCC 1993) (Stoller1996) Site Data

SMtissue1figs.xls Cd dose 10/29/2002 Figure 2. Lead Residues in Kidney and Liver and Associated Effects

Effects-based benchmarks from Ma (1S96) shown as horizontal lines

Kidney

50

45

40 • ' 270 -Increased SOI

' 400 - Survival (moles)

I'" £ y 25 o " 20- n n p 15 increased SOI (oanK voles;

10- ._ _ NOAEL (rodents) NOAEL (reprod) 5- NOAEL (SOI; rodents) m m " giSv~p5p| ££$*£ "^•^§' ^S^v^f^- • m* 5§^ ••. - • - •;••-<-. --4-3 ,-:™SM4< ite*&iaJJSSSflH' 0 - Reach 0 Reach 1 (max) Upper Cal Glch (max) (mean+sd) (WCC 1993) (Stoller 1996) (WCC 1993)

Liver

A A

^ ' 40 - Increased SOI

1— • • 338- Suivivat (mules)

Tissu e Cone . (mg/K g dr y wt ) Increased SOI (bank 5>:5»35£ p£|j|_

--•f'C-^.-.b'i^ NOAEL (reproduction) rp^i^J^Si NOAEL (SOIirodents) ~ ' ' fejsjtf^|f F"" ••'-.: •••. • $3S£ 1 .«?frK •-'-••"''':'• \ ,* - <•- '$&&|IMI ^;;i-5::>1 ' •" ^ IS

3rofetncooru£ k W Reach 0 Reach 1 (max) Upper Cal Glch (max) (mean+sd) (WCC 1993) (Stoller 1996) (WCC 1993)

NOAEL = No Observed Adverse Effects Level LOAEL = Lowest Observed Adverse Effects Level SOI = Somatic Organ Index

SM Eisxuo1figs.xls Pb dose 10/29/2002 Figure 3 Cadmium Concentration in Grasses and Forbs, UAR (mean + std error)

• Reach 0 • Reach 1 I6 D Reach 2 §* D Reach 3 01 * 4 O) E ru 3 c O 0 O 2

Grasses Forbs

App_J_tables and figs.xls Fig 3 Figure 4. Hazard Quotients for Mule Deer Feeding in Upper Arkansas River Drainage Study Area

1.0

• Cadmium • Lead DZinc 0.8 T3 0) (A CO .0

LU r 0.5 .0) "o 3 O

CD N CO I 0.3

0.0 Reach 0 Reach 1 Reach 2 Reach 3