My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2013-10-02_PERMIT FILE - C1981019A (3)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Coal
>
C1981019A
>
2013-10-02_PERMIT FILE - C1981019A (3)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 5:31:59 PM
Creation date
10/18/2013 8:51:20 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981019A
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
10/2/2013
Section_Exhibit Name
Rule 2 Permits -ST
Media Type
D
Archive
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
129
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
RULE 2 PERMITS <br />,~~ _~,_ __.- - _ .... _~. ,.µ ~ , . ~.m ,,._ v_. <br />• Pit Inflow and Pit Surface A'ater Recharge Impacts <br />The minor springs located on the hill slopes adjacent to the proposed South Taylor Pit (Map l0A), which <br />flow four months of the yeaz or less, are the springs likely to experience diminished flow. Springs 3-93- <br />20-212 and 3-93-17-142, -143, -144, and -432 (South Taylor) and 3-93-20-213, -214, and -215 (West <br />Fork Good Spring Creek) are located within the pit boundary and will be eliminated by the pit. Taylor <br />Creek would potentially lose about 20 gpm of its peak flow (0.04 cfs), which is about 2% of its 1.9 cfs <br />peak flow. The West Fork Good Spring Creek would potentially lose about 5 gpm (0.01 cfs) of its peak <br />flow which is 0.5% of its 2.1 cfs peak flow. Since these springs only flow seasonally, neither creek <br />would lose any base flow by the elimination of these springs. <br />The South Taylor pit is likely to be within the watersheds for these springs: GSCS-1, WFS-1, WFS-2, <br />WFS-4, WFS-5 and SA, and WFS-7 and 7A, and 3-93-29-234. These springs collectively contribute <br />about 20 gpm to the base flow and about 130 gpm to the peak flow of Good Spring Creek, the majority of <br />this flow originating in the WFS-2 complex. This is equivalent to 0.04 cfs contribution to the base flow <br />and about 0.3 cfs contributed to the peak flow. The WFS-2 spring complex is located in the bottom of the <br />drainage and therefore is likely to obtain most of its water from areas outside of the South Taylor pit azea. <br />If all the contributions from these springs were terminated by South Taylor mining, the West Fork Good <br />Spring Creek would lose 0.04 cfs of its base flow, and about 0.3 cfs of its peak flow. This amounts to a <br />calculated loss of about 5% of the base flow of 0.85 cfs and about 3% of the peak flow of 11 cfs (as <br />measured at NUGSC). However, since much of the rechazge is from undisturbed aeeas outside of the <br />South Taylor pit, the probable reduction is likely to be less than half of this amount and not expected to be <br />measurable or statistically significant. Once the mining has been completed and the pit has been <br />• saturated, the contributions to surface water from springs originating from infiltration into the South <br />Taylor pit would return to normal. <br />• <br />South Taylor/Lower Wilson -Rule 2, Page 113 Revision Date: 3/3 0/07 <br />Revision No.: PR-02 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.