My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV02407
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV02407
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 1:00:01 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 9:00:39 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1984065
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
10/1/1990
Doc Name
PROPOSED DECISION & FINDINGS OF COMPLIANCE FOR PN 1 COAL RIDGE 1 MINE C-84-065
Type & Sequence
PR1
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.
/
36
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
-20- <br />Cumulative Hvdrolooic Impact <br />The worst case impact of mining at the Eastside Mine was a predicted increase <br />in TDS during the non-irrigation season from a baseline of 755 mg/1 to 1054 <br />mg/1 with a flow of 0.7 cfs. The low-flow on record for the Colorado River at <br />Glenwood Springs is 870 cfs. The mean level of TDS in the Colorado River <br />during the 83 water year was 427 mg/1. Loading of the worst-case level of TDS <br />in Harvey Gap into the low-flow of the Colorado River gave a rise in TDS of <br />0.5 mg/1. This rise is insignificant and would not affect the quality of the <br />Colorado River. No other significant impacts to the hydrologic balance were <br />predicted due to mining at the Eastside Mine. <br />No impacts to quality of the Colorado River or associated alluvium were <br />projected from mining at Coal Ridge No. 1 Mine. Use of water for the <br />hydraulic mining process was projected to consume acre feet from the Colorado <br />River system. This equals an average flow of 0.46 cfs. The average flow of <br />the Colorado River at De Beque during 1983 was 5,827 cfs. Therefore, the <br />impact of the consumptive water used at the mine site is insignificant. <br />In conclusion, based on information currently available, mining at the <br />Eastside and Coal Ridge No. 1 operations is not projected to cumulatively <br />impact the quality or quantity of ground water or surface water within the <br />Colorado Basin. <br />The assessment of the probable cumulative impacts of all anticipated coal <br />mining in the general area of the Coal Ridge No. 1 on the hydrologic balance <br />has been made by the Division, and the operations proposed under this <br />application have been designed to prevent material damage to the hydrologic <br />balance outside of the proposed permit area. <br />Reference <br />Tremain, Carol M. 1983. Coal Bed Methane Potential of the Piceance Basin, <br />Colorado. Colorado Geological Survey, Department of Natural Resources, <br />Denver, Colorado 80203. Open - File Report 82-1. <br />The proposed operation is in compliance with the requirements of this section. <br />IX. Alluvial Vallev Floors - Rules 2.06.8 and 4.24 <br />The entirety of Section 5 of the Permit Revision application is devoted to <br />discussion of alluvial valley floors. In the original Findings Document for <br />the Coal Ridge No. 1 Mine, the Division made the following Findings: <br />a. South Canyon Creek is hydrologically upgradient from the coal <br />mining operations and cannot be impacted by them. <br />b. Streamlaid deposits along Alkali Creek constitute an alluvial <br />valley floor, however the proposed operation will not interrupt, <br />discontinue, or preclude farming on the alluvial valley floor. <br />c. The Colorado River alluvium constitutes an alluvial valley floor, <br />whose function will be protected by the proposed operation. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.