Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />U <br /> <br />J <br />Chapter 3 <br />Affected Environment and Environmental Consequences <br />Minnesota Creek (USGS gaging station). These <br />gaging stations are sampled three times per annum <br />for field water quality parameters (pH, EC, and <br />temperature), and sampled once per year for <br />laboratory water quality analysis. In addition to <br />these stream gaging stations, the spring and seep <br />monitoring program monitors flow, field water <br />quality, and laboratory water quality from springs <br />located in the lower Dry Fork. and lower Deep <br />Creek drainage basins, designated J-4 and 26-1 <br />respectively (Figure 3-6)., <br />3,3,3,2 Groundwater <br />Shallow groundwater in the LBA tract area is <br />limited due to geomorphologic controls from the <br />relatively steep gradients and stream profiles of <br />drainages, resulting in thin alluvial/colluvial <br />deposits confined to the drainage bottoms. <br />Groundwater that surfaces as springs and seeps in <br />the LBA tract area is associated with these shallow <br />alluvial/colluvial deposits and does not appear to be <br />hydrologically connected with deeper bedrock <br />aquifers. There are no alluvial/colluvial monitoring <br />wells in the LBA tract area that are currently <br />monitored as part of the West Elk hydrologic <br />program. The upper Dry Fork alluvial (shallow) <br />well shown on Figure 3-6, installed in 2003, is not <br />currently monitored. Its status is unknown. <br />Bedrock groundwatef resources in the Dry Fork <br />tract area are limited to isolated perched lenses and <br />fracture/fault zones. There is one groundwater <br />monitoring well in the Dry Fork tract area that is <br />completed in bedrock and monitored by the West <br />Elk Mine hydrologic program (well 96-2-2, Figure <br />3-6). This well is sampled 3 times per year for field <br />parameters and water level and once per annum for <br />laboratory water quality analysis for parameter <br />specified in the hydrologic monitoring program. <br />Static water levels in well 96-2-2, since time of <br />completion, have ranged from 704 feet to 727 feet <br />below ground surface (HydroGeo 2003). Age- <br />dating chemical analyses from the West Elk <br />monitoring program have shown that bedrock <br />groundwater resources in the vicinity of the mine <br />are part of a deep inactive system that is not in <br />direct contact with near-surface water (USDA <br />Forest Service 2003a). <br />Groundwater may also be present to a limited extent <br />within coal seams. Bedrock and associated coal <br />seams dip to the northeast, with the uppermost <br />strata outcropping along the North Fork Valley. The <br />occurrence of groundwater springs in the North <br />Fork outcrops of the Mesa Verde formation is rare. <br />BLM and MCC report that the coal seams in the <br />West Elk Mine area are typically dry, with average <br />moisture content of 5 percent. Groundwater <br />discharges from faults intercepted by longwall <br />panels in the West Elk Mine have experienced <br />initially high volume discharge periods followed <br />diminishing to negligible flow within a short time <br />period. No effects to surface water resources have <br />been documented from interception of water- <br />bearing faults underground. Not all faults <br />encountered during mining have contained water. <br />Mine underdrain and mine inflow sites are currently <br />monitored for flow and water quality by the West <br />Elk hydrologic program. The total inflow for the <br />West Elk Mine is approximately 200 acre-feet per <br />year (HydroGeo 2003). It is assumed for this <br />analysis that any water-bearing faults that are <br />intercepted by the proposed longwall panels in the <br />Dry Fork tract would flow 1,000 gallons per minute <br />(gpm) or less when encountered, then decrease to <br />negligible flows (Koontz 2003). Any groundwater <br />encountered would be handled by the existing <br />system in the MCC underground operation. <br />Discharge water would be required to meet the <br />NPDES and Colorado Discharge Permit System <br />(CDPS) surface water quality standards. <br />It is difficult to assess mining-related effects of <br />groundwater interception and withdrawal on <br />regional water supply due to ongoing drought <br />conditions in the region. Yearly decreases in annual <br />stream flow in both Minnesota Creek and the North <br />Fork of the Gunnison River during the period <br />between 1999 and 2003 document ongoing drought <br />conditions. The mean annual surface water flow for <br />water year (WY) 2002 was the lowest on record for <br />Minnesota Creek and second lowest on record for <br />the North Fork of the Gunnison River (USGS <br />2003b). Average monthly and daily flows in <br />Minnesota Creek for WY2002 were below <br />historical averages for the period of 1937 through <br />2002 (USGS 2003a), ranging from 17 to 74 percent <br />of the average monthly flow and 2 percent of the <br />average daily flow (HydroGeo 2003). <br />Climatological data from the West Elk Mine 2002 <br />Annual Hydrology Report (HydroGeo 2003) also <br />Dry Fork Lease-By-Application FEIS <br />3-19