Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Notations on the driller's log (Appendix 4.3) for well B-17 are <br />inconsistent. Is the hole cased to 20' or 80'? Is 6" I.D. PVC used <br />or 5" PVC? Is the hole open below the casing or was it sealed below <br />80'? In addition, were any packers installed to limit inflow into the <br />well from above 20' and below 60'? <br />Is well B-17 artesian? Has it ever flowed out of the ground? <br />Minimization of impacts to the hydrologic balance requires that all <br />holes be sealed in an appropriate temporary or permanent manner. <br />Flowing wells must be sealed with a valve that measures head and can <br />be accessed for water sampling. <br />The documentation of the well permit and water rights submittal on <br />Pueblo Coal/Oak Ridge Energy is very confusing. Information from the <br />State Engineer's Office (Appendix 4-3c) indicates Pueblo Coal has <br />three well permits: 25629F; 26846F; and 31082F. Permit 31082F is the <br />only well that has experienced use according to these records. <br />Appendix 3-4 lists two well permits: 25629F and 26846F. There appears <br />to be a single water right, Case 82-CW-149, tied to Well Permit <br />26846F. <br />a. Have all three wells been drilled? <br />b. Please identify their locations on a map. <br />c. Have additional water rights been acquired? <br />d. Is PW-1 linked with one of these permits? <br />e. Please provide all drilling information available. <br />Miscellaneous Comments <br />What is the contour interval on Map 5-4, Final Reclaimed Topography? <br />Please provide a post-mining drainage plan. This may include both <br />temporary and permanent drainage structures to handle water flow down <br />the reclaim. Provide hydrologic designs in accordance with <br />Rule 4.05.3. <br />Permit area boundaries on maps which have scales smaller than <br />1' = 200' are very confusing. The larger scale maps appear to have <br />specifically pointed out the 'old' vs. the current permit boundary, <br />and this should probably be done on all maps if the 'old' permit <br />boundary can not be erased. <br />Is the whole haul road going to be included within the permit area? <br />The coloration and designation of it as the 'haul road' suggests that <br />it will be. <br />I am very concerned about wording in the second paragraph on page 5-2. <br />It seems to suggest that Oakridge Energy can modify their mine plan <br />for the permit term without filing a permit revision. I would like to <br />see this wording modified. <br />/ern <br />M:\wp51\carbadq.cwb <br />