Laserfiche WebLink
\XC~u~ a. <br />R h r-n D 1 a~ <br />r n r <br />T!: <br />FRiM: <br />RE: <br />~~~ <br />• ~ III III III III IIII III Gv~ <br />DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES <br />D M1lp me Pasr,oe E.n~ulmp Dnec o-rr <br />M1NED LAND RECLAMATION DIVISION <br />DAVID C. SHELTON Director <br />February 22, 1983 <br />Jim Pendleton and Ed Bischoff <br />Jerry Zimpfer <br />Yampa .River CHIS <br />~~ <br />ghat .a U5 GS's suud~,k.~- ~~ <br />"~ie Qnl w~ ? <br />I am currently in the process of assembling a list of hydrology effects <br />for inclusion in the U.S. Geological Survey's assessment of cumulative <br />hydrologic impacts for a portion of the Ya~npa River drainage. (The USGS <br />wants this list during the first week in I~iarch.) In briefly reviewing <br />the Mine No. 3 - Middle Creek underground mine permit application, I have <br />noted some serious deficiencies in the discussion of probable hydrologic <br />consequences for the underground mine. For example, the applicant states <br />(p. 2.05-107) that since the mine "neither receives or discharges water <br />. to any surface water body, the effects of underground mining on surface <br />~ ~ water is considered negligible." This conclusion may be somewhat <br />premature, since the applicant also states (p. 1.U5-109) that "the ~ya~t~Wh~~t'd~-- <br />~~ site-specific characteristics of the overburden aquifer in the major ~oula y~ ru u~r ~ <br />o fault zone and in the area west of the fault are not known. Estimates of ~' <br />~ dewatering effects from the underground mine will be made when this <br />information becomes available." Without an estimate of worst case mine <br />inflow, it is difficult to conclude that the mine would not discharge <br />water to any surface water body. Other deficiencies may exist. <br />Because of the deficiencies in the discussion of probable hydrologic <br />consequences, we need to decide haw to include the (diddle Creek <br />underground mine in the Yainpa CHIS. Tl~e Division could proceed by using <br />the hydrologic effects currently identified in the permit application. <br />However, this would require that the CHIS be again rewritten as a part of <br />the Middle Creek mine permit review. Alternatively, the Division (or the <br />applicant) could develop a better estimate of the hydrologic consequences <br />of the Middle Creek mine for inclusion in the CHIS. If the estimates are <br />conservative enough, the CHIS might not have to be redone to allow <br />permitting of the Middle Creek nine. <br />Time is short. A decision about which approach to take must be made <br />early this week. <br />/mt <br />cc: Roy Cox <br />Sandy Emrich <br />Doc. No. 1019 <br />~ps,~n {1 Cnr QLi tl.icl i-Qi ~TT~ (;f ~~ C05R_ <br />~ C..,~C~.-wc:~Y ~i ~... ~`' - '~ aS , s i ~ o~n1G~ ~~~ 1-0 6~ rebola.. <br />~. <br />423 CenlBn nil Building 1313 $hprrn ml '•11 r~r ~l <br />Ilr`nynr (~~~Ir rr R•1., Rri~n'1 rnl <br />a <br />tlCn ~ i~C~u~.~ <br />(9(~'li RfiF i'.:' <br />