My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
APPCOR12981
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Application Correspondence
>
2000
>
APPCOR12981
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 6:33:18 PM
Creation date
11/19/2007 2:36:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1996083
IBM Index Class Name
Application Correspondence
Doc Date
8/9/1996
Doc Name
BOWIE 2 MINE NEW PERMIT APPLICATION PN C-96-083
From
DMG
To
JE STOVER & ASSOCIATES
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.
/
22
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
Mr. Jim Stover <br />August 9, 1996 -New App./Bowie 2 <br />Page 4 <br />northwest/southeast which may bisect the proposed mine workings and provide possible <br />means of communication with the Terror Creek drainage. It is possible that mining or mine <br />dewatering could impact Tet7or Creek through groundwater communication. Please address <br />this issue in detail. <br />Impacts to Hubbard and Terror Creeks are also possible if and when B-seam mining occurs. <br />Baseline and operational monitoring on Terror and Hubbard Creeks should be considered <br />if B-seam mining is proposed. <br />The BRL responses indicate that certain baseline monitoring plans were agreed during April <br />of 1995. We have reviewed the letter of April 11, 1996, and we have a reasonable <br />recollection of the meeting referenced in that letter. We do not recall, eliminating the <br />possibility of ,nor does the letter preclude, baseline or operational monitoring of either <br />Terror Creek or Hubbard Creek. Such monitoring may be required upon consideration of <br />your responses. Such monitoring would include upstream and downstream quality and <br />quantity measurements. We recall discussing the immediately available groundwater <br />information, as well as discussing the possibility that other data might be necessary if impact <br />projections or the quality of the existing data indicated such a need. We apologize if there <br />has been some level of miscommunication. It is always our intention to communicate in <br />good faith and as clearly as possible. <br />13a) A review of the baseline data provided in Exhibit 3 indicates the need to request additional <br />information. <br />i) Most of the baseline spring data indicate that measurements began in June 1995 and <br />ended in December 1995. Some measurements began later in the year. We <br />recommended that data measurements begin in April, in order to characterize the full <br />hydrological cycle, since the April and May periods tend to show highest flows. <br />Please provide data for all springs beginning in April 1995, or 1996, and for each <br />month thereafter where data are currently missing. Please provide a plan to remedy <br />this situation. <br />ii) The application indicates that pond observations began in September 1995. Please <br />provide recent (1995 or 1996) data which indicate the full hydrological cycle. We <br />acknowledge the presence of the 1984 data, but more current information is <br />recommended for these important surface features. <br />iii) Please provide the flow rate data for the Deer Trail Ditch (lower) for June 14, 1996, <br />and, for the Deer Trail Ditch (upper) for May 11, 1996 and June 14, 1996. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.