My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2008-03-21_PERMIT FILE - C1980007A (46)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Coal
>
C1980007
>
2008-03-21_PERMIT FILE - C1980007A (46)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:25:41 PM
Creation date
6/20/2008 3:24:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007A
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
3/21/2008
Doc Name
pg 2.05-200 to 2.05-300
Section_Exhibit Name
2.05.6 Mitigation of Surface Coal Mining Operation Impacts Part 2
Media Type
D
Archive
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
102
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
West Elk Mine <br />• Review of Table 46 and recognition of the fact that a new 2,000 gpm pumping facility will be <br />operational by late 1998, lead to the following observations specifically pertaining to water rights: <br />In 1996, MCC dischazged more water to the North Fork than it diverted from the North <br />Fork. Specifically, there was a surplus of approximately 157 acre-feet that came primarily <br />during the late spring and early summer when the B East Mains fault inflows were at their <br />highest. <br />During November and December 1996, it was assumed there were minor North Fork <br />depletions because in-mine runoff water from the Mount Gunnison Pipeline (i.e., North <br />Fork water that was pumped into the mine for mining use) along with fault water inflows, <br />were collected in operational sumps and then pumped to the NW Panels sealed sump. <br />However, there was no North Fork call during this time; hence, no vested downstream water <br />rights were harmed as a consequence of storing water in the sumps. Furthermore, North <br />Fork minimum stream flows were maintained during this period. <br />There will likely be no net North Fork depletions, because mine discharges (including the <br />fault water inflows) will equal or exceed surface diversions. Further, MCC will continue to <br />ensure that any North Fork water which is diverted when the Mount Gunnison Pipeline is <br />out of priority will be fully replaced by its other North Fork replacement water (i.e. Fire <br />Mountain Canal leased water from East Beckwith No. 1 Reservoir, etc). <br />4. A$er the new pumping facility is operational, there will continue to be no affect to senior <br />water rights diversions in the North Fork because the pumping facility will contribute flows <br />to the North Fork well upstream of these diversions, as well as, MCC's intake gallery. Also, <br />any out-of-priority diversions will continue to be replaced with releases from East Beckwith <br />No. 1 Reservoir or MCC's other North Fork water rights. <br />After analyzing the 1996 North Fork diversions and return flows, WWE concluded that there <br />were no Section 7 (of the Endangered Species Act) issues that arose from MCC's <br />management of the fault water inflows, including use of the sealed panels sumps. That is, <br />the endangered fish species in the lower Colorado River will not be harmed as a consequence <br />of MCC's water management practices, because MCC has introduced (during 1996) and will <br />likely continue to introduce more water than it will divert from the North Fork on an annual <br />basis. <br /> <br />7.05-1I6 RevrsedJun. 1995 PR06; RevisedNm. 1998 TR80; 1/98 PROS; Rev. Ma1~1006PR10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.