GENERAL35606 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. ,trd,~ eo,~ Drcisrar ofMrrurds.md Cw(agv Repa~ze Letter Puge? predicated on flow values supplied for Site WSS4. These data are not relevant for two reasons. First of all, Site WSS4 is upstream, noc downstream, of "Peabody's diversion from Sage Creek". (This is not "Peabody's diversion", but is correctly referred to as the Sage Creek Reservoir Outlet Ditch and is operated by Hockett Farms). This diversion is located in the southeast corner of Section 35, T6N, R88W. Secondly, all but the last years data provided for Site WSS4 was during the period when the Sage Creek Reservoir was in operation (it washed out in May 1985). The "flows greater than 0.25 cfs noted throughout 4 of 6 growing seasons" were a result of releases from that reservoir. The Sage Creek Reservoir most likely will not be rebuilt. First, there is the economic factor. The cost of rebuilding the dam under today's regulations and specifications would most likely Ear outweigh the benefit of the limited irrigation water it would supply. Also, SCC now owns 15/16ths of the water rights for the Sage Creek Reservoir. These water rights are now being used in the Yoast Mine Water Rights Augmentation Plan (Attaclunent 16-1, Tab 16). Continent 4. 71~e dixrrssier ofnrnwnal Sage Cr~k flaw (less tlavr 0.25 cfs n fene~ to on fade 16-3-6 dc~ rrat appeitr to !x srtpportel try tlx data m Appaulix 7-6. 71x figzrre on page 7-6-22 indicates flours upsnemn from the field at WSS4 excttrled 0.25 cfs t{muglxvrt most or all of six grouiorg seasons (1980-1985). I.s this disausier Gxsecl et data fron WSSF3? If it is, plane ezplaut way WSSF3 data is mare n~ermrt to tJx disnusion of~ imgatier potential yr Bettie: i0 tJxm WSS4 data 7Tiis disaessiorr is also presented wt page 42 of Tab 17 71~ data referencnl nt this disczusion dms rte apparr to conecperd to tl~ data u: Tab 7 (pp 7-6-22 tlnwegh 24J. Strmm~ flaurdata for 1979-1985 in Tab 7 does not szrppon tl~ disacssion n: Tab 17, mrd 1991 data n feraresl in d~ PHCdc~ nat appn~n- w fe indrelal n: Tab 7. As stated above in Item 3, high summer flow values at Site WSS4 were a result of release from the Sage Creek Reservoir. Since that reservoir is no longer in operation, those historically high flows values would no longer be present. In regards to the data presented in Tab 17, page 42, the apparent inconsistencies are a result of a typographical error. All references to Site WSSF4 are incorrect, they actually should refer to Site WSSF3. SCC will correct this page of the PHC. There is no Site WSSF4! Corrunent 5. 71re PHC proJeds toml dissohsl solids nr lareer Sage Grek wdl !n[YPlLSe to 2118 rng/l, cGre in part to dx nrrle2cts of sport springs. Using a ceaeniet factrn of 1.4 for omertnrg TDS to sprtific cnrrcGrctir>rzy, this mnrspvuls to a cerdratmrm of 2.91un/m~/on ~slxurld rrad 2900 Frmins/onJ. 71~is ~ersdd vrdiaue a lvtartinl for' rncaerial dmrrage_to tl~.1>)rlydagrc lalan~ ertsicle [he permit amv, -ra/nd~ nuut lx adclressel by tl~ Diu+iart in its Crorurlatite Hjdrolagic Grzprrct Suxfy for t1K Ymrgn Riter &rsin, mrd Iry SCC' in d~ PHC sctrimt of tlx perrivt (-<ee Rules 2.076(2)(c) mul 2.05.6(h)(vui)). 71~ PHC earls to address tlr pot~rturl v»/acts to dx h}rlrologic lrrlmrer ordside the permit amn yr tlx Sage Crct'k tram, sptcrfually v: temu of gturlity of ~uruer tlxrt is or rrray !x rua~~ far irrigatrar. As stated above ut Item 3 and 4, Sage Creek typically does not contain enough water for the imgation of any significant acreage, especially during the later summer months. This is also addressed on page 42 of Tab 17 (PHC). It should also be noted that the predicted 2118 mg/1 TDS value on Sage Creek is derived from "worst-case" numbers, in panicular, a 4500 mg/1 TDS spoils discharge value. The following table provides the most recent (1998) TDS values measured at the Seneca II Mine's NPDES sites.