My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV04342
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV04342
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 1:02:26 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 9:17:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
8/30/1994
Doc Name
2ND RESPONSE TO REVIEW OF 1990 & 1991 AHR REPORTS WEST ELK MINE PN C-80-007
From
MOUNTAIN COAL CO
To
DMG
Type & Sequence
TR71
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.
/
4
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
.^ <br />Ms. Christine E. Johnston <br />1990-1991 AHR Response <br />August 25, 1994 <br />Page 2 <br />10. No response necessary. <br />11. No response necessary. <br />SPRINGS: <br />1. Springs G-11, G-13, G-I5, G-I8, G-19, G-21, and G-23 are no[ monitored for a number of reasons. Firs[ <br />of all, they are in an area which is not curtently planned to be undermined; second, they are in an area <br />of overburden cover which is greater than 300 feet; and finally, other springs in this area are being <br />monitored which were deemed representative (as per TR-54) and would detect any impacts on all water <br />resources m this area. <br />2. MCC will keep the Division informed on the location and Flow of spring CR-12. <br />3. No response necessary. <br />4A. No response necessary. <br />4B. See response to Comment Number 4 under Surface Water above. MCC does have hydrologic data from <br />water resources monitored above underground mining activities which supports this prediction. This <br />information is contained in the past AHRs. Further verification of this prediction is presenteil in Response <br />Number 5 under Subsidence in MCC's submittal to the PR-5 adequacy review dated May 23, 1994. <br />5. No response necessary. <br />6. See response to Comment Number 4B under Springs above. <br />7. No response necessary. <br />SA. Springs and stock ponds were dropped from monitoring as a result of TR-54 because they were above the <br />300/350 feet of overburden cover relating to the projected impact zone. In addition, the resources <br />remaining in [he monitoring plan were considered to be representative for monitoring purposes end would <br />detect any impacts in [he area due [o mining. <br />8B. No response necessary. <br />GROUNDWATER: <br />L The attached TR (Revised Table 16 of the permit document) requests that wells SOM 38-H2 and 38-H3 <br />he removed from the monitoring plan. MCC plans [o retain these holes which may be used to monitor <br />water levels in the mine workings and recovery of the piezome[ric surface during reclamation. MCC will <br />manage these wells by temporarily staling [hem with well caps. The holes are currently within the <br />calculated bond for the mine and will be sealed and abandoned as per the procedures described in Rule <br />4.07.3 when they are deemed to have no value. <br />2. No response necessary. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.