Laserfiche WebLink
Rule 2 05.6(3)(a)(iii) Protection of the Hydrological Balance. Each application shall contain a <br />detailed description... of the measures to be taken... to ensure the protection of-...The rights of <br />present users to surface and ground water, which may be adversely affected by the surface coal <br />mining and reclamation operations. <br />Rule 4.05.9 (13) Permanent Impoundments. Permanent impoundments for beneficial use of <br />stored water may only be authorized in accordance with applicable State law and upon the basis <br />of the following demonstration... (d) Water impoundments shall not result in the diminution of the <br />quality or quantity of water available to water right holders for agricultural, industrial, <br />recreational, or domestic uses except in accordance with applicable state law... <br />Rule 4.05.15 Water Rights and Replacement. Any person who conducts surface or <br />underground mining activities shall replace the water supply of a vested water right which is <br />proximately injured as a result of the mining activities in a manner consistent with applicable <br />State law. <br />Given the background information summarized above, we request your consideration and response to the <br />following questions. These items are numbered to be consistent with the item number from SCC's March <br />19`h letter, to which our questions relate. <br />This concern relates to two adjudicated springs (Friederich Springs I and 2), which were mined <br />through at Seneca II-W. The mine pit area where the springs were originally located has been <br />backfilled and revegetated for several years. Spoil springs developed in the general location of <br />Springs 1 and 2, on the Friederich property, following completion of pit backfilling. SCC has <br />provided information indicating that the original Friederich Springs 1 and 2 water right was for <br />30 gpm, to be used for livestock watering. SCC has further stated that flow from the spoil springs <br />on the Friederich property has averaged 56 gpm between January 2007 and September 2008, and <br />that the spoil spring flow would be used to replace the flow from the original adjudicated springs <br />(see January 2009 TR-62 proposed amendments to permit Tab 16). <br />We have advised SCC that monitoring of the subject spoil springs will need to be continued until <br />final bond release (which will be 2017 or later), and that data from the full period of monitoring <br />will need to be evaluated and presented in the future application for final bond release, to <br />demonstrate compliance with Rule 4.05.15. DRMS will require documentation of conformance <br />with Rule 4.05.15, prior to final bond release approval. <br />Please let us know if you concur with our advisement to the operator and our approach for <br />resolution of this matter. Also, please advise if you have recommendations regarding <br />documentation the operator will need to provide to demonstrate replacement of the water <br />supply consistent with applicable State law. <br />6c. This item relates to SCC's request to retain various sedimentation ponds and stock ponds as <br />permanent impoundments to support the postmining land uses of livestock grazing and wildlife <br />habitat. The Division's initial adequacy letter for TR-62 had noted that required documentation <br />of conformance with State Engineer requirements would need to be provided prior to approval of <br />permanent impoundment retention. SCC's short response was that "the State Engineer <br />documentation will be provided once it is received by SCC". The issue of diversion and storage <br />of surface waters within proposed permanent impoundments on the permit area, and the necessity <br />2