My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV15871
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV15871
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 1:27:15 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 11:09:20 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981035
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
12/14/1993
Doc Name
PR REVIEW OF GEOLOGY AND HYDROLOGY ISSUES NATIONAL KING COAL C-81-035
From
DMG
To
HARRY RANNEY
Type & Sequence
PR4
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.
/
3
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 />identify trends is chemical parameters and eater quality, and <br />to predict a reasonable future impact scenario. <br />This documentation needs to include the following: <br />a. A ouality analysis of probable hydrologic consequences of <br />mining for both the surface and around waters in the <br />permit area at present, and within the new acreage to be <br />added from this revision. <br />b. A quantity analysis of probable hydrologic consequences <br />of mining for both the surface and ground waters in the <br />permitted area at present, and within the new acreage to <br />added from this revision. <br />c. Identification of the effect over time, using data from <br />monitoring reports of mine operations, on concentrations <br />of total dissolved and total suspended solids, total <br />iron, pH, total manganese and other parameters as <br />detailed in Section 2.04.7, page 1 of the permit. <br />See Section 2.05.6(3)(b)(iii), of the regulations for further <br />guidance. <br />2. Page 3, 2nd paragraph, last sentence: the mine will be <br />located at least 136 feet above the potentiometric level. The <br />revision incorrectly states 82 feet - this needs to be edited. <br />3. Page 4, second paragraph states that the King Coal Mine has <br />never impacted ground-water systems, yet on page 2 it states, <br />"has little impact". As nature is rarely depicted in absolute <br />terms, please change page 4 to agree with page 2. <br />This same paragraph is a repeat of page 2; is this the <br />operator's intention or an oversight? <br />4. Page 5, well list: #5) and ,~6) seem the same, except the name <br />is changed, and both do not agree with the current permit <br />page. Please edit and correct. <br />5. Page 6, last paragraph: the distance to well 108185 has been <br />altered from 4,300' to 2,000'. Since no map was made <br />available to verify this difference may be due to the new <br />permitted acreage under this revision, please indicate if this <br />indeed has changed. Thank you. <br />6. Page 7, 2nd paragraph. The fourth sentence in the current <br />permit reads, "A water right agreement for use of the meadow <br />well is included in this exhibit". This sentence seems to <br />have been deleted in the revised page. Please clarify the <br />current status of this agreement, and if necessary re- <br />incorporate this sentence into the revised page. Secondly, if <br />the agreement is current, provide a copy of the document. The <br />current permit indicates that the agreement was terminated on <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.