My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2020-06-25_REVISION - C1981019 (6)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1981019
>
2020-06-25_REVISION - C1981019 (6)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/8/2025 2:43:03 AM
Creation date
6/25/2020 10:51:12 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981019
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
6/25/2020
Doc Name
Proposed Revision Materials
From
Colowyo Coal Company, LP
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
MR220
Email Name
ZTT
JDM
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.
/
117
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 /> The South Taylor pit is likely to be within the watersheds for these springs: GSCS-I, WFS-I, WFS-2, <br /> WFS-4, WFS-5 and 5A, 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 area. <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 recharge is from undisturbed areas 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 /> South Taylor Pit Hydrology—The South Taylor pit will have a reclaimed surface area of approximately <br /> 1004 acres and a pit bottom that inclines predominantly towards the Good Spring Creek drainage (Figure <br /> 2.05.6-1). Assuming resaturation would raise a pit aquifer level to 7,500 feet AMSL (the elevation of the <br /> lowest point on the southeastern pit boundary) and considering the pit topography, the volume of <br /> materials that must be resaturated is calculated to be 6.92 x 10' cubic feet(ft3). Assuming 20% effective <br /> porosity, 1.38 x 10' ft3 of water (3,178 acre-feet) must infiltrate from the surface and from the Williams <br /> Fork Formation to fill the pit to this level. <br /> Prior to flow from a pit, resaturation of the materials in the pit must occur. The time necessary for the <br /> resaturation of the backfilled pit can be estimated by utilizing the volume of the pit, the infiltration rate, <br /> and the porosity of the materials within the pit. Published infiltration rates for the area are 0.5 inches per <br /> year(Rice, 1979) and 3 inches per year (Williams & Clark, 1992), for an average value of 1.8 inches per <br /> year. Calculated inflows, in the above equations, indicate an inflow rate 92 gpm (approximately 150 <br /> acre-feet/year from 1.8 inches infiltration over 1,000 acres) from infiltration due to precipitation. (No <br /> other water is expected to flow into the reclaimed pit materials since the South Taylor Pit is on a <br /> topographic and structural high). The volume of water needed to fill the reclaimed pit divided by the <br /> infiltration rate equals the time to fill the pit to form an aquifer necessary for sufficient outflow. The <br /> result of this calculation is approximately 45 years for pit resaturation to the elevation of the lowest point <br /> of the pit boundary where water could be discharged. This assumes no water infiltrates into the <br /> undisturbed Williams Fork Formation on the limits of the reclaimed pit, and the entire pit fill becomes <br /> saturated. It is possible that the pit fill will be anisotropic and heterogeneous in a way that can allow a pit <br /> spring to form prior to complete saturation of the pit fill. It is also possible that most or all of the pit <br /> water will enter the Williams Fork Formation (see discussion below) thereby reducing the time to reach <br /> saturation or preventing the full thickness from becoming saturated. <br /> Groundwater from the reclaimed South Taylor pit will eventually discharge into Good Spring Creek at the <br /> drainage that is above the Sturgeon Flume (the unnamed tributary to West Fork Good Spring Creek in <br /> Section 21). This would result in a pit spoil spring and/or discharge through colluvial and shallow <br /> bedrock groundwater infiltration. This water would likely have the same characteristics as the water in <br /> the Streeter Fill well or the Streeter pond or in similar spoil springs (Williams and Clark, 1994). <br /> Analytical data for these sampling points are summarized on Table 2.04.7-31. <br /> If all of the water that infiltrates into the pit discharges into Good Spring Creek, then 150 acre-feet per <br /> year or 92 gallons per minute (0.21 cfs) of pit spoil water will enter the Good Spring Creek drainage. <br /> South Taylor/Lower Wilson—Rule 2,Page 80 Revision Date: 6/22/20 <br /> Revision No.: MR-220 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.