Laserfiche WebLink
'~, <br />Ltr/Revw Bsln Env Data - 2 - July 2, 1986 <br />1. Geology 2.04.6 <br />(A). To assure continuity, and to limit needless confusion, the Sego <br />Sandstone Member, which contains the Anchor Coal zone, should be <br />assigned to the Mesaverde Group. Cashion, 1973 (Geology and Structure <br />Map of the Grand Junction Quadrangle, Colorado and Utah; U.S.G. S. <br />Miscellaneous Investigations Series, Map I-136), has assigned the Sego <br />to the Mesaverde, while the applicant has assigned it to both the <br />Mancos Shale (Section 2.04.6 p. 3, December, 1983 submittal) and to the <br />Mesaverde Group (Figure 2.04.6-2, December 1983 submittal). <br />(B). Figure 2.04:6-2 (Section 2.04.6, December 1983 submittal), <br />should be drawn so that the Mount Garfield and Hunter Ca Ryon Formations <br />are shown as submembers of the Mesaverde Group. <br />(C). 1t is not clear from the permit application exactly which <br />portion of the Cameo Seam is to be extracted. It is assumed that the <br />lower most coal zone ("Main Cameo") is the mined unit, however figure <br />2.04.6-2 indicates that there are three overlying units which may also <br />be economically recoverable. <br />(D). The July, 1985 submittal, as well as the original submittal, <br />did not include chemical and physical analyses of the roof, coal, <br />floor, and interburden (if applicable) as required for the North Lease <br />area. The geochemical analysis, along with an interpretation of the <br />data, must be submitted to the Division. <br />(E). The coal reject material (sample 83-3842-OB) exceeded the <br />livestock watering standards for both Boron (B) and Lead (Pb). The <br />applicant must address the potential for contamination to water which <br />may percolate through the stockpiled material and discharge to either <br />the surface or ground water systems. <br />The applicant should also address the potential impact to downstream <br />users, and include a mitigation plan as necessary. <br />2. Ground Water Hydrology 2.04.7(1) <br />The ground water monitoring program, as well as the spring monitoring <br />program, was designed and carried out to meet the minimum requirements <br />of the regulations. The applicant is urged to develop and submit for <br />approval a monitoring plan which more fully defines the prevailing <br />hydrologic regime at and near the Fruita mine site. <br />The fo]lowing comments pertain to the "Baseline Hydrology Report; <br />Additional Data - 1984" submitted to the Division in July, 1985. <br />