ms2 cover letter - deq.state.wy.usdeq.state.wy.us/wqd/wypdes_permitting/wypdes_pns...devon energy...

Devon Energy Production Company, L.P. 20 N. Broadway, Suite 1500 Oklahoma City, OK 73102

Devon Energy Production Company, L.P./2006/June/29/Permit Renewal/ HUC10101202/WY0046906

June 29, 2006 Ms. Becky Peters Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality NPDES Permit Section 122 W. 25th Street Herschler Building 4W Cheyenne, WY 82002 Subject : Devon Energy Production Company, L.P., Campbell County Belle Fourche River Basin, Mud Springs 2 Permit Renewal WY0046906, Option 2 Dear Ms. Peters: Devon Energy Production Company L.P. (Devon) is requesting a renewal for the Mud Springs 2 WYPDES permit WY0046906. This permit was originally written in December 2001 for the discharge of twelve (12) wells at two (2) discharge points into an unnamed tributary of Mud Springs Creek (Class 3B) which drains into the Belle Fourche River basin (Class 2ABWW). It was modified in October 2002 to have discharge from outfall 002MS2 be fully contained in Reservoir T44NR74W2NWSW and add an Irrigation Compliance Point (ICP). All twelve (12) wells were completed in the Big George and Wyodak coal seams. This renewal will add twenty-one (21) wells, allow all wells to discharge to all outfalls, and if a stream monitoring location is still necessary, this renewal proposes changing the ICP to an Irrigation Monitoring Point (IMP) at a slightly different location. All new wells will be completed in the Big George coal seam. The total anticipated flow for this facility is 0.32 MGD. In addition, Devon proposes the following terms be updated to reflect WDEQ policy:

1. Remove the effluent limit and monitoring requirements for total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH); 2. Remove potassium from routine end-of-pipe monitoring requirements; 3. Remove fluoride from routine end-of-pipe monitoring requirements; 4. Update effluent limit for radium to distance-based limits; 5. Update the dissolved iron limit to 1,000 ug/L; 6. Update the pH range to 6.5-9.0; 7. Update the initial monitoring list to 24 constituents; 8. Update the SAR limit to 14, consistent with forthcoming WDEQ effluent limits on the Belle

Fourche. Three (3) copies of the renewal application are enclosed. Table 1 identifies the outfalls. Locations were identified in consultation with the landowners. For a detailed list of all the wells associated with this permit, please see Table 2. The attached Map 1 identifies the well, outfall and reservoir locations. Two representative water quality samples are found in Table 3, to ensure satisfaction of reporting all required constituents for all coals and to show a historic and current sample. Table 4 lists the average flow per outfall from the last six months. Table 5 is a compliance summary for the facility. Appendix A has laboratory and analytical reports. This renewal will permit discharge from thirty-three (33) wells at two (2) discharge points.

June 29, 2006 Devon Energy Production Co., L.P. Mud Springs 2 WYPDES Permit Renewal WY0046906 of 3


Devon proposes the reservoir containment scenario be reduced from a 25-yr, 24-hr storm event containment to a 10-yr, 24-hr storm containment to allow for more discharge options. A mixing analysis shows that if an effluent limit for SAR remains at 10, the limit would be met at the IMP if the reservoir discharged with a 10-yr, 24-hr storm containment of 2.8 inches. The current permitted discharge for all wells is 681 gallons per minute (gpm) or 0.98 million gallons per day (MGD). For this renewal, Devon is using an initial production rate of 8.73 gpm/well for the Big George coal seam. This rate is based on the maximum initial flow rate of nearby Big George wells. The total anticipated flow for the Mud Springs 2 facility is 224 gpm or 0.32 MGD (Table 4). Table 5 summarizes historic water quality challenges associated with this permit for iron and SAR. Iron values were successfully lowered using a half-culvert oxidation channel. SAR has been recorded as high as 11.9. Re-sampling at 001MS2 often resulted in compliance. Devon proposed containment in T44NR74W2NWSW in 2002 for 002MS2 achieving compliance at a dry ICP. Devon anticipates that elevation of the SAR limit in the Belle Fourche would eliminate the containment requirement, but in the event that the Use Attainability Analysis (UAA) is unsuccessful, and revised limits are not available, a water balance and mixing analysis are provided in Appendix B. The T44NR74W2NWSW reservoir was designed in accordance with Wyoming State Engineer’s Office regulations and has been permitted with that agency. Table 6 in Appendix B illustrates the water balance calculations associated with this reservoir. Monthly evaporation rates were derived from document WWRC 85-12, “Design Information for Evaporation Ponds in Wyoming”. The infiltration rate used, 29 acre-ft/acre/yr, was determined from a 10-month field study in K-Bar field. This reservoir is able to contain discharge from the existing twelve (12) wells, the twenty-one (21) proposed wells and the 10-yr, 24-hr storm, should containment be required. Also included in Appendix B is a mixing analysis for the 10-yr, 24-hr storm event, Table 7. Storm volumes were derived from SEDCAD Version 4, a commercially available software package with routines derived from TR55. A weighted average formula based on reservoir storage volume was used to determine the mixed water SAR and EC values. Surface water quality data collected from the Hay Creek site for the PAW Tributary Monitoring Program was used to represent natural water quality. The SAR and EC values from a sample collected at outfall 001MS2 on 4/11/2006 were used to represent CBM water quality. The resulting SAR of 6.0 and EC of 1543 show the 002MS2 discharge point can meet the effluent limitations downstream of the reservoir and upstream of irrigation. Appendix C includes a summary of the reservoir reclamation cost for the T44NR74W2NWSW reservoir (Table 8) and a reclamation plan. Devon Energy Production Company, L.P. commits to comply with all effluent limits, self-monitoring and reporting requirements and other conditions of the permit.

