My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2008-06-23_APPLICATION CORRESPONDENCE - C2008086
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Application Correspondence
>
Coal
>
C2008086
>
2008-06-23_APPLICATION CORRESPONDENCE - C2008086
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:33:24 PM
Creation date
6/23/2008 2:56:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C2008086
IBM Index Class Name
APPLICATION CORRESPONDENCE
Doc Date
6/23/2008
Doc Name
Responses/Comments and Concerns
From
J.E. Stover & Associates Inc
To
DRMS
Email Name
MPB
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
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
2.04.7 Hydrology Description <br />The springs listed on the BLM GIS data base were not within the permit or <br />adjacent area. Eight of the springs inventoried by Dorchester Coal <br />Company were located in the permit and adjacent area as well as the <br />spring identified by URS. <br />The Dorchester springs were inventoried in September and November <br />1983. All were noted a being seeps. BSC1 and SCS2 were noted as <br />having a pool of water along the channel with no flow observed. The only <br />spring for which quality information was taken was SCS2 (ph 7.7, <br />conductivity 5,600 umhos/cm and temperature 34°C. <br />A field survey was conducted during April 2008 to try to find the <br />Dorchester springs. None were identified because the channel was wet <br />and muddy and it was not possible to distinguish the springs from spring <br />snowmelt. A second field survey was conducted on June 19, 2008. <br />Springs SCS1, SCS2, BCS1A, BSC1 and BCS2 were identified. All would <br />be characterized as seeps at best. BCS1A, BCS2 and SCS2 were damp <br />spots. SCS1 and BCS1 both had a small pool of water. The quality of <br />SCS1 was; pH 7. 1, conductivity 4,000 umhos/cm and temperature 17°C. <br />The quality of BCS1 was; pH 7.8, conductivity 6,900 umhos/cm and <br />temperature 26°C. There was not an adequate quantity of water for a <br />laboratory analysis. Springs BSC3, BSC4 and SCS3 were not located. <br />The URS spring noted as URS1 on Map 9 was initially identified on April <br />22, 2008. Flow was estimated at 2 gpm. No quality data was obtained. <br />On June 19, 2008, URS1 was characterized as a few shallow pools. The <br />quality of URS1 was; pH 7.6, conductivity 59,000 umhos/cm and <br />temperature 26°C. There was not an adequate quantity of water for a <br />laboratory analysis. <br />(b)(i) Minimum, maximum, and average flow data identifying seasonal variations of <br />low flow and peak discharge rates are presented in this section and in <br />Volume III, Exhibit 3. <br />Permit Application 2.04-31 06/08
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.