My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2001-07-16_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1980007
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Coal
>
C1980007
>
2001-07-16_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1980007
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/22/2021 3:16:23 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 3:29:24 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
7/16/2001
Doc Name
Proposed Decision & Findings of Compliance for RN4
Permit Index Doc Type
FINDINGS
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
65
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
sites' isolation from modern river terraces and general site and soil characteristics <br /> indicate that agricultural development prior to its present use is not likely. <br /> MCC has no control over the terrace area on the north side of the North Fork (SWIA, <br /> Section 9, T13S, R90W) and has no plans for developing this site in association with <br /> the West Elk Mine. Less than ten acres of noncolluvial materials are evident at this <br /> location. Most of these are associated with the apparent glacial remnant gravel <br /> deposits. No agricultural activities have been conducted on this site. The immature <br /> soils would not be adequate to support general agronomic activities, and development <br /> would probably be limited to improved pasture. Because of the size limitations of this <br /> area and the lack of a well developed soil capable of supporting sustained agronomic <br /> production, the terrace area on the north side of the North Fork does not meet the <br /> criteria of an AVF. <br /> Downstream from the town of Somerset, the valley opens up and the applicant has <br /> identified a much larger body of alluvium. Areas within Sections 13 and 14 have been <br /> identified as currently supporting agriculture. In the permit approval issued July 29, <br /> 1981, MCC was notified of a positive alluvial valley floor declaration for the North <br /> Fork of the Gunnison River in Section 18, T13S, R90W and Sections 13 and 14, <br /> T13S, R91W. A stipulation was included in the original permit approval requiring <br /> that the applicant demonstrate that the mining operation's fresh water usage will not <br /> materially damage the quantity and quality of water supplying the alluvial valley floor. <br /> This stipulation was complied with on March 25. 1982, with the following response: <br /> Mining activities at the West Elk Mine will not affect the quantity and quality of <br /> water in the North Fork. The coal seam to be mined lies a significant distance <br /> above the North Fork and is not considered to bean aquifer. Surface facilities <br /> have been designed and located to prevent contamination of the river. <br /> Changes in the quantity of water supplied to the AVF depend on the difference <br /> between water used and water discharged to the North Fork of the Gunnison River. <br /> Total water use is expected to be about 150 acre- feet per year during maximum <br /> projected production. This represents less than 0.04 percent of the average annual <br /> stream flow on the North Fork. Since less than 70 percent of this use is deemed to be <br /> consumptive use, the loss is actually less than 0.03 percent of the average stream flow. <br /> In addition, water is withdrawn during higher flows when MCC's water rights are in <br /> priority. During low flow periods when other calls for water exist, MCC would not <br /> be withdrawing water. <br /> Water quality changes resulting from discharge of waste water will not constitute <br /> material damage because no measurable change in water quality is expected to occur. <br /> Of the 200,000 gallons/day maximum projected use, 38,000 gallons/day <br /> (28.5 acre-feet/year) would be required for potable water use. Consumptive use of <br /> potable water would be minimal. Assuming no consumptive use, one would expect a <br /> discharge of less than 0.06 cubic feet per second (cfs) during plant operation. This <br /> use and return flow is insignificant compared to the flows in the North Fork of the <br /> 58 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.