June 29, 2006 Devon Energy Production Co., L.P. Mud Springs 2 WYPDES Permit Renewal WY0046906 of 3


Sincerely, Randall W. Maxey Senior Regulatory Specialist Attachments

WYPDES Application (3 copies) Table 1: Outfall Information Table 2: Well Information Table 3: Water Quality Table 4: Well Flow Summary Table 5: Compliance Summary Map 1: Mud Springs 2 CBM Operations

Appendix A: Water Quality Laboratory Data Sheets Appendix B: Water Balance and Mixing Analysis Table 6: Water Balance, Reservoir T44NR74W2NWSW Table 7: Mixing Analysis Appendix C: Reservoir Reclamation Estimate Summary and Reclamation Plan Table 8: Reservoir Reclamation Cost Estimates

Devon Energy Production Company, L.P./2006/June/29/Permit Renewal/ HUC10101202/WY0046906 Page 1

SUBMIT IN TRIPLICATE

NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO SURFACE DISCHARGE PRODUCED WATER FROM COAL BED METHANE NEW DISCHARGES, RENEWALS, OR MAJOR

MODIFICATIONS

Revised 12-19-03 PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE 1. Check the box corresponding to the type of application being applied for New CBM permit CBM permit renewal Permit number _______WY0046906_______ CBM permit major modification Permit number _________________________ 2. Select a permit option

Option 1A - complete containment to an off-channel man made containment unit(s) (class 4C), no discharge allowed to surface waters of the state outside the containment unit.

Option 1B - complete containment to a natural closed basin or playa lake (class 3A), no discharge

allowed to surface waters of the state outside the basin or playa. Option 2 - surface discharge to class 2 or 3 receiving stream of the Belle Fourche River or Cheyenne

River drainage (class 2ABWW). Option 2 - surface discharge to class 2 or 3 receiving stream of the Powder River or Little Powder

Rivers (class 2ABWW). Option 2 – surface discharge to class 2 or 3 receiving streams of the Tongue, Clear Creek, or Crazy

Woman Creek (class 2AB)– this option requires the permittee to demonstrate that quality of the effluent at the discharge point is equal to or better than the ambient quality of the perennial class 2 receiving water.

3. Name, mailing address, e-mail address, location and telephone number of the individual or company

which owns the facility producing the discharge. Name: Devon Energy Production Company, L.P. Attn: Randall Maxey _____________________________________________________________________________________ Street Address: 20 North Broadway, Suite 1500 _____________________________________________________________________________________ City, State, and Zip Code: Oklahoma City, OK 73102-8260 _____________________________________________________________________________________ Telephone Number: (405) 235-3611 _____________________________________________________________________________________ E-Mail Address: [email protected] ____________________________________________________________________________________

For Agency Use Only

Application Number WY00_______________

Date Received:

__________________ (mo/day/yr)


4. Name(s) and mailing address(es) of owner(s) of the surface rights on whose land the discharge occurs (in cases where the land is owned by the state or federal government but surface rights are leased to a private individual, provide lessee’s name and address) Name: Fred L. and Mary Ann Oedekoven Street Address: __________________________481 Recluse Rd. City, State, and Zip Code: __________________________Recluse, Wyoming 82725______________________________________ Telephone Number: __________________________(307) 682-4951______________________________________________ Name: __________________________Donald L. and Betty J. Brown Street Address: __________________________ 95 Greenough Rd. City, State, and Zip Code: __________________________Relcuse, Wyoming 82725 _______________________________ Telephone Number: __________________________(307) 682-4373 Name: __________________________Wyoming Office of State Lands and Investments Street Address: __________________________ Herschler Building, 3rd Floor West City, State, and Zip Code: __________________________Cheyenne, WY 82002 _______________________________ Telephone Number: __________________________(307) 777-7331 5. Name of the facility producing the discharge (this is the facility name that will appear on the NPDES

permit. It is not necessary to name every well contributing to this facility’s discharge in this section) _____________________ Mud Springs 2 ___________________ 6. For Option 1A or 1B permit, attach a water balance that demonstrates, considering total maximum

projected discharge inflows, natural precipitation, evaporation and infiltration, that the containment unit will be adequately sized to contain all projected discharge and stormwater runoff from a 100 year, 24 hour storm event. If actual flow rates are available, use the maximum flow rate from all active wells within the previous six months of operation in the water balance. Not Applicable

