Laserfiche WebLink
~ • <br /> <br /> <br />2.0 Flydralagic Data lNerpMadon and LapaC Assusmmt for the Permit and Adjacent Arras <br />Flow volumes from MCC sediment ponds <br />are low relative to the North Fork of the <br />Gunnison flows. Even during low flow <br />conditions on the North Fork MCC dis- <br />charges represent an imperceptible differ- <br />ence in stream quality. <br />Based on the analyses, sediment pond dis- <br />charges have had no adverse impact on the <br />North Fork of the Gunnison River. The <br />quality of discharges usually is better than <br />the quality of the North Fork. In addition, <br />pond discharge flows are so small that <br />incremental changes in concentrations in the <br />North Fork are imperceptible. <br />Discharges of surface runoff in 1996 are <br />expected to be similaz to 1995. <br />2.6 ADEQUACY OF <br />MONITORING PROGRAM <br />An evaluation of the adequacy of the current <br />monitoring plan was conducted to determine <br />whether the program is covering anticipated <br />affects. The mine workings map (Figure 2) <br />was overlaid on the resources maps to deter- <br />mine the potential resources which may be <br />affected. Although several resources are <br />above the mined area and adjacent to the <br />mined area, overburden depths aze great <br />enough so that no impacts aze anticipated. In <br />addition, the un-named stock ponds are <br />typically small dugouts to capture spring <br />runoff and precipitation. Because there is <br />no regular source of water, they are usually <br />d-Y• <br />Springs overlying mining which have not <br />proposed for monitoring include G-4, G-7, <br />G-8, J-18, and G-29. Spring G-4 was a <br />wide-spread, seepy azea. No measurable <br />flows existed, just wet soil. Springs G-7 <br />and G-8 were indistinguishable seeps located <br />in a steep, rocky draw. Flows from the <br />AFflt-93 210/09119/960~)Ipm) <br />23 <br />seeps were usually measurable in the Spring, <br />only in one spot where they could be <br />accumulated before flowing into a U.S. <br />Forest Service stock pond. Other times of <br />the year the springs diminished to just wet <br />soils. 'The F-seam was developed at this <br />location (1st East Submains), but ~ pillars <br />were recovered, as the panel was abandoned <br />and sealed due to unsafe mining conditions. <br />J-18 has been dry more than it has had <br />yields in baseline data collection from 1975 <br />to 1981. Flows of 1 gpm were measured <br />7/17/75 and 12/2/81. Spring G-29 showed <br />seasonal variation during baseline data <br />collection, but always had flows. MCC <br />returned to the tagged site in 1994 and <br />found that the spring had stopped flowing. <br />MCC is expanding lease holdings adjacent to <br />the permit area and acquiring baseline water <br />monitoring data. This effort will continue <br />into the 1996 V/Y. <br />"F" Seam <br />MCC plans no further mining activities in <br />the F seam in V/Y 1996. <br />"B" Seam <br />Outing 1996, longwall panel and mains <br />development and longwall retreat mining <br />will continue. Development of the 8th and <br />9th Northwest longwall panels will be <br />completed. longwall mining of the 7th, 8th <br />and 9th Northwest longwall panel are <br />planned. Development of some of the B <br />East Mains and B North Mains will also <br />begin. <br />Water Quality <br />Samples taken during the water yeaz indicate <br />water quality in the mine to be good. Only <br />the amount of water necessary for mining <br />