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
-43- <br />1) by increasing infiltration which would, in turn decrease runoff, <br />2) by lowering the piezometric surface and causing springs to dry <br />up, and <br />3) by direct infiltration from streams and their alluvium, or <br />terraces. <br />In areas not covered by soils, subsidence fractures would directly <br />divert runoff into the ground water system. In such an area, numerous <br />open fractures could significantly reduce surface runoff. In areas <br />covered with soils (which would not maintain an open fracture), any <br />reduction in runoff would be less severe. Subsidence fractures would <br />increase deep percolation of soil water, but the infiltration <br />characteristics of the soil would still control the amount of runoff. <br />Infiltration might still increase slightly, because deep percolation <br />might more rapidly deplete soil moisture and decrease anticedent <br />moisture. <br />A lowering of the piezometric surface might cause intermittent and <br />perennial springs to go completely dry. Exhibit 2.8.1.U identifies <br />numerous springs in or adjacent to the area to be mined. The <br />application (2-253-6) indicates that springs contribute 11 percent of <br />the flow in Lower Dry Fork, 4 percent of the flow in Lick Creek, 12.6 <br />percent of the flow in South Prong, and 0.9 percent of the flow in <br />Horse Creek. Excluding the Sylvester Gulch data, springs could <br />contribute 6.2 percent of the low flow runoff. In reality, it is <br />probable that not all the springs would be affected and, therefore, <br />reduction of surface flow would be less than the worst case scenario. <br />Subsidence could reduce stream flow by directly diverting surface flow <br />and alluvial ground water into the bedrock ground water system. This <br />effect is undesirable both because of the hydrologic effects and the <br />mine operation problems it could produce. The applicant has proposed a <br />subsidence protection plan for the Dry Fork of Minnesota Creek to <br />protect streamflow. The adequacy of this protection plan was not <br />assessed as a part of this permit review, The Division prefers that <br />the site specific monitoring data concerning subsidence and its <br />hydrologic effects betaken into account in the design of any <br />protection plan. <br />Stipulation No. 9 <br />WFIQI THE APPLICANT SUBMITS A PERMIT APPLICATION ~ UNDERMINE THE DRY <br />FORK OF MINNESOTA CREEK, THE SUBSIDENCE PROTECTION PLAN SHOULD BE BASED <br />UPON MONITORING INFORMATION COLLECTED DURING THE EARLIER PHASES OF <br />MINING. <br />Three perennial streams cross the southern portion of the life-of-mine <br />area, Lick Creek, South Prong, and Horse Creek. Subsidence effects <br />could be significant along these stream courses as well, unless the <br />applicant undertakes to design subsidence protection plans for these <br />drainages as well as Dry Fork. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.