My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REP09781
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Report
>
REP09781
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:39:19 PM
Creation date
11/27/2007 12:14:33 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980005
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Date
6/25/1992
Doc Name
1986 AHR Table of Contents
From
Peabody Coal Company
To
DMG
Annual Report Year
1986
Permit Index Doc Type
Hydrology Report
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.
/
72
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
Little Grassy and Grassy Creek and thus detected by the frequent monitoring at <br />~~ surface water Site 002, SW-52-1, and SW-52-2. <br />Field parameters at Site GW-S31-A2 and 33 will be collected on a semiannual basis at <br />the same time that the long suite water quality samples are obtained. Page 7-157 of <br />the Seneca II Permit Revision has been revised to incorporate the new sampling <br />frequency. A copy is attached to replace the existing Page 7-157 in the Permit <br />Application Package (PAP). <br />2. A discussion is provided pertaining to the Peabody Commf tment to verify the MYMO <br />Model (Appendix G). An explanation is offered that the comparison is not feasible <br />due to limitations of the Model. A request is made (P. G-1) to revise the permit <br />text to remove this commitment. <br />The SEDIMOi II Model is currently being used by Peabody for drainage design. Ir <br />considering the proposed revision, the option of verifying the SEDIM07 II Model <br /> should be reviewed by Peabody based on the intended purposes of the commitment. This <br /> consideration should be made prior to the revision submittal. <br />RESPONSE: <br />On Page 7-77 of the Seneca II Permit Revision, Peabody stated that as more flow data <br />became available, verification of the MYMO Model would be possible. Page 7-174 restated <br />the above and indicated that the results of this verification exercise would be reported <br />in the 1986 AHR. Upon examination, the type of monitoring data being collected annot be <br />used for model verification. Most of the reclaimed area ponds being monitored are spring <br />and or ground water fed. HYMO does not have any subroutines that incorporate ground water <br />. flow components. <br />Within the past year and a half, all drainage designs have been performed using SEDIMOT <br />11. Extensive and detailed monitoring analyses have been performed by the University of <br />Kentucky to demonstrate the applicability of the Model to coal mined watersheds. As in <br />the case of MYMO, the type of monitoring data being collected by Peabody cannot be used <br />for verification of the SEDIMOT II Model. In light of the extensive studies performed by <br />the University of Kentucky and the general acceptance of SED IMOT II, it should not be <br />necessary to attempt to further verify the Model. <br />The appropriate sentences of Pages 7-77 and 7-174 have been deleted on the revised pages <br />enclosed. Please replace the existing pages in the Permit With the revised ones. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.