My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL41305
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL41305
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:08:44 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 11:08:17 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
4/11/1986
Doc Name
Proposed Decision & Findings of Compliance for PR3
From
Permanent Lower Waste Pile
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.
/
69
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
-32- <br />between Paonia and Lazear. However, a review of past U.S. Geological <br />Survey (U.S.G.S.) records indicates that for the years 1922 through <br />1932, a gaging station existed on the North Fork of the Gunnison River <br />near Paonia. Also, for the years 1932 through 1950, a gaging station <br />existed in Somerset. These two stations are important since Paonia <br />Reservoir was not yet constructed and, thus, did not affect inflows to <br />the basin. <br />Use of these stations allows determination of approximate inflows to <br />the North Fork of the Gunnison River contributed by the study watershed <br />boundary located on Figure 1. The average monthly flows are <br />illustrated on Table 2, along with the inflows to the North Fork of the <br />Gunnison River from Minnesota Creek. These figures were used to <br />determine the amount of outflow via the North Fork of the Gunnison <br />River from the basin. Obviously, such predictions are not absolutely <br />accurate. For example, less than 3 years of data existed for Minnesota <br />Creek and 1 year (1977) experienced drought conditions. However, for <br />purposes of this assessment, such figures provide a rough approximation <br />of flows through the general area. <br />PROBABLE HYDROLOGIC CONSEQUENCES <br />Ground Water <br />Since the Mt. Gunnison No. 1 Mine began operations, it has experienced <br />some mine inflows. There are three basic types of mine inflows that <br />are seen at the mine. The first type of inflow is due to primary <br />permeability which is ground water flow through the competent portions <br />of F-Seam and lower Barren Member. The second type of inflow occurs in <br />the coal seam and overlying Barren Member in areas of shallow <br />overburden; this is secondary permeability and is the result of ground <br />water flow through the fractured and weathered portions of these <br />strata. The fractured rock acts as a conduit to the surface colluvial <br />aquifer. The third type of inflow is also due to secondary <br />permeability and it is the result of ground water flow along fault <br />zones. These fault zones may be in contact with surface aquifers or <br />with other water bearing zones in the overburden. The streams in the <br />North Fork area are generally fault controlled and may be a source of <br />recharge for fault related inflows. <br />De-watering will occur in portions of the coal seam that contain water <br />and in the lower portions of the Barren Member; it will reach a maximum <br />at the furthest extent of mining. Mine inflows, on the other hand, <br />will reach a maximum sometime before the furthest extent of mining and <br />will then taper off until equilibrium is reached. Shallow surface <br />aquifers located close to the coal outcrop may experience some <br />influence by the second mechanism of mine inflow, mentioned above. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.