7. For an Option 2 permit utilizing on-channel reservoirs, attach a water balance and mixing analysis

documenting the amount of CBM discharge that, under normal operating conditions, can be contained within the reservoirs, the amount and circumstances under which the reservoirs will discharge, and the expected water quality upon discharge from the reservoirs. See Appendix B.

8. Attach a description and a clear, legible, detailed topographic map of the discharging facility. Include

the following:


a. A legend b. Well locations c. Ponds d. Reservoirs e. Stock tanks

f. Discharge points (outfalls) g. Immediate receiving streams

h. Water quality monitoring stations i. Irrigation compliance points

j. Location of nearest downstream irrigator. k. Section, Township, and Range information

If any of the above are not applicable please indicate in the description and include a brief explanation as to why the item is not applicable) See Map 1.

9. Describe the control measures that will be implemented to prevent significant damage to or erosion of

the receiving water channel at the point of discharge. The discharge points, shown on Map 1, are located on a gently sloping channel. Water will be

discharged onto a concrete or rock armored splash pad.

10. Describe the control measures that will be implemented to achieve water quality standards and effluent

limits. If proposing to utilize a treatment process, provide a detailed description of the treatment process, including, but not limited to: Water quality analyses demonstrating the effluent quality before and after treatment; waste stream volumes and planned method of disposal; aquatic life toxicity data for any chemicals being used in the treatment process; description of how the chemicals will be handled at the facility and the potential for any impacts to waters of the state in the event of a spill; and diagrams of the facility indicating the water treatment path. Additional sheets and diagrams may be attached.

At each discharge point, water is discharged through a riser pipe into an oxidation channel prior

to discharge to the natural stream or containment reservoir. When required, a pre-treatment

oxidation channel is utilized to achieve iron compliance.

11. Outfall locations must be established as part of a preliminary field reconnaissance survey using GPS or conventional survey equipment and documented in Table 1. Please document the type of equipment used, the expected accuracy of your measurements, and a brief rationale for locating the outfalls at the requested sites below. The outfalls associated with this renewal have been constructed at sites designated by the landowner, and locations reflect as-built conditions. Coordinates were obtained by field personnel using handheld GPS units with accuracies ranging from 15 to 60 feet.

12. Complete the attached Table 1. Provide all the information in the table for each proposed discharge

point or monitoring point. If proposing changes (a major modification) to an existing facility, clearly indicate the desired changes on the table. Additional tables may be attached. Use the format provided.

13. Complete the attached Table 2. Provide all the information in the table for each well associated with this

proposed discharge authorization. If proposing changes (a major modification) to an existing facility, clearly indicate the desired changes on the table. Additional tables may be attached. Use the format provided.

14. Provide the results of water analyses for a sample collected from a location representative of the quality

of the water being proposed for discharge for the 25 chemical parameters listed below. The sample must


be collected from well(s) or outfall(s) within a twenty mile radius of the proposed facility’s location, and from the same coal formation(s) and the same approximate depth(s) as proposed in this application. If filing an application for a permit renewal or modification, the representative sample must be collected from the facility being proposed for renewal or modification. Explain why this sample is representative of the produced water to be discharged. Table 3 includes the water quality analyses for outfall 001MS2 which is representative of commingled Big George and Wyodak coal waters. The laboratory analytical report for the outfall is included in Appendix A. The wells in the permit range from 675 feet to 1275 feet deep. A water balance and mixing analysis are contained in Appendix B.

Samples from co-mingled coal seams are acceptable as long as the sample(s) meet the following criteria:

A. all of the coal seams being proposed for development are represented in the co-mingled sample,

B. the ratio of each coal seam’s contribution is approximately the same in the sample and the proposed development,

C. documentation is provided to verify the criteria listed in A. and B.

The analyses must be conducted in accordance with approved EPA test procedures (40 CFR Part 136). Include a signed copy of your lab report that includes the following:

a. detection limits b. results of each of the 25 chemical parameters at the chemical state given below c. quarter/quarter, section, township and range of the sample collection location d. Time and date of sample collection e. Time and date of analysis for each parameter

f. Analyst’s initials for each parameter g. Detection limit for each parameter as achieved by the laboratory h. NPDES permit number and outfall number, where the sample was collected. i. Origin of produced water (coal seam)

If more than one coal seam is being proposed for development, the permittee must submit a lab analysis and complete information characterizing water quality from each coal seam being proposed for development. If the permittee is proposing to include discharges from a coal seam not previously developed at this facility, the permittee must submit a lab analysis and complete information characterizing water quality from the new coal seam being proposed for development. Analyses must be provided in the units listed below.

