My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2016-02-03_PERMIT FILE - C1981038A
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Coal
>
C1981038
>
2016-02-03_PERMIT FILE - C1981038A
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/3/2016 7:33:57 AM
Creation date
2/29/2016 8:59:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981038A
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
2/3/2016
Doc Name
page 100 to 164
Section_Exhibit Name
Volume 1 2.05 Operation and Reclamation Plans Part 3
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.
/
68
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
42,05 APPLICATION FOR PERMIT FOR SURFACE OR UNDERGROUND MINING ACTIVITIES -- <br />MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR OPERATION AND RECLAMATION PLANS. <br />2.05.6 Mitigation of Surface Coal Mining Operation Impacts. (Cont'd.) <br />(3) (b) Civ) (Cont'd.) <br /> <br /> <br />Coal Basin, 6 out of 26 parameters monitored <br />increased (conductivity, Fl, Fe, Mn, K, Na), <br />pH, and suspender solids decreased, and the <br />remainder were stable between pre- and post- <br />mining values (page 376). Any significant <br />change in groundwater quality detected by the <br />present and proposed groundwater monitoring <br />(described in Section 2.04.7) should be negat- <br />ed due to dilution. <br />Surface Water Effects - Permit and Adjacent <br />Area <br />Streams within and adjacent to the permit <br />area, described in Section 2,04.7 are not ex- <br />pected to be adversely impacted due to subsi- <br />dence, based upon monitoring experience (refer <br />to Volume 4). The major ephemeral drainages <br />of Steven's Gulch and East Roatcap Creek will <br />be protected by a Subsidence Control Plan (see <br />Section 2.05.6) during future permit terms be- <br />neath 800 ft. of overburden. In areas of <br />greater than 800 ft. overburden, the predict- <br />ed character and nature of subsidence should <br />not impact these resources, Monitoring data <br />obtained to date (CWI Hydrology-Subsidence Re- <br />ports, 1982 and 1983) have detected no in- <br />crease in sediment load or decrease in stream <br />flow. As described in the Subsidence Study <br />for the Orchard Valley Atine (Geo-Hydro Con- <br />sulting, Inc., Appendix 3), abrupt changes in <br />stream gradient, reversal of stream gradients, <br />or impounding of streams is not predicted to <br />occur. Tension cracks could develop to the <br />surface in the tributary drainages. The sig- <br />nificance of flow disruption due to subsidence <br />cracks is diminished due to the flow charac- <br />teristics of the ephemeral streams. These <br />streams flow in response to precipitation <br />events, usually substantial rainstorm or sud- <br />den snowpack melting, During ephemeral flow, <br />these streams are typically charged with con- <br />siderable amounts of sediments, (refer to Vol- <br />ume 4 - Stream Quality Data). Crane (1927) <br />_9dde~1 l2 /26 /84 <br />Added 02/26/85 <br />Revised 10/01/87 <br />133 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.