My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2020-06-26_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981041
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Coal
>
C1981041
>
2020-06-26_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981041
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/30/2020 7:45:37 AM
Creation date
6/29/2020 1:50:16 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981041
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
6/26/2020
Doc Name
Correspondence
From
Law Offices of John R. Henderson, PC
To
DRMS
Email Name
CCW
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.
/
109
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
JAMES A. BECKWITH <br />FONTANARI OBJECTIONS AND COMMENTS / SNOWCAP BOND APPLICATION SL -I T / PG. 14 <br />Unfortunately, Snowcap's Annual Hydrologic Reports and its claims in Tab 9, <br />Application, are unreliable and cannot serve as a basis for bond release based upon water <br />issues. <br />First, Snowcap's Annual Hydrologic Reports have correctly admitted that no "beneficial <br />uses" of the mine water have occurred (i.e., coal -washing; dust control; fire suppression) <br />because mining ceased in 1999 and the Roadside Mine was sealed in 2000. Notably, <br />however, since 2006 to the present date, Snowcap's Annual Hydrologic Reports have stated <br />that "Consumptive use (of mine water) will be for seeding and dust control during reclamation <br />operations." (Emphasis added) <br />Snowcap has regularly reported the Sodium Adsorption Rate (SAR) at a concentration <br />considerably greater than 9 PPM. Water containing an SAR of 9 PPM or granter is toxic to all <br />living plants. (Fontanari Exhibit 26) Broadcasting the mine water on the Study Area's <br />surface would have killed all vegetation installed under Snowcap's revegetation program. <br />Since the revegetated areas are thriving, the conclusion is obvious: Snowcap has never used <br />mine water to irrigate the vegetation. The August 1416 inspection failed to reveal any <br />mechanical means by which Snowcap pumped water from the mine, cleaned it to usable <br />quality standards, and broadcast it on the revegetated areas by sprinkler or other means. <br />Second, since 2001, Snowcap has regularly reported 275 +/- GPM as the volume of mine <br />water discharged directly from the Roadside Mine into the Colorado River. Snowcap <br />installed a meter at Outflow 016, and replaced it with an identical meter in January, 2017, but <br />failed to install either of the meters in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications. The <br />result is that the meter readings are inaccurate and unreliable. Actual measurement of the <br />discharge amount, in June, 2018, is 93 GPM, not the 275 GPM reported by Snowcap. <br />(Fontanari Exhibit 27) And notably, the Bond Release Inspection of August 14-16, did not <br />include any collection of water quality samples nor measurement of the actual volumes of <br />water discharged to the Colorado River. It is also true that neither Powderhorn nor Snowcap <br />ever reported, in their Annual Hydrologic Reports, any backup tests to verify the accuracy or <br />calibration of the meters and gauges upon which their disclosed data to DRMS was based. <br />Third, pre -Snowcap Annual Hydrologic Reports contradict, if not refute, Snowcap's <br />assertion that in June. 2014, 3 cfs (22.4 gallons/sec or 1,346 GPM) of irrigation water flowed <br />from the surface of Tract No. 71 into the South Portal of the Roadside Mine. In 1992, 1993, <br />and 1994, surface irrigation water was applied to Tract No. 71 by Rudy Fontanari, then land <br />manager for Powder Mountain Ranch, the tract owner. The water source (Martin Crawford <br />Ditch; Rapid Creek), the water volume, and the period of irrigation were identical to the <br />source, volume and irrigating time in June. 2014. The sole difference was that water was put <br />into Carey Pond. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.