Laserfiche WebLink
Attachment A <br />avert Elk dine <br />qualm that need be further im-e.ti_ated :is a result. monitoring of these _elected parameter: <br />will pro:-ide a reasonable basis for detecting mining- induced changes in :piing water quality. <br />Therefore. once full suite analy-ses have been col-'ected at a rite for at least five nears. these <br />indicator parameter-- (pH. conductivity. TDS. TSS. and iron) will be col :ected on an annual <br />basis. If riot already provided in AHR:. baseline data wL:l be provided to CDP-MS prior to <br />longwal: mining under or within the angle -of -draw of a monitored water resource <br />Spring water quality samples (Exhibit 19 and Exhibit 19A) were obtained from selected <br />locations These spring: were chosen for water sampling on the basis of =geographic <br />distribution. generally reliable flow. availability of previous water quality data. and ease of <br />access Springs were :elected to provide sampling point: it each of the major watershed: in <br />the project area. and to pionde coverage throughout the lease area. Along with the water <br />quality analy -sn in Exhibit 19. a compari:or of the water qua :m ana:y :ts of the springs to water <br />quality standards recommended by the State of Colorado has been performed. Indications are <br />that spring water quality is good. Most of the springs located above the F -Seam :how total <br />dissolved solids (TDS) concentratiom vary locally and that there r: not a large continuous <br />groundwater reservoir supplying these springs. <br />Furthermore. Mayo and Associates conducted a hydro geologic analy:i. of the peanut and <br />adjacent area in 1999. The complete report is included in Exhibit 1S. To summarize Dr. <br />Savo': finding:: the groundwater systems are localized, are not areally extensive. and tend to <br />form discrete groundwater bodies that are not in bydiodtnamic communication with each other. <br />Therefore. impacts to the water qua'' -ity of a spring due to underground mining are high:} <br />unlike:v. <br />Honritorirtg o(Re.en-oirs and .SrockPonds <br />Although water level measurements are not taken on Minnesota Reservoir, the Upper and <br />Lower Dry Fork flume: provide an estimate of the reservoir inflow: and outflow:. The <br />addition of the ditch company's flume (Middle Dry Fork) upstream of the reservoir has <br />improved the accuracy of the reservoir inflow measurement. <br />In addition. the We :t Elk Mine. in cooperation with the U.S. Forest Service (USFS). Paonia <br />Raneer District in Paonia. Colorado. has agreed to informally monitor the USFS -surface water <br />resources (:tock ponds}. as depicted on Map 37. that are located directly over longwall pane:_ <br />to be mined of within the angle-of-draw per the agreement letter in Exhibit 19C. In addition <br />to the commitments provided in Exhibit 19C. MCC will also photograph S om the ground on a <br />yearly bast: the resource: that are located over longwall panel• to be mined or within the angle <br />Of draw-. The results of the monitoring will be included in the Annual Hvdrology Report. <br />Table 12 lists the USFS water resource: within or adjacent to the lVe :t Eil _Mine permit area. <br />14N 11"PRIO.WO&PRIO.019M.PR10 WO6.PRIQ 0407 -PRI.1 ll1IMLPR,: <br />56 <br />