See Appendix A for a copy of the lab report.

Parameter* (See notes following the table on chemical states)

Required Detection Limits and Required Units

Alkalinity, Total 1 mg/l as CaCO3 Aluminum, Total Recoverable 50 μg/l Arsenic, Total 1 μg/l Barium, Total 100 μg/l Bicarbonate 10 mg/l Cadmium, Dissolved 5 μg/l Calcium, Total 50 μg/l, report as meq/l Calcium, Total 50 μg/l, report as mg/l Chlorides 5 mg/l Chlorides 5 mg/l


Parameter* (See notes following the table on chemical states)


Alkalinity, Total 1 mg/l as CaCO3 Copper, Dissolved 10 μg/l Dissolved Solids, Total 5 mg/l Hardness, Total 10 mg/l as CaCO3

Iron, Dissolved 50 μg/l Lead, Dissolved 2 μg/l Magnesium, Total 100 μg/l, report as meq/l Magnesium, Total 100 μg/l, report as mg/l Manganese, Dissolved 50 μg/l Mercury, Dissolved 1 μg/l pH to 0.1 pH unit Radium 226, Total 0.2 pCi/l Selenium, Total Recoverable 5 μg/l Sodium Adsorption Ratio Calculated as unadjusted ratio Sodium, Total 100 μg/l, report as meq/l Sodium, Total 100 μg/l, report as mg/l Specific Conductance 5 micromhos/cm Sulfates 10 mg/l Zinc, Dissolved 50 μg/l *Discharges into drainages other than the Powder River geologic basin may require analysis of additional parameters, please contact the WDEQ for a separate list.

15. For new facilities, provide the expected (estimated) flow volume from each well in gallons per day, and

provide the rationale behind the flow volume estimate. For existing facilities, provide actual flow data from all wells within the last six months. See Table 4.

16. For applications for new facilities, are any of the required chemical constituents in the laboratory

analysis present in concentrations above Wyoming Water Quality Standards? YES NO NA

If the answer to question # 16 is yes, answer 16.a. – 16.b below. If no, proceed to question 18.

a. Which constituents? _____________________________________________________________________________

b. Has this constituent been addressed in the response to question 10? _____________________________________________________________________________

If the answer to question # 16 is yes, answer 16.a. – 16.b below. If no, proceed to question 18.

a. Which constituents? _____________________________________________________________________________

b. Has this constituent been addressed in the response to question 10? _____________________________________________________________________________


17. For applications for existing facilities, has the facility ever exceeded permit limits or water quality standards?

YES NO If the answer to question 17 is yes, answer 17.a. – 17.b. If no, proceed to question 18. a. Which constituents? Dissolved Iron and SAR

b. Has the exceedance been addressed? . Yes

c. Describe how the exceedance is being addressed See Table 5. Following re-sampling for verification of the exceeded values, outfall 001MS2 has been in compliance. An oxidization channel was added to address elevated dissolved iron values. A reservoir and an ICP were added below outfall 002MS2 to address elevated values of SAR. In addition, there is a forthcoming SAR limit increase to 14 for the Belle Fourche watershed.

18. Is there active irrigation, (including but not limited to irrigation of cultivars or flood irrigation) in the

drainage of the discharge? YES NO If the answer to question #18 is yes, then documentation demonstrating one of the following must be provided. Devon Energy submitted a Section 20 Analysis of Mud Springs Creek with the original WY0046906 application. Please see the Section 20 Analysis to answer the questions below.

A. Effluent will meet SAR and specific conductance (EC) values that are equal or of better quality

to ambient values in the mainstem or highest quality receiving stream; or B. Demonstrate that a higher level of EC and SAR at the point of irrigation diversion can be

tolerated by irrigated soils and crops without a significant reduction in crop yield and soil quality/permeability.

This information should include, but is not limited to the following: a. Location and description of irrigated crop land between the discharge points and mainstem,

including maximum local tolerance thresholds to SAR, EC, and sodium of each crop. Map 1, Section 2 and Tables 1, 2 and 3 b. Description of irrigation practices including when and how frequent irrigation occurs. Section 2 and Table 2 c. Soil characteristics for each area where irrigation occurs which includes: Classification of

soils and soil type (i.e. sandy loam, clay, etc.) Composition of soils (% clay, silt, sand), type of soils, texture and permeability.

