Laserfiche WebLink
iii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii <br />999 <br /> STATE OF COLORADO <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />1313 Sherman 51., Room 215 y <br /> <br />Denver, ColoraAo 80203 ~l <br />~~ <br /> <br />Phone: 1303) BBh-7567 I <br />FA%:13031 8328106 <br /> DEPARTMENT OF <br />NATURAL <br />April 19, 1995 ~$~~CES <br />r Roy Romer <br />Mr. Basil Bear cu.crnor <br />Bear Coal Company dames 5. EochheaA <br />P.O. BOX 518 E.ecutive Duecmr <br />Somerset, CO 81434 M¢hael B. Long <br />Dwision Duccmr <br />RE: 1992, 1993, and 1994 Annual Hydrology Report; Bear Mine; <br />Permit No. C-81-033 <br />Dear Mr. Bear; <br />The Division has reviewed the 1993 and 1994 Annual Hydrology <br />Reports (AHR) for the Bear Mine. It appears that the 1992 AHR was <br />reviewed at an earlier date, but the comments were not forwarded to <br />Bear Coal Company (BCC). Therefore, this letter also addresses the <br />1992 AHR. <br />The alluvial well designations in the permit and the AHR are <br />reversed. On Map 10 in the permit, AA1 is shown as the well on the <br />west side of the facilities and AA3 is on the north side of the <br />facilities. On the map provided with the 1993 AHR, they have been <br />switched. In addition, the well data lists in the 1993 AHR that <br />correspond to the graphs have been reversed; the line for AA1 does <br />not match the data listed below the graph. Also, the lab reports <br />in the 1993 and 1994 have been changed to reflect different sample <br />IDs. Please clarify the well designation and correct the AHRs or <br />the permit. The well that shows the poorer quality is on the west <br />side of the facilities and will be referred in this letter as AA3, <br />which corresponds to the AHRs. <br />This review letter has been divided into four sections: Monitoring <br />Requirements and Frequency, Quality Analysis and Predictions, <br />Report Content Requirements, and General Recommendations and <br />Questions. <br />Monitoring Requirements and Frequency <br />BCC has revised the monitoring plan twice, which affects the <br />monitoring requirements for the 1993 and 1994 AHRs. The first <br />revision occurred after the submittal of the 1992 AHR and required <br />monitoring of the french drains for the 1993 AHR. The second <br />revision followed the submittal of the 1993 AHR. Monthly flow and <br />field parameters for springs G-26A, G-26B, and CR-12 are now <br />