My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE137750
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
400000
>
PERMFILE137750
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:38:22 PM
Creation date
11/26/2007 6:31:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
12/2/2004
Doc Name
2.06 Requirements for Permits for Special Categories of Mining
Type & Sequence
PR10
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.
/
12
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 />• The effluent from the treatment unit has the following characteristics: <br />Soluble B.O.D. 16 mg/L <br />Suspended Solids B.O.D. 14 mg/T <br /> 30 mg/L <br />Suspended Solids 30 mg/L <br />Ammonia (NHs) 1.0 mg/L <br />Nitrate (NO3) 29 mg/L <br />Combined Chlorine Residual 0.1 mg/L <br />Fecal Coliforms 10,000/100m1 <br />Ammonia varies from 2 to 100 times the concentrations measured in the North Fork. The <br />suspended solids value varies from 0.2 to 15 times the suspended solids concentrations reported in <br />the M & R Plan. The nitrate values aze ten times the values reported for baseline conditions <br />measured in the North Fork, while B.O.D. values vary from 2 to 60 times the values encountered in <br />baseline monitoring. Considering the degree of dilution is considerably greater than two hundred- <br />fold even during extreme low flow conditions, it is unlikely that a water quality change would be <br />detected in the North Fork as a result of the discharge. Furthermore, the water quality pazameters <br />that might be marginally increased by the effluent would not pose a problem for irrigation use. <br />On an annual basis the water use is insignificant relative to the flow in the North Fork. To further <br />evaluate the risk of material damage to quantity and quality of water supplying downstream AVF's, <br />the daily water use scenario was considered. The 200,000 gallons/day maximum projected water <br />use represents less than two percent (2 percent) of the lowest flow on record (17 cfs). As previously <br />mentioned 38,000 gallons for domestic use would be primarily non-consumptive use and returned <br />to the river following treatment. <br />The remaining 162,000 gallons per day of water use is for coal spraying and dust suppression <br />activities. The estimate is conservative and includes a 15 percent contingency for leakage. <br />Consumptive use is difficult to estimate, but should be less than 85 percent. The return flow <br />would be collected and routed to sediment pond MB-1. This water is then treated and either <br />released to the North Fork or recycled. Assuming 138,000 gal/day (0.2 cfs) is the consumptive <br />use, only about 1 percent of the lowest flow on record would be consumed. However, even this <br />magnitude does not represent the true picture of risk of affecting water supplies to downstream <br />AVF's. Because of Mountain Coal Company's junior water rights, most of the water supply will <br />be withdrawn during spring runoff and stored for mine use. Thus, it is quite possible that during <br />the irrigation season the mine could be a net water producer. Given current market conditions, it <br />is unlikely that West Elk will achieve a maximum coal production rate of 2.8 MMTPY any time <br />in the foreseeable future. Thus water withdrawn and dischazged into the North Fork of the <br />Gunnison River from the mine will be significantly less than originally predicted and the impacts <br />to the North Fork AVF much less than discussed here. <br />C~ <br />2.06-11 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.