My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL41258
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL41258
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:00:23 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 11:06:33 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981034
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
6/14/1993
Doc Name
PROPOSED DECISION & FINDINGS OF COMPLIANCE FOR RN2
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.
/
27
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
Pursuant to Rule 2.06.8, the Division is required to make specific <br />written findings on the effect of mining on all AVF's within the <br />permit and adjacent area. The required findings are presented below. <br />The mining operations did not interrupt, discontinue, or preclude <br />farming on the alluvial valley floor. The surface facilities <br />associated with the mine are located outside of the area <br />designated as alluvial valley floor. The operation did undermine <br />portions of the area designated as alluvial valley floor but it <br />did not affect farming activities. The applicant performed <br />limited mining (the extraction ratio was between 50 and 55 <br />percent), and, therefore, no significant surface effects from <br />subsidence were expected. In addition, the applicant hoe a <br />subsidence monitoring plan (Section 2.05.6(6)(f)(ii)(c) of the <br />permit application). <br />The mining operations would not materially damage the quantity or <br />quality of surface and ground water which supply the alluvial <br />valley floor. During mining operations, the underground mine <br />slightly depleted flows in the stream/alluvial aquifer system, <br />and the discharge of water from the underground workings affected <br />water quality in the Carbon Ditch and in Ward Creek. After <br />mining operations, when the natural ground water flow pattern is <br />restored, water passing through the underground workings would <br />affect water quality in the Williams Creek and ward Creek <br />stream/alluvial aquifer system. A quantitative assessment of <br />these effects ie provided in the discussion of probable <br />hydrologic consequences contained in this findings document. <br />That assessment predicts the stream flow depletion to be less <br />than 2 percent of the average stream flow in Ward Creek, and less <br />than 7 percent of the lowest stream flow observed in Ward Creek. <br />The predicted water quality resulting from the mining activities <br />would not prevent the use of surface water for flood irrigation. <br />The essential hydrologic functions of the alluvial valley floors <br />would be preserved. The most important characteristics of the <br />Williams Creek and Ward Creek alluvial valley floors are the <br />integrity of the present irrigation system and the ability of the <br />surface water system to supply sufficient irrigation water to <br />farming activities on the alluvial valley floors. As discussed <br />above, surface disturbances were located outside of the alluvial <br />valley floors, and mining was limited to 50-55 percent extraction <br />to minimize surface subsidence effects. Any surface effects are <br />anticipated to be minor, and capable of remedy. The operator hoe <br />committed to promptly regrading depressions, swells, or cracks if <br />any develop ae a result of subsidence. As a result, the surface <br />topography and the integrity of the existing irrigation system <br />would be preserved. Since no significant effect to the quantity <br />or quality of the water which supplies the alluvial valley floor <br />is expected, the supply of irrigation water would also be <br />preserved. <br />XVII. Operations on Prime Farmland <br />A. An investigation was made in the fall of 1980 to determine if the <br />land within the proposed permit area ie prime farmland. Pursuant to <br />Rule 2.07.6(2)(k), the Division has made a negative determination for <br />the presence of prime farmland for the following reasons: <br />The land has not been historically used as cropland. The land <br />within the permit area was wildlife habitat. <br />The slope of the land varies from 20 to 60 percent. <br />23 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.