Laserfiche WebLink
C- 2010 -089 PAR Part 2 <br />New Horizon North Mine <br />5-Jan-2011 <br />Page 10 of 13 <br />page 2 of Section 2.05.6(3) and springs and seeps are shown on Figure 2.05.6(3) -1 to <br />potentially discharge from the "Saturated NHN Backfill", but no further predictions of flow <br />or TDS concentrations are provided. Please update all pertinent sections contained within <br />the protection of the hydrologic balance and probable hydrologic consequences discussions <br />and data analysis with information on potential spoil springs tributary to Meehan Draw. The <br />same level of detail should be provided for Meehan Draw as presented for Tuttle Draw. <br />10. There is very little discussion or analysis of Coal Creek Canyon. Please update Section <br />2.05.6(3) with a complete analysis of potential impacts to Coal Canyon resulting from the <br />potential for spoil spring discharge to Meehan Draw which flows to Coal Creek Canyon and <br />ultimately discharges to the San Miguel River. The analysis should provide predictions for <br />TDS concentrations and flow information for the potential impacts to Coal Canyon. <br />11. On pages 11 and 15 there is a discussion of the 2 n3 Park Lateral being diverted around the <br />mining area in a HDPE pipeline. Please clarify in this section when the 2 nd Park Lateral will <br />be restored and what specific effect that will have on groundwater flow. Also clearly <br />describe whether or not the pipe will be removed or retained and whether the ditch will be <br />placed back in its approximate original configuration. <br />12. On page 13, WFC describes 30 ground water rights (wells) that have been identified; <br />however, this conflicts with the information presented earlier in Section 2.04.7. Under the <br />Present Groundwater Use section (page 11 and Table 2.04.7.4 of Section 2.04.7) WFC states <br />that thirty four wells were identified. Please clarify this discrepancy. <br />13. Please provide an estimate of flow and TDS concentrations for all potential future spoil <br />springs. Provide the predicted locations for all future spoil springs to Meehan Draw and <br />Tuttle Draw and clearly label them on an appropriate map. <br />14. Section 3), Impact of Spoil Material on Groundwater Flow and Recharge, beginning on page <br />14 again minimally discusses springs tributary to Tuttle Draw and springs tributary to <br />Meehan Draw. The discussion for Tuttle Draw should clearly identify what the predicted <br />flow and TDS concentrations will be for the future spoil springs that may occur. Sections 3 <br />and 5 of the PHC (pages 14 through 22) need to be updated accordingly with predicted TDS <br />and flow rate information for springs tributary to Meehan Draw and any impacts to Coal <br />creek Canyon. <br />15. On page 17 it would be appropriate to add a description and prediction of the combined <br />effect of discharge that may occur from the new NHN Mine mixing with the "old Backfill" <br />(New Horizon #1 Area) and ultimately discharging from the approximate location of Spoil <br />Spring #1. Please provide the cumulative prediction for the existing flow from SS 41 when it <br />is combined with the additional TDS concentration and flow from the proposed NHN Mine <br />Area backfill. <br />16. On page 19 WFC indicates that during mining the overburden will be tested and if acidic <br />layers are encountered, they will be mixed with non - acidic layers. How will it be <br />determined that acidic layers are encountered? Please provide details on how the <br />overburden will be tested and include the sampling and analysis plan in the application <br />package. (This question is related to Item 6 of Section 2.04.6(2) in Part 1 of the PAR.) <br />17. On page 23 in the first paragraph under 6) Impact of Backfill Water Quality On Surface <br />Water Quality WFC states that the NHN spoil spring will issue to a tributary of Tuttle Draw. <br />