Laserfiche WebLink
GRAND MESA COAL COMPANY <br /> 1989 ANNUAL HYDROLOGIC REPORT <br /> HYDROLOGIC YEAR 10/88 - 9/89 <br /> Grand Mesa completed the reclamation of its Red Canyon mine site <br /> during 1988 . Sedimentation control for the site is accomplished <br /> with a sediment pond and the use of sediment traps for a small <br /> area exemption. Both systems worked effectively during the year. <br /> No run-off water was discharged from the site during the year. <br /> This year' s report is formatted the same as the 1987 and 1988 <br /> reports . Monitoring values are compared with the average of pre- <br /> vious values for the same month which generally include monitor- <br /> ing results from 1981 through 1988 . The averages shown in this <br /> report are slightly different from prior years reports because <br /> the 1988 values are included in the averages . <br /> As a result of a technical revision approved September 5 , 1989 , <br /> required hydrologic monitoring of the area around the mine site <br /> has been reduced. Current monitoring requirements are shown on <br /> pages 144 and 144a of the Permit. The new monitoring program <br /> will go into effect during the 1989 - 1990 water year. <br /> • SURFACE WATER <br /> Table S-89 shows the surface water monitoring results for this <br /> water year compared to the averages of previous monitoring <br /> results for the same month. <br /> According to the local irrigation office , 1989 was a below <br /> average year for run-off and it was worse than 1988 . Unless the <br /> mountains receive above average snowfall this winter, 1990 will <br /> be a very dry year. <br /> Spot flow readings taken in May will vary because of the timing <br /> and intensity of snowmelt . The May flows in Ward and Williams <br /> Creeks were substantially lower than prior years averages . In <br /> fact there was not really a spring run-off this year. <br /> The late season flow in the creeks is augmented by reservoir dis- <br /> charge. The September flow in Ward and Williams Creeks were low <br /> but about what would be expected for a dry year. <br /> The flow in the springs this year was in all cases lower than <br /> average . The revised hydrologic monitoring program expands the <br /> sampling of springs 1 & 3 to flow and conductivity twice each <br />