Section 2 and Table 3

d. Baseline soil parameters in all actively irrigated areas which includes soil SAR, EC, Na, Mg,

Ca, permeability, and exchangeable sodium percentage (ESP). Section 2 and Table 3


e. Determine the maximum SAR and EC of water that can be applied to the least tolerant and most sensitive identified irrigated soil type and crop, which would not result in a short and/or long-term reduction in soil infiltration/permeability or yield.

Section 3 and Table 4

f. Provide the location (township, range, section, quarter quarter and lat/long coordinates) of

point(s) upstream from the first downstream point of irrigation diversion/use between the outfalls and mainstem and/or provide the location(s) of the irrigation diversion/use that requires the least flow to operate.

Table 2 g. An evaluation that demonstrates the proposed discharge will be in compliance with Section

20, Chapter 1 of the Wyoming Water Quality Rules and Regulations. Sections 1 through 5

h. If necessary to protect irrigated crops and/or soils, describe changes that must be made in

traditional irrigation practices to protect downstream irrigation activities. Not Applicable i. A monitoring plan, if necessary to gauge changes in water/soil quality and make adjustments

before substantial reduction in crop production and soil permeability would occur. Not Applicable

j. Citations of reference for all the above information must be provided. See References Cited in Section 20 Analysis

19. Name(s) and address(es) of all downstream irrigators between the outfalls and the mainstem must be

provided. Name: __________________________Fred L. and Mary Ann Oedekoven Street Address: __________________________481 Recluse Rd. City, State, and Zip Code: __________________________Recluse, Wyoming 82725______________________________________ Telephone Number: __________________________(307) 682-4951______________________________________________ Name: __________________________Donald L. and Betty J. Brown Street Address: __________________________ 95 Greenough Rd. City, State, and Zip Code: __________________________Recluse, Wyoming 82725 _______________________________ Telephone Number: _________________________ (307) 682-4373 20. Section 40 CFR Part 435 Subpart E requires that the permittee document agricultural and wildlife uses of

produced water. Provide documentation that the produced water will be used for agriculture or wildlife


during periods of discharge. Agriculture and wildlife use includes irrigation, livestock watering, wildlife watering and other agricultural uses. Agricultural and wildlife use documentation includes (but is not limited to) a certified letter from a landowner(s), a formal written statement from a state, federal or local resource management agency, or a formal written statement with supporting documentation from a natural resources or environmental professional accompanied by the credentials of the natural resources or environmental professional. Agriculture and wildlife use documentation must be provided for each outfall included in the application. Agricultural and wildlife certification must be submitted for each outfall’s discharge, and must have original signatures.

An Agriculture/Wildlife Use Statement is no longer required per Chapter 2, Appendix H(a)(i), Wyoming Water Quality Rules and Regulations. I (CEO or other authorized person) certify that I am familiar with the information contained in this application and that to the best of my knowledge and belief, such information is true, complete, and accurate. I am requesting _____2_____ outfalls in this application. Randall W. Maxey Senior Regulatory Specialist Printed Name of Person signing* Title* _____________________________ _06/29/2006______________ Signature Date *All permit applications must be signed in accordance with 40 CFR Part 122.22, “for” or “by” signatures are not acceptable. Section 35-11-901 of Wyoming Statutes provides that: Any person who knowingly makes any false statement, representation, or certification in any application ... shall upon conviction be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both. Mail this application to: NPDES Permits Section Department of Environmental Quality/WQD 122 West 25th Street, Herschler Building, 4W Cheyenne, WY 82002 Please include unique footer information on each page of this application and on all supporting documentation using the following format: Company Name: Year/Month/Day/NEW, MOD, RENEWAL/10 Digit HUC Code/Permit # (if a modification or renewal) or Application # (from this particular company) for that particular day

Discharge Point

#(Outfall)Immediate Receiving Stream

Distance from outfall to mainstem

(stream miles)Mainstem Q/Q Sec Tnp Rng Latitude Longitude County

Reservoir Permit Application

Submitted to SEO?

SEO Reservoir Permit # Reservoir Name SEO Reservoir Requirements

001MS2 Mud Spring Creek 6.56 Belle Fourche SENE 36 45N 74W 43.83235 -105.6905 Campbell NA NA NA NA002MS2 Mud Spring Creek 11.79 Belle Fourche SWSW 2 44N 74W 43.81297 -105.72029 Campbell Yes P11226R T44NR74W2NWSW None

ICP Mud Spring Creek 11.43 Belle Fourche NWSW 2 44N 74W 43.81628 -105.72159 Campbell NA NA NA NAIMP Mud Spring Creek 10.69 Belle Fourche SWSW 35 45N 74W 43.82331 -105.72440 Campbell NA NA NA NA

Strikethrough indicates removal from pervious permit.Bold type indicates changes from previous permit.

