Laserfiche WebLink
III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII <br />999 <br />MINED LAND RECLAMATION DIVISION <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />1313 Sherman St., Room 215 <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />303 866-3567 <br />FAX: 303 832-8106 <br />DATE: January 19, 1990 <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />OF ~0[ <br />~`~> °'~ <br />Nc,%a 90 <br />~o <br />}~y~i, <br />~ re76 ~ <br />Roy Romer, <br />Gavemor <br />Fred R. Banta, <br />Division D:reIXOr <br />T0: Carl Mount <br />FROM: Cathy Begej r ~~~ <br />RE: Peabody Coal Company's Seneca II-W Pre-Blast Survey, C-82-057 <br />I would recommend acceptance of the material submitted with the pre-blast <br />survey of hydrologic structures. Water quality data acquired to date was <br />performed with acceptable quality control. They have committed to sampling <br />further in this submittal, to ascertain the seasonal fluctuations of these <br />resources, and I would hold them to this commitment. It is accept b~ that <br />they not monitor Peter Springs, as it appears to be a seep, and i they not <br />monitor the Smith ditches as the ditch itself is not likely to be damaged by <br />blasting. <br />I found out some additional information during my evaluation of this <br />submittal, that I though I should share wit~1 yyqqu. The drillers of the Olsen <br />well indicated that they thought it had a bead"of 120 gpm. Adjudication for <br />the well was assigned as 14.8 gpm, a standard adjudication volume for wells <br />which have not been measured. The current Peabody reading of 19.5 gpm fits <br />with the adjudication, but concerns me because it is ten times lower than the <br />original estimate. Either the drillers were overly optimistic or the Olsen's <br />consumption has resulted in serious dewaterina. Peabody might be well advised <br />to continue to monitor volume in the well annually to identify any dewaterina <br />trends due to consumption rather than blasting. <br />CWB/yjb <br />3300E <br />