My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
APPCOR12258
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Application Correspondence
>
2000
>
APPCOR12258
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 6:32:38 PM
Creation date
11/19/2007 2:28:13 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982056
IBM Index Class Name
Application Correspondence
Doc Date
11/5/1982
Doc Name
FOIDEL CREEK UNDERGROUND MINE SURFACE WATER HYDROLOGY ADEQUACY REVIEW RULES 2.04.7 & 2.05.6 3
From
MLR
To
SANDY EMRICH
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.
/
4
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
"1 <br />~I~ ~I~~I~~~~~~~~~~~ <br />STATE OF COLORADO RICHARD D. L4MM. Gov e,nrv 999 <br />DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES <br />D. Monte Pascoe, Executive Director <br />MINED LAND RECLAMATION <br />423 Centennial Building, 1313 Sherman Street <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 Tel. (303) 866-3567 <br />David C. Shelton - <br />Director <br />2C): Sandy Emrich <br />FROM: Jerry Zimpfer °~~ <br />RE: Foidel Creek Underground Mine, Surface Water Hydrology Adequacy <br />Review (Rules 2.04.7 and 2.05.6(3)). <br />DRTE: November S, 1982 <br />I have completed my preliminary adequacy review of the surface water items <br />submitted in response to Rules 2.09.7 and 2.05.6(3) of the State Regulations. <br />The applicant's submittal of baseline hydrologic information, except for the <br />spring su;~vey,is very good. However, the discussion of probable hydrologic <br />consequences (Rule 2.05.6(3)) is qualitative and fails to address several <br />possible hydrologic effects of the proposed operation. The discussion of <br />probable hydrologic consequences should be expanded and quantified •sn that <br />the Division has a clear understanding of just what effect this mining <br />operation would have on the existing hydrologic system. <br />The applicant should submit additional information for the following areas <br />of concern. <br />1. Rule 2.04.7(2)(a) - The applicant relies upon published U.S.G.S. data <br />for their spring survey. Normally, U.S.G.S. studies are regional, <br />and are not as intensive as those surveys performed by mine permit <br />applicants themselves (e.g. ARCO's Mt. Gunnison application). In <br />addition, the applicant has submitted only one water quality sample and <br />flowrmeasurement for each of the two springs identified. This is not <br />sufficient to show the seasonal variations in water quality and quantity, <br />or even to identify the flow regime of the springs. The applicant <br />should perform his own spring survey for the permit area and adjacent <br />area, and provide sufficient data to identify seasonal variations <br />in quality and quantity. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.