Receiving Stream: Mud Spring Creek and Unnamed Tributaries of Mud Spring Creek (Class 3B)Receiving Drainage: Belle Fourche River (Class 2ABWW)

Devon Energy Production Company, L.P.Table 1: Outfall Information

Mud Springs 2 WYPDES Permit Renewal WY0046906Campbell County T44N and T45N R74W


Well Name API Number Coal Seam Well Depth (ft) Discharges to Outfall #Brown/Oedekoven 1S-1 49-005-45116 Big George 1055 AWTAOBrown/Oedekoven 1W-1 49-005-45500 Wyodak 1150 AWTAOBrown/Oedekoven 1S-7 49-005-45115 Big George 1080 AWTAOBrown/Oedekoven 1W-7 49-005-45499 Wyodak 1180 AWTAOBrown/Oedekoven 1S-9 49-005-45114 Big George 1098 AWTAOBrown/Oedekoven 1W-9 49-005-45498 Wyodak 1200 AWTAOBrown/Oedekoven 1S-15 49-005-45113 Big George 1167 AWTAOBrown/Oedekoven 1W-15 49-005-45497 Wyodak 1275 AWTAOBrown/Oedekoven 2S-9 49-005-45112 Big George 1153 AWTAOBrown/Oedekoven 2S-15 49-005-45109 Big George 1236 AWTAOBrown/Oedekoven 2S-11 49-005-45111 Big George 1220 AWTAOBrown/Oedekoven 2S-13 49-005-45110 Big George 1189 AWTAOBrown/Oedekoven Fed 5S-5 NA* Big George NA* AWTAOBrown/Oedekoven Fed 6S-3 NA* Big George NA* AWTAOBrown/Oedekoven Fed 6S-5 NA* Big George NA* AWTAOBrown/Oedekoven Fed 6S-11 NA* Big George NA* AWTAOBrown/Oedekoven Fed 6S-13 NA* Big George NA* AWTAOBrown/Oedekoven Fed 7S-5 NA* Big George NA* AWTAOBrown/Oedekoven Fed 7S-7 NA* Big George NA* AWTAOMarquiss Fed 7S-9 NA* Big George NA* AWTAOMarquiss Fed 7S-11 NA* Big George NA* AWTAOMarquiss Fed 7S-13 NA* Big George NA* AWTAOMarquiss Fed 7S-15 NA* Big George NA* AWTAOBrown/Oedekoven Fed 8S-7 NA* Big George NA* AWTAOD Fuller Federal 8S-9 NA* Big George NA* AWTAOBrown/Oedekoven 5S-11 49-005-57317 Big George 771 AWTAOBrown/Oedekoven 5S-13 49-005-57287 Big George 838 AWTAOBrown/Oedekoven 6S-9 49-005-57288 Big George 871 AWTAOBrown/Oedekoven 6S-15 49-005-57319 Big George 932 AWTAOBrown/Oedekoven 7S-3 49-005-57289 Big George 959 AWTAOBrown/Oedekoven 8S-5 49-005-57320 Big George 855 AWTAOD Fuller 8S-11 49-005-57322 Big George 795 AWTAOMarquiss 8S-13 49-005-57323 Big George 848 AWTAO

Bold type indicate additions from previous permit.AWTAO = All Wells To All Outfalls


* API numbers and well depths not listed in the table will be included when they are made available by the WOGCC.

Table 2: Well InformationDevon Energy Production Company, L.P.



Parameter* (See notes following the table on chemical

states)


001 MS2 02/21/02

Big George & Wyodak Coals

001 MS2 04/11/06

Big George Coal 1

Alkalinity, Total 1 mg/l as CaCO3 760 713Aluminum, Total Recoverable 50 µg/l 448 252Arsenic, Total Recoverable 1 µg/l <0.4Arsenic, Total 1 µg/l 0.3Barium, Total Recoverable 100 µg/l 568Barium, Total 100 µg/l 850Bicarbonate 10 mg/l 926 856Cadmium, Dissolved 5 µg/l <0.1 <0.1Calcium, Total 50 µg/l, report as meq/l 2.3 1.85Calcium, Total 50 µg/l, report as mg/l 46 37Chlorides 5 mg/l 18 14Copper, Dissolved 10 µg/l 2 <1Dissolved Solids, Total 5 mg/l 844 797Hardness, Total 10 mg/l as CaCO3 151 130Iron, Dissolved 50 µg/l 131 97Lead, Dissolved 2 µg/l <2 <2Magnesium, Total 100 µg/l, report as meq/l 0.74 0.66Magnesium, Total 100 µg/l, report as mg/l 9 8Manganese, Dissolved 50 µg/l 50 42Mercury, Dissolved 1 µg/l <0.06 <0.06pH to 0.1 pH unit 7.87 8.32Radium 226, Total 0.2 pCi/l <0.2 <0.2Selenium, Total Recoverable 5 µg/l <5 <5Sodium Adsorption Ratio Calculated as unadjusted ratio 9.1 10.7Sodium, Total 100 µg/l, report as meq/l 11.18 12.00Sodium, Total 100 µg/l, report as mg/l 257 276Specific Conductance 5 micromhos/cm 1370 1257Sulfates 10 mg/l <5 8Zinc, Dissolved 50 µg/l <10 <10

Table 3: Water QualityDevon Energy Production Company, L.P.


