Laserfiche WebLink
-15- <br />The applicant's normal surface water and ground water monitoring, along <br />with the U.S. Geological Survey monitoring at Somerset, is sufficient <br />to monitor the affects to the essential hydrologic functions of the <br />alluvial valley floor. However, the following stipulation is required <br />if the USGS station is discontinued: <br />Stipulation No. 2 <br />IN ITS ANNUAL HYDROLOGY ASSESS[~1T, THE APPLICANT SHALL CONTINUE TO <br />INCLUDE WATER QUANTITY DATA FROM THE U.S.G.S. SCbff.RSET MONI'It~RING <br />STATION. SHOULD THE U.S.G.S. DISCONTINUE MONITORING AT THIS LOCATION, <br />THE OPERATOR SHALL SUBMIT ITS OWN QUANTITY MONITI~RING PROGRAM Ft~R THE <br />NORTH FORK OF THE GUNNISON. <br />VIII Water Rights and Replacement (2.04.7(3), 2.05.6(3), (ii), 2 <br />As requested by MLRD, the State Engineer's Office, Division of Water <br />Resources reviewed the original permit application and identified the <br />following problems with regard to the operations proposed under the <br />five year permit application and to portions of the leased area outside <br />of the initial five year permit area. In addition, several concerned <br />citizens identified similar problems within the lease area which are <br />beyond the initial five year permit boundary, in particular the <br />Minnesota Creek Drainage Basin which provides a significant amount of <br />water to many farming and ranching operations in the Paonia area. All <br />problems associated with the operations during the initial five year <br />permit application were satisfactorily resolved, but many of the <br />concerns which pertain to lease areas outside of the initial permit <br />area, such as the Minnesota Creek Drainage Basin, were not <br />satisfactorily resolved and were stipulated. The items of concern <br />which were satisfactorily resolved will be dealt with first. <br />The Division of Water Resources in their March 26, 1980 and January 30, <br />1981 memoranda to Nff,RD indicated that an application for a well permit <br />would be required of WECC before seepage water from the overburden and <br />water from strata below the coal could be used in the mine, and that <br />before the permit could be approved, WECC must show that other water <br />rights would not be injured. WECC responded satisfactorily by stating <br />on revised page 3-39, Section 3.2.8.2.a of the application that water <br />from strata below the coal and seepage water through the overburden <br />will be utilized only when WECC's rights to this water are in <br />priority. At all other times, they will be discharged following <br />appropriate treatment to insure maintenance of effluent limitations, tc <br />the North Fock. <br />WECC indicated on Figure 3.2.8.A of the original application that <br />disturbed area runoff and excess mine water would either be discharged <br />to the North Fork of the Gunnison or reused in the mine. The Division <br />of Water Resources said that if the water is to be reused, WECC would <br />