Laserfiche WebLink
fiii iuiiiiiuiu iii <br />999 <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Dcpanmenl of Natural Resources <br />1715 Sherman 51., Room ? I $ <br />Ocover, Gdnrado 802U3 <br />Phone: (7071 866-5567 <br />FnX' ILl tl 8R-81 O6 <br />July 17, 1998 <br />Mr. AI Weaver <br />Southfield Mine <br />Energy Fuels Coal, Inc. <br />P.O. Box 459 <br />Florence, Colorado 81226 <br />RE: Southfield Mine; Permit No. C-81-041; Annual Hydrology Report <br />Deaz Mr. Weaver: <br />~~~~~ <br />DEPAkTMENT OF <br />NATURAL <br />RESOURCES <br />Roy Romer <br />Gm ernur <br />lames 5. Lochhead <br />Executive Director <br />M¢haei 8. Long <br />DIYI$IUn DireClor <br />The Division has reviewed Energy Fuels Coal, Inc.'s (EFCI's) Annual Hydrology Report (AHR) <br />received June 1 I, 1998. The 1997 AHR covers an expanded water year of 18 months (July 1, 1996 <br />through December 31, 1997). The 1997 AHR complies with the provisions of the mine permit. <br />The operator did an excellent job at collecting all of the required samples at the appropriate <br />frequency as specified by the approved monitoring program. All NPDES dischazges were in <br />compliance with the requirements of the approved CDPS permit. Overall the report was well <br />organized and covered the required topics. The Division has the following minor comments <br />concerning the adequacy of the submittal. <br />1. It appeazs that relatively precise measurements are provided for mine inflows in acre-feet. <br />The text states that mine inflows were estimated. Please discuss the methodologies used to <br />estimate the inflows in future AHR submittals. <br />2. It would be helpful to have a table of well completion data including total depth, screened <br />interval, formation, etc. included for easy reference in future AHRs. <br />3. It was noted that iron exceeds the Secondary Drinking Water Standard (Basic Standards for <br />Groundwater) in well MW-16 on 3/24/97 and on 9/30/97. Manganese exceeds the <br />Secondary Drinking Water Standard inwell M W-65 on 9/9/96, 3/24/97 and 9/30/97. These <br />results do not appear to be significantly elevated above baseline levels. This does not <br />represent a significant concern, because there are essentially no receptors for potential <br />groundwater contamination within the permit or adjacent areas. <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />4. Overall, groundwaterwells show declining water levels, which is generally consistent with <br />the predicted probable hydrologic consequences discussed in the permit document. <br />