My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2016-12-01_PERMIT FILE - C1980007 (6)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Coal
>
C1980007
>
2016-12-01_PERMIT FILE - C1980007 (6)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/1/2017 10:42:32 AM
Creation date
2/1/2017 10:41:50 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/1/2016
Doc Name
Hydrologic Characterization of the South of the Divide
Section_Exhibit Name
Exhibit 71
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
154
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
2016 Recommended Modifications to the West Elk Mine Hydrologic Monitoring Network 48 <br />5.0 RECOMMENDATIONS <br />Some of the recommendations discussed below have been noted in multiple Annual Hydrology <br />Reports for the West Elk Mine (HydroGeo, 2002 through 2015) and most recently in the <br />Technical Memo West Elk Mine Summary of Water Year 2015 Surface Water and Groundwater <br />Quantity and Quality Data (HydroGeo, 2016a). <br />HydroGeo recommends that all eight of the currently monitored Gribble Gulch springs (G-25, G- <br />26Aa, G-28Aa, G-30, G-31, G-35, G-49, and CR -12) and the Lower Gribble Gulch surface water <br />monitoring site be removed from the MCC WEM hydrologic monitoring network. The WEM <br />operations in the Gribble Gulch area were completed over 16 years ago and spring and surface <br />flows and water quality do not show any adverse historical trends. <br />HydroGeo also recommends that the five currently monitored Raven Gulch springs (24-3, E-14- <br />1, E-14-2, E-14-3, E-14-4) and the Lower and Upper Raven Gulch surface water monitoring sites <br />be removed from the hydrologic monitoring network. The WEM operations in 2006 and 2007 in <br />the West Flatiron Area were located more than 1,000 feet to the west of the Raven Gulch <br />monitoring sites. No future mining operations are planned for the Raven Gulch Area (MCC, <br />2016). Spring and surface flows and water quality in the existing Raven Gulch monitoring sites <br />do not show any adverse historical trends. <br />Seep E-14-1 is also recommended for removal from the monitoring network, because this site <br />has not had any measurable flow throughout the period of record, and it was permanently <br />covered by a drill pad in 2006. <br />In addition, the 14 compromised and/or damaged wells: SOM-2H, SOM-16-H, 96-27-1, SO.W- <br />1, SOM-45-1-12, SOM-3E, SOM 13, SOM 129-H, SOM-23-H-1, SOM-23-H-2, SOM-23-H-3, <br />SOM-313, 96-2-2, and SOM-23-H-4 should also be removed from the MCC WEM hydrologic <br />monitoring network, as data collection at these sites is not possible due to obstructions or <br />damaged casing, they are not providing any useful hydrologic information, and the damage is <br />irreparable. Furthermore, these wells are generally located up -gradient of the mine workings, <br />and had very low groundwater yields from inception. <br />August 2016 HydroGeo, Inc. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.