My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV95268
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV95268
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 3:20:22 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 11:48:00 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
8/21/1998
Doc Name
TR-80 PROBABLE HYDROLOGIC CONSEQUENCES WEST ELK MINE PN C-80-007
From
MOUNTAIN COAL CO
To
DMG
Type & Sequence
TR80
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.
/
11
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
Technical Revision No. 80 <br />August /9, 1998 <br />Page 2 <br />year and the figure in the AHR represented a water year (October I -September 30). <br />8. Use of large-scale sumps has not beery approved. Given the potential for adverse off-site <br />impacts, the use of large-scale sumps may rrot be an approvable practice. Any and all <br />discharges to the surface must be in compliance with all applicable water quality <br />standards. <br />To reiterate from our October 9, 1997 meeting, the Division and MCC disagree that Rule <br />4.05.16 applies to MCC's management of water within the West Elk Mine. Nonetheless, <br />the PHCs of MCC's current and planned mine water management are addressed in this <br />revision application. MCC has and will continue to discharge mine water in compliance <br />with the approved CDPS permit. <br />9. MCC did a good job of presentlrrg a water quality comparison and the Division generally <br />agrees with the information as presented. However, the Division has specifically requested <br />that MCC update the hydrologic monitoring program to include provisions for sampling <br />and analyzing mime inflow data. This has not been provided. The requested mine inflow <br />data should be reflected in the permit document and reported in upcoming AHRs (refer to <br />Division letter dated December 9, 1996 -Request for Minor Revision to Permit to Improve <br />Hydrologic Monitoring Program). This would provide a consistent means by which the <br />Division carr compare inflow water quality with other groundwater quality data. Table 1 <br />presented with the response submittal does rrot provide important information such as date, <br />time, or location of mine ir~ow samples. If this ir~tormation is available, p/ease provide t[ <br />irr a revised Table 1. <br />MCC has updated the permit to include a protocol for sampling and analyzing mine <br />inflows. This was presented in Minor Revision No. 208 and has been approved by the <br />Division. <br />Table 1 submitted with MCC's previous response letter has been revised to note the date <br />and location of the fault inflow samples, and is enclosed. <br />/0. Please revise page 2.04-100 to describe Paul[ inflows known to exist. <br />As stated in MCC's previous response letter, the discussions on page 2.04-100 address <br />baseline hydrology descriptions per Rule 2.04.7, not PHC discussions, and therefore were <br />not revised as part of this revision. These discussions contained in the Lower Coal Member <br />(Mesaverde Formation) section were revised for the Box Canyon Permit Revision (PR O8) <br />submitted to the Division in February 1998. A statement was included about encountering <br />the water producing fault systems. This discussion appears on page 2.04-102 in PR 08. In <br />addition, other portions of Section 2.04.7 were revised in PR 08 to include discussions and <br />references to these faults. <br />k <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.