My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL49126
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL49126
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:27:15 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 4:52:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1984065
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
9/1/1989
Doc Name
PROPOSED DECISION & FINDINGS OF COMPLIANCE FOR RN1
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.
/
21
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
i • <br />a. The Probable Hydrologic Consequences of Mining at the Coal Ridge #1 <br />tKi ne: <br />The Coal Ridge No. 1 Mine is located adjacent to the Colorado River <br />in Garfield County, Colorado. The location is approximately 7 <br />miles west of Glenwood Springs and 1.5 miles southeast of the town <br />of New Castle. The Probable Hydrologic Consequences section of the <br />original Findings Document describes in detail the local and <br />regional geography, hydrology, and geology, and is incorporated by <br />reference into this document. <br />The surface facilities of the mine are located on the north flank <br />of the Grand Hogback, a geological structure which exposes parts of <br />the Upper Cretaceous Mancos Shale and Mesaverde Group. The <br />elevation of the site ranges from 5,600 feet near the Colorado <br />River to 7,585 feet at the crest of the Grand Hogback. <br />The Mancos Shale is at least 4,000 feet thick in the area, is <br />easily erodible, and intertongues wiUi the lower part of the <br />Mesaverde Group. The lower Mesaverde Group is referred to as the <br />Iles Formation, which consists mostly of shale with several <br />sandstone members known, from oldest to youngest, as the Corcoran, <br />Cozzette, and Rollins Sandstones. The Williams Fork Formation <br />conformably overlies the Iles Formation, and includes in its lower <br />section the Wheeler Coal seam which was to have been mined at Coal <br />Ridge. Above the Wheeler seam are two mappable sandstone members, <br />the Middle and the Upper Sandstones, as well as several uneconomic <br />coal seams. The Wheeler Seam is separated from the underlying <br />Rollins Sandstone by approximately 75 feet of shale and sandstone. <br />In places the Wheeler Seam is split into two seams which total up <br />to 35 feet in thickness. <br />The formations exposed in the Grand Hogback dip to the south and <br />southwest, into the Piceance Basin, at approximately 60 degrees. <br />The depth to the formations in the Basin has greatly limited their <br />potential for water development. Potential aquifers in the section <br />include the Rollins Sandstone, Wheeler Coal, and the Middle and <br />Upper Sandstones. The Middle and Upper Sandstones in the permit <br />area do not yield water, while the Rollins Sandstone and Wheeler <br />Coal typically yield less than 5 GPM, and are saturated only in <br />deeper areas. The Grand Hogback is thought to be principally a <br />recharge zone for these formations. <br />Ground water development in the area is dominated by wells <br />producing from the alluvium of the Colorado River and its <br />tributaries. Water level and quality of the alluvial ground water <br />are closely related to that of the Colorado River surface water. <br />The Probable Hydrologic Consequences section of the original <br />Findings Document stated that mixing of ground waters of the <br />Rollins Sandstone and Wheeler Coal was possible due to fracturing <br />as~~ciated with mine development. However, the mine tunnels extend <br />only 613 feet (N o. 1 mine) and 576 feet (No. 2 mine) into the <br />hogback, and are still approximately 900 feet from the Wheeler <br />Seam. Only very minor, unmeasurable water inflow has occurred up <br />to this time in the No. 2 mine tunnel, and none in the No. 1 <br />tunnel. It is highly unlikely that the tunnels have modified the <br />ground water conditions in the Mesaverde Group. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.