REV12615 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

PAR - C-80-007 - 8 - March 31, 1986 date. In looking at water availability WECC should look at natural availability, not artificial subirrigation from the reservoir or the transbasin diversion. There may be water depletion effects in the Minnesota Creek basin from the operation under worst case projections. If this would occur the effects could be felt down to and including the Turner and Minnesota ditches. Therefore, it is necessary to identify those AVF's that may derive their water supply from these ditches. The AVF investigation should be expanded so that all potentially affected areas are known. The existing AVF determinations for Minnesota Creek need to address the essential hydrologic functions of the agricultural areas and discuss which of the undeveloped alluvial areas may qualify as an alluvial valley floor. As these areas may be potentially affected by anticipated mining, the Division will need to make AVF determinations in order to assess material damage. The study should include more detailed maps of the areas, crops grown, extent of subirrigation, and areas and sources of flood irrigation. Probable Hydrologic Consequences The Colorado Surface Coal 14ining Reclamation ACT requires that the Division assess the cumulative hydrologic impacts from all anticipated mining and make a finding of no material damage prior to issuing a permit (34-33-114(2)(c)). The law also requires that the application present "sufficient data for the mine site and surrounding areas, so that an assessment can be made by the Division of the probable cumulative impacts of all anticipated mining..." (34-33-110(2)(1)). Recently the Division's interpretation of "anticipated mining" has changed based on OSM rule changes and other court decisions. The Division now considers anticipated mining to include all adjacent continuous Federal Coal Lease tracts assigned to the operation for which there are diligence requirements, and other coal tracts for which we have mine development information. The application on Page 2-524 indicates that it is not possible to perform an impact analysis on adjacent coal leases outside the 5 year permit area due to lack of mine plan and baseline data. The Division, while understanding the difficulty, requires that such an attempt be made. If information is not provided on all the lease areas it will not be possible to make the required CHIS findings. We also recommend that WECC provide it s own projection of impacts on these lease areas in the interest of saving time and arriving at a mutual agreement on the kind of impacts projected. The following comments relate to the both the PHC analysis and cumulative hydrologic impacts from "anticipated mining" south of the drainage divide. The following comments pertain to Volume 4, Exhibit 2.8.5, Protection of Minnesota Creek Water Supply.