*Discharges into drainages other than the Powder River geologic basin may require analysis of additional parameters, please contact the WDEQ for a separate list. 1This sample was provided to illustrate total recoverable arsenic and total recoverable barium values per Chapter 1 requirements. Values from this sample were also used in the mixing analysis (Table 7).



Outfall001MS2 0.00130 MGD/well 0.90 gpm/well002MS2 0.00082 MGD/well 0.57 gpm/well

Average Flow per Well (8 flowing wells) 0.00106 MGD 0.74 gpm/well

0.002 cfs 1,060 gpd/well

Average Flow for Facility 0.00848 MGD 5.89 gpm0.013 cfs 8,480 gpd

Highest Flow Per Well (Big George) * 0.01257 MGD/well 8.73 gpm/well0.019 cfs 12,571 gpd/well

25 Big George wells not yet flowing* 0.31428 MGD 218.25 gpm0.486 cfs 314,280 gpd

Total Anticipated Flow 0.32276 MGD 224.14 gpm0.499 cfs 322,760 gpd

Approved Volume 0.98 MGD 680.56 gpm1.516 cfs 980,000 gpd

* Based on maximum initial flow of nearby Big George wells.

Average flow per well between 10/01/05 and

03/31/06

Receiving Stream: Mud Spring Creek and Unnamed Tributaries of Mud Spring Creek Receiving Drainage: Belle Fourche River (Class 2ABWW)

Table 4: Well Flow SummaryDevon Energy Production Company, L.P.



Outfall>2 mile from class 2 stream Constituent

Permit Limit Value Date

Re-sample Value

Re-sample Date Units Comments

Dissolved Iron 275.3 1170 4/20/04 117 5/22/2004 ug/l Re-sampled on 5/22/2004; in complianceSodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) 10 10.6 7/15/02 9.4 8/9/2002 unitless Re-sampled on 8/9/2002; in complianceSodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) 10 10.3 5/13/03 10.4 6/9/2003 unitless Re-sampled on 6/9/2003Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) 10 10.4 6/9/2003 9.4 7/28/2003 unitless Re-sampled on 7/28/2003; in complianceSodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) 10 10.1 5/22/04 9.9 6/21/2004 unitless Re-sampled on 6/21/2004; in complianceSodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) 10 10.8 4/14/05 10.3 5/3/2005 unitless Re-sampled on 5/3/2005Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) 10 10.3 5/3/2005 10 6/14/2005 unitless Re-sampled on 6/14/2005; in complianceSodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) 10 10.7 4/11/2006 11.3 5/3/2006 unitless Re-sampled on 5/3/2006Dissolved Iron 275.3 370 2/21/02 685 3/11/2002 ug/l Re-sampled on 3/11/2002Dissolved Iron 275.3 685 3/11/2002 570 4/11/2002 ug/l Re-sampled on 4/11/2002

Dissolved Iron 275.3 570 4/11/2002 <30 11/14/2002 ug/lAdded mitigation structure consisting of an oxidation channel and settling pond. Re-sampled on 11/14/2002; in compliance

Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) 10 10.5 2/21/02 10.3 3/11/2002 unitless Re-sampled on 3/11/2002Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) 10 10.3 3/11/2002 11.2 4/11/2002 unitless Re-sampled on 4/11/2002Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) 10 11.2 4/11/2002 10.5 4/23/2002 unitless Re-sampled on 4/23/2002Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) 10 10.5 4/23/2002 10.4 5/14/2002 unitless Re-sampled on 5/14/2002Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) 10 10.4 5/14/2002 11.0 6/13/2002 unitless Re-sampled on 6/13/2002Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) 10 11.0 6/13/2002 11.9 7/15/2002 unitless Re-sampled on 7/15/2002

Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) 10 11.9 7/15/2002 11.0 11/14/2002 unitlessPermit was modified on 10/10/2002 to add ICP and adjacent reservoir T44NR74W2NWSW downstream of 002MS2 outfall. ICP was dry.

Table 5: Compliance SummaryDevon Energy Production Company, L.P.



