My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2008-05-22_REVISION - C1980004
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1980004
>
2008-05-22_REVISION - C1980004
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:31:55 PM
Creation date
5/23/2008 9:33:04 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980004
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
5/22/2008
Doc Name
Adequacy Review
From
J.E. Stover & Associates
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
TR16
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.
/
23
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
Michael Boulay May 21. 2008 <br />Please respond to these concerns and take them into consideration in <br />amended sediment pond designs. <br />CAM: As demonstrated in Appendix N, the water quality of East Salt Creek will <br />not be adversely impacted, in fact, the contribution of water from the mine to East <br />Salk Creek will improve the quality of the water. The Operator agrees with the <br />DOW that it is in the interest of everyone that the water discharged into East Salt <br />Creek be of the highest standard possible, however, does not believe it is <br />necessary to line the pond. The existing Sediment pond discharges nearly the <br />same type of contaminates that the new sediment pond will discharge, and it is <br />not currently lined. It is also worth mentioning the Sediment Pond at the Munger <br />Canyon Mine was within 100' of Munger Creek, discharged into Munger Creek, <br />was never lined and it is the assumption of the operator that the 'additives' of the <br />discharge from the Munger Sediment Pond did not adversely affect wildlife <br />utilizing Munger Creek, or utilizing the Sediment Pond itself. Therefore, based on <br />past accepted precedence, the operator does not believe the Pond at McClane <br />Canyon needs to be lined. The Operator agrees to realign the BLM Drift Fence <br />and the current design provides for a 5:1 ramp on the East side of the Sediment <br />pond that could be used by wildlife as an escape ramp. <br />Rule 2.05 .6(3) Protection of the Hydrological Balance <br />53. DRMS: On revised page 2-46 of the permit text, MCM states that there is a <br />description of the Probable Hydrologic Consequences for the Coal Mine Waste <br />Pile and associated surface facilities in section 2.4.1 beginning on page 2-41. <br />Surface water control systems are described but there is no description of the <br />Coal Mine Waste Pile in this section. <br />Please add a discussion of the Coal Mine Waste Pile to section 2.4.1 and <br />make reference to the detailed analysis of the Coal Mine Waste Pile in <br />Appendix N. <br />CAM: Please see revised page 2-41 where text was added to direct the reader <br />to Appendix N for a detailed analysis of the Coal Mine Waste Pile. <br />54. DRMS: There are apparent typographical errors on the first page of the <br />revised Appendix N. In the first paragraph the letter "A" and the symbol "@" <br />appears to have been inadvertently inserted at several locations. On pages 1 and <br />2, reference is made to the 1999 Hydro-Geo Consultants letter report. It appears <br />that this report should be dated 1985. <br />Please revise accordingly. <br />CAM: Please see revised pages 1 & 2 of Appendix N. <br />21
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.