Laserfiche WebLink
<br />to respond to Rule 2.04.7(1)(a)(ii) which asks for the aquifers to be <br />lithologically characterized. <br />Is there any water level and water quality data on Well 82-5 through <br />four quarters of a year per Rule 2.04.7(1)(a)(iii)? <br />Please remove the reference to the Peerless Coal Gulch Mine from the <br />permit application narrative. As a general rule of thumb, the permit <br />application should serve as a source of information about the mine <br />area and the surrounding general area. Interpretation of other mines' <br />resources is probably inappropriate. <br />Mitigation of Hvdrolocric Impacts <br />Please identify the location of well 82-6 which will be added to the <br />hydrologic monitoring plan per the response on page 4 of the adequacy <br />comments and referenced on page 4-13. <br />a. Please provide a driller's log of this well and completion <br />information; <br />b. Provide any monitoring data which has been acquired from this <br />hole. <br />Information in Section 2.04.7 suggests that 82-6 is a typographical <br />error and that the well is actually 82-5. If this is so, please <br />disregard these two questions, but correct the permit application. <br />Page 5.35 indicates that a well 82-3 will be monitored. The permit <br />application no evidence of a well with that designation. <br />Monitoring wells should all be located outside the planned pit <br />disturbance and should monitor those water-bearing zones which will <br />potentially be impacted by mining. In addition, each water-bearing <br />zone should be monitored by multiple wells, preferably at least three <br />to provide reproducible information. Lastly, it is the hydrologist's <br />understanding that coal is to be acquired from the Shamrock, Carbonara <br />and Lewis coal seams. <br />a. Please revise page 4-10, as it indicates that the water-bearing <br />zone above the Shamrock coal rider is inappropriate for <br />monitoring as it is outside the planned pit disturbance. <br />b. Propose a monitoring plan that includes multiple wells in each <br />identified water-bearing formation (aquifer). Consider the use <br />of the wells for which there are well permits, if the perforated <br />interval is well characterized. <br />c. Carbon Junction would be well advised to acquire some baseline <br />information on the Hoverman Well. Table 4-4 indicates there some <br />confusion about the depth and water level in that well. <br />It is most unusual to find a site where there has only been one set of <br />full suite analyses performed of the water quality. Please review the <br />aforementioned Guidelines and revise the monitoring plan to include <br />full suite analyses on all samples for the first three years. As <br />limited as the geochemistry information is, results did suggest that <br />there may be water quality concerns with zinc, lead and molybdenum. <br />Propose a spoils monitoring program to commence following reclamation <br />and through the bond liability period. Include proposed well <br />locations in both the fill and the backfilled pit, as well as an <br />annual spring and seep survey. <br />