My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL32460
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL32460
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:55:00 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 7:19:16 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981023
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
2/17/2003
Doc Name
Proposed Decision & Findings of Compliance for SL4
From
Partial Phase III
Permit Index Doc Type
Findings
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.
/
12
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
Rule 4.05.13(3)(b). The Division has reviewed the submittal for compliance with tlae requirements <br />for Phase III bond release for the AVF bond release azea. Based on a quantitative evaluation the <br />Division has concluded that the submittal is technically adequate. Based on the above vegetative <br />analysis, deletion of the hydrologic monitoring program is warranted and the operator has fulfilled all <br />the hydrologic requirements necessary for a Phase III bond release of the AVF bond release azea. <br />Evaluation of Hydrologic Impacts <br />The Division has reviewed the hydrologic impacts caused by the Chimney Rock Mine. The results <br />of this review aze summazized below. <br />Leachate Formation -Coal spoil leachate probably is forming in the backfilled pits ofthe reclaimed <br />Chimney Rock Mine. The leachate forms as slightly acidic meteoric water infiltrates from the <br />ground surface through spoil. As the water percolates through the spoil, it dissolves and oxidizes <br />minerals in the spoil, resulting in a leachate high in dissolved solids. Sulfate would be a main <br />component of the leachate. The TDS concentration of the leachate can be expected to reach an <br />ultimate maximum in the range of 3000 to 4000 mg/1. This concentration may continue for several <br />hundred years, as predicted for the Seneca II Mine in Routt County, Colorado (iJSGS Water- <br />Resources Investigations Report 92-4187). <br />Leachate Discharge - Kaiser's backfilled mine pits probably dischazge coal spoil leachate into the <br />Stollsteimer Creek alluvial aquifer where the pit was excavated in the alluvium. The discharge is <br />probably fairly continuous over time. The following two pathways are predicted for the dischazge: a) <br />leachate may flow in the subsurface from the east side of the backfilled Barren Ridge pit into the <br />alluvium at the base of Barren Ridge in the center of Section 30-T34N-R4W; and b) leachate may <br />flow in the subsurface from the southwest comer ofthe backfilled East pit into the alluvium in N 1/2 <br />SEl/4 Section 30-T34N-R4W. The amount of leachate dischazging into sandstones ofthe Fruitland <br />Formation in the walls of the pits is probably small because the prefeaed flowpath for leachate <br />would be towazd the much more permeable alluvium of Stollsteimer Creek in the walls of the pits, <br />rather than the low permeability sandstones in the walls of the pits. <br />Impacts to Bedrock Aquifers -The Fruitland Formation is the only bedrock aquifer that is in the <br />Bound water flow path of the previously-described spoil leachate. There is nopre-mining monitoring <br />data from bedrock wells. Kaiser monitored the Fruitland formation downgradient from the Barren <br />Ridge pit in well W-9. Monitoring was conducted from 1985 through 1991. It showed no impacts <br />from leachate. Kaiser monitored the Fruitland underneath the Barren Ridge pit in well W-10. <br />Monitoring spanned 1985 through 1991. This well showed a significant TDS increase (on the order <br />of 2,000 mg/1) when it was last monitored in 1991. This increase is consistent with degradation of <br />ground water in the Fruitland at this location from an influx of leachate from the pit in the Revision <br />1 area. That pit is upgradient from W-10 and had been reclaimed a few yeazs eazlier. If leachate <br />caused this degradation, the impact would be considered a destruction of a small, localized aquifer <br />that is not used; this is a major hydrologic impact, but does not rise to the level of material damage. <br />8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.