My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL40290
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL40290
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:59:31 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 10:35:45 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
11/25/1981
Doc Name
Stip. 4 letter
From
ARCO COAL CO
To
MLRD COLO DNR
Permit Index Doc Type
STIPULATIONS
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.
/
6
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 />MINING AND RECLAMATION PLAN Revised February 1981 <br />MT. GUNNISON NO. 1 MINE <br />major watersheds in the project area, and to provide coverage throughout the lease <br />area. Along with the water quality analysis in Table 2.S.1.R, a comparison of the <br />water quality analysis of the springs to water quality standards recommended by the <br />State of Colorado has been performed, and the information is presented in Table <br />2.8.1.5. Indications are that spring water quality is good. Most of the springs <br />located above the F seam show total dissolved solids (TDS) concentrations near or <br />less than 500 milligrams per liter indicating that the water is probably local and <br />that there is not a large continuous groundwater reservoir supplying these springs. <br />To determine the contribution that spring flows make to stream flows in the <br />Gunnison lease block, the spring flows measured in November 1977 were compared <br />with average November flows for Sylvester Gulch, Lower Dry Fork, Lick Creek, <br />South Prong, and Horse Creek watersheds. In making this comparison, it was <br />assumed that seeps did not contribute to stream flow, that none of the spring water <br />was lost by infiltration or evapotranspiration, and that the springs flowed at the <br />same rate all month. The November 1977 sampling period was chosen because <br />spring contributions would be most important at this time to water use in the basin <br />and because a good data base was available for this period and represents the <br />lowest flow of the year. <br />The results of this study are shown in Table 2.8.1.W and indicate that springs <br />contribute to 11 percent of the flow in Lower Dry Fork, 4 percent of the flow in <br />Lick Creek, 12.6 percent of the flow in South Prong, and 0.09 percent of the flow in <br />Horse Creek. Sylvester Gulch data indicates springs contribute 102 percent of the <br />flow, but this is a fictitious number, since the Bear Mine (which currently operates <br />on Atlantic Richfield leases as a contract miner) removes water from Sylvester <br />Gulch upstream of the gaging station. <br />The assumptions made above for calculating the spring contribution to stream flow <br />probably result in high estimates. However, ignoring Sylvester Gulch data, it is <br />possible that springs could contribute up to 6.2 percent of stream flow for the <br />entire lease block in the dry part of the year. <br />2-253b <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.