My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE137697
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
400000
>
PERMFILE137697
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:38:19 PM
Creation date
11/26/2007 6:25:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007A
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
4/8/2005
Doc Name
pages 2.05-157 to 2.05-267
Section_Exhibit Name
2.05 Operation and Reclamation Part 3
Media Type
D
Archive
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
87
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
West Elk Mine <br />flows were measured as well, from five of the remaining six (non-adjudicated) resources identified <br />above azeas proposed to be mined. Investigation of the Division of Water Resources records in <br />1994 showed no documentation of historical flows and, thus, no beneficial use, for any of the <br />Jumbo Mountain water rights. <br />Based on monitoring data obtained during arsine-month period (September 1993 through May, <br />1994), the physical water supply is only a fraction of the decreed diversion rate. Of the eight <br />decreed ponds and "reservoirs" with a surface source (at least in part), the cumulative flows <br />measured are approximated by the total annual precipitation on the north side of Jumbo Mountain <br />(i.e. "natural augmentation" of measured (actual) flows). In addition, the majority of the <br />adjudicated water resources on Jumbo Mountain aze located down-dip of the proposed mining and <br />outside the permit area. No effect to these resources from mining is projected as water migrating <br />down-dip through the B-Seam would still enter the colluvium of the ancient landslide on the north <br />slope of the mountain. The colluvium in this azea will not be mined under, as no minable B-Seam <br />exists. The overburden is generally greater than 370 feet, as well, and no impact is anticipated. In <br />any case, if effected, Mountain Coal Company will repair the water right resource to measured <br />flows or storage amounts or enhance the right within and up to the decreed amount. <br />,~~Ivacter (;,doh -Engineering analysis indicate that there is a small probability that the mining in <br />the Apache Rocks and Box Canyon permit revision areas will deplete Sylvester Gulch flows (see <br />Section 2.05.6 (3)(b)(iii & viii), Surface Water Quantity Effects. <br />There are three decreed water diversion systems in the Sylvester Gulch drainage (Table 44). All of <br />these rights are owned and controlled by MCC. MCC realizes that there may be injury to these <br />rights and will accept that possibility and does not plan to augment them within the Sylvester Gulch <br />basin. <br />However, depletions that may occur to Sylvester Gulch flow could affect senior North Fork water <br />rights if a call for junior Sylvester Gulch water rights is made. (See North Fork Gunnison River <br />below). Call records for the North Fork aze presented later in this section. <br />As discussed below, MCC has a significant North Fork water rights portfolio that is available to <br />cover Sylvester Gulch depletions, if necessary (Table 45). <br />Nnrrh Fnrk C:~mnicnn River -Though unlikely, subsidence may potentially reduce North Fork <br />flows due to disruption of streamflows, springs, and groundwater, each of which are discussed <br />below. <br /> <br />2.05-177 November 200 PRlI <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.