My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
APPCOR12686
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Application Correspondence
>
2000
>
APPCOR12686
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 6:33:05 PM
Creation date
11/19/2007 2:33:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980004
IBM Index Class Name
Application Correspondence
Doc Date
11/9/1981
Doc Name
MCCLANE CANYON HYDROLOGY MONITORING
From
MLR
To
BRIAN MUNSON
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.
/
2
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
w' <br />iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii <br />STATE OFCOLORADO RIC HAFDD LAMM, GO.er• <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 60203 Tel. (303) 866-3567 <br />David C. Shelton <br />Director <br />November 9, 1981 <br />TO: Brian Munson <br />FROM: Dave Craig <br />RE: McClane Canyon Hydrology Monitoring <br />I have reviewed the monitoring program proposed by the McClane Canyon mine. <br />I find the proposed monitoring scheme to be inadequate in some respects, <br />and excessive in others. <br />The only major inadequacy I see in the monitoring plan is the lack of a down- <br />stream surface water monitoring site on East Salt Creek. The existing site <br />(SW-4) is located about 2# miles downstream of where McClane Creek empties <br />into East Salt Creek. I feel this is too far away from the mine to adequately <br />detect any impacts. Therefore, I propose that a surface water monitoring site <br />be Zocated in East Salt Creek immediately downstream of McClane Canyon. Upon <br />construction of this new site, the old site (SW-4) could be eliminated from <br />future monitoring. <br />I feel that, in light of the potential impacts, the ground water monitoring <br />program proposed by the applicant is excessive. Since the alluvial materials <br />of McClane Canyon are essentially dry, there should be Zittle or no ground <br />water discharge from the mine to the alluvial aquifer of East Salt Creek. <br />Therefore, I feel that the applicant need only monitor one upgradient well <br />(6W-1) and one downgradient well (6W-4). Also, because the potential for <br />impact to ground water quality is slight, the applicant need only monitor for <br />field water quality parameters (pH, Temperature, and Specific Conductance). <br />The monitoring program that I propose is summarized below in tabular form: <br /> Table I. Surface Water Monitoring <br />Site Number Monitored Stream Monitoring Frequency* Chemical Parameters <br />SW-S McClane Creek Twice a year** Table 3 <br />SW-2 McClane Creek Twice a year** Table 3 <br />SW-1 East Salt Creek Quarterly Table 3 <br />Proposed New Site East Salt Creek Quarterly Table 3 <br />* Record flow and take a water sample for chemical analyses. <br />**Once during snowmelt runoff <br />Once during a rainfall event. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.