GENERAL51068 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• Pescri ration cf Acelicar.t's PrrnosaZ T.he applicant does not propose to physical_y disturb a.-,y arias errderlain b~, crcon- selidated stream-laid decosits. t'l arias teat meet the geomorphic ..__teria of an I:['F .are loci tsd either do:vs Cream cf the mire or on t.^.~ other side of ~ draina~-e d.. vide. Thera is a slight poter,t~:a1 for the ?ualitu of watez supplied to the n': Fs to be degraded as a result of nir,:ng. T:,is is 81c:7ssed in tr.= foiloc;inc section. Discussi„n of Potential Impacts to .7/Fs The only A7Fs idenrified ir, the vi cinitu of the Trapper F.'ine r.ze the Ya r:oa Ziver, tF.e [villians Fort, River, and FIume G:a ch.The potential .`or each cf these tc b2 irepact.~d .bu the proposed minino operations will be discussed next. The potential for the Yampa River A'lF to be impacted by the psJ.nosed ..^ir.inq oper- a`__ons is probably neglicible. The spplicar.t has presented j~rsti_`-ications for this conclusion on paye 2-533 of the perr^.it appIication. Generally, _..'^.e Yampa R,ver i,VF receives very Iitt_'e of its water supply (both grcund cater end sur- face rater) from the propcsEd mina area. The ma?ority of the flow in. tee river and the alluvial aquifer come:; free the ~eadwa ter aortiens of the dial nice. The applicant states that the contribution of szrface ;rater from the Trapeer :Nir.=_ i., insigniricsnt and is~estimated at 0.07 cfs/mil. F^z-ther, the crcur:d eater con- tr_'bucion to the base flcw of the F'amx River _'s .•ndetectable. This is sub- • st3P.t12ted b3 see cage, ru.^.off and potenticm2ric studies (see :i_rpend_x H of t:~e parmat application) ch_`ch basicaLy sho:~ the fol _'o:~ri rag: (li The Yampa River loses surface water flow to the alluvial aquifer as it flo:os past the r_ne area, and (2) The Yampa alluvial aquifer is hydrauiicallu isolated f-om race bedrock aquifer of the ~/i__'iams pork Formation. In addil:ion, al~ disturbance related to tne~mine is located ac least one ~ri1e from the scutnern boun~iaru cf the 1'a T;na River F. ve'. T!:erefore, it is very unlikely that the Y'a:rpa River &VF will be impacted by the proposed mirinq operatign. The Potential fcr the [/illiams Fork Ricer AVF to bP impacted by the procosed Tz'apoer mining oceration is also negligible. .Tha [9iI1`ams Fork River is _'ccated :: r. the ocposite side ~` a maior drainage .divide from the Tranper Ftine. All drainage, ;;o th surface water and ground water flews ac~rav from the :villiams Fork Ri-rer and +:o.rards tf:e k'ampa P.ive^. Furtre^more, the strata to be affected bg the procosed min_ry opErat_'ons outcrop on Mite Yampa River side of the dr:i rage divide. Sn additior„ no miring-related disturbance _s proposed in t.`.e ::;:11.iams Fork River drainage aria. Therefor=, the iti'illiame FgrY. River A?rF should rot b~ i•~oacted by t;^e ;~ro_osed ~inirq c?erat~ors. The only other AVF idc-nti fled .... the viciri ty .~f the Trapper :line is Flcme Gsich. i7o mini..^.a disturbance cov~=rec ;rn.?er ,. e prcposEd `-near perm.i := tc-rm __ located .ithin t!:e =1cro Gu1c.': drainage area. Mining rcti~,~ti_=.z ;~i'.1 net c?at;.e~b gnu portion of the drainage azaa unt'1 the -ext 3-•;ear permit *_e-.T. .n aadi`_cn, necaue of the •i.ip of the .stra,:a (see .r,e Geol~~gg rvrti•~n of this doc~:~er.t) , a'1 around grater flow Bore the m_ne area _.; directsd ..eep be.^.eat!; ail ~i:~ :call drain- s .;ce.7 ir. the vicinity or the nine. Therefore, the pzopo;;.=d n_r.i^c oceretions in • -.his S-near permit te.;m shc:J.:d not i:r!nact the :lump Gulci~ ,;~/'.