001MS2 Yes

002MS2 Yes


APPENDIX A

Water Quality Laboratory Data Sheets

Analyses Result Units Analysis Date / ByMethod

LABORATORY ANALYTICAL REPORT

Client Sample ID: 001 MS2 WY0046906 Collection Date: 02/21/02 11:05

Matrix: AQUEOUS

Client: Devon Energy Corporation

Lab ID: G02020196-003

Report Date: 03/07/02

DateReceived: 02/21/02Location: SENE_36_45N_74W Big George & Wyodak CoalsSampled By: Mike Naus

Qualifier

Samp FRQ/Type:

Project: 30 Day Sampling House CreekRevised Date: 06/27/06

Result Units

ENERGY LABORATORIES, INC. * 1105 W First St * Gillette, WY 82716Toll Free 866.686.7175 * 307.686.7175 * FAX 307.682.4625 * [email protected]

MAJOR IONS, DISSOLVED02/22/02 13:53 / mlimg/L926Bicarbonate as HCO3 A2320 B15.2 meq/L02/22/02 13:53 / mlimg/L<1Carbonate as CO3 A2320 B<0.03 meq/L02/22/02 16:08 / mlimg/L18Chloride A4500-Cl B0.51 meq/L02/27/02 13:38 / mlimg/L0.6Fluoride A4500-F C0.03 meq/L02/22/02 10:12 / mlimg/L<5Sulfate A4500-SO4 D<0.1 meq/L02/25/02 22:30 / eli-bmg/L46Calcium E200.72.29 meq/L02/25/02 22:30 / eli-bmg/L9Magnesium E200.70.74 meq/L02/25/02 22:30 / eli-bmg/L5Potassium E200.70.12 meq/L02/25/02 22:30 / eli-bmg/L260Sodium E200.711.2 meq/L

METALS, DISSOLVED02/25/02 22:30 / eli-bug/L<100Boron E200.702/26/02 04:10 / eli-bug/L<0.1Cadmium E200.802/26/02 04:10 / eli-bug/L<1Chromium E200.802/26/02 04:10 / eli-bug/L2Copper E200.802/25/02 22:30 / eli-bug/L130Iron E200.702/26/02 04:10 / eli-bug/L<2Lead E200.802/25/02 22:30 / eli-bug/L50Manganese E200.702/26/02 04:10 / eli-bug/L<0.06Mercury E200.802/26/02 04:10 / eli-bug/L<10Nickel E200.802/26/02 04:10 / eli-bug/L<3Silver E200.802/26/02 04:10 / eli-bug/L<10Zinc E200.8

METALS, TOTAL02/27/02 20:13 / eli-bug/L0.3Arsenic E200.802/28/02 22:45 / eli-bug/L850Barium E200.702/28/02 22:45 / eli-bug/L1200Iron E200.702/28/02 22:45 / eli-bug/L77Manganese E200.7

METALS, TOTAL RECOVERABLE03/01/02 17:09 / eli-bug/L450Aluminum E200.702/27/02 21:26 / eli-bug/L<50Antimony E200.8

D 03/01/02 17:09 / eli-bug/L<1Beryllium E200.702/27/02 21:26 / eli-bug/L<5Selenium E200.802/27/02 21:26 / eli-bug/L<100Thallium E200.8

NON-METALS02/22/02 13:53 / mlimg/L760Alkalinity, Total as CaCO3 A2320 B02/21/02 15:46 / dpumhos/cm1370Conductivity @ 25 C A2510 B02/26/02 11:13 / eli-bug/L<5Cyanide, Total Automated E335.303/05/02 21:58 / tlfmg/L151Hardness as CaCO3 A2340 B02/21/02 16:03 / dps.u.7.87pH A4500-H B

ReportDefinitions:

RL - Analyte reporting limit. MCL - Maximum contaminant level.QCL - Quality control limit. ND - Not detected at the reporting limit.D - RL increased due to sample matrix interference.



Client Sample ID: 001 MS2 WY0046906 Collection Date: 02/21/02 11:05

Matrix: AQUEOUS


Lab ID: G02020196-003


DateReceived: 02/21/02Location: SENE_36_45N_74W Big George & Wyodak CoalsSampled By: Mike Naus

Qualifier

Samp FRQ/Type:

Project: 30 Day Sampling House CreekRevised Date: 06/27/06

Result Units


NON-METALS02/28/02 11:50 / eli-bug/L<10Phenolics, Total Recoverable E420.203/05/02 22:00 / tlfunitless9.1Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) Calculation02/22/02 08:23 / mlimg/L844Solids, Total Dissolved TDS @ 180 C A2540 C02/23/02 11:38 / clwmg/L<1.0Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons SW1664A

DATA QUALITY03/05/02 21:56 / tlf%-4.82A/C Balance A1030 E03/05/02 21:56 / tlfmeq/L15.8Anions A1030 E03/05/02 21:56 / tlfmeq/L14.3Cations A1030 E

RADIOCHEMICAL03/05/02 06:46 / eli-cpCi/L<0.2Radium 226 E903.0

ReportDefinitions:

RL - Analyte reporting limit. MCL - Maximum contaminant level.QCL - Quality control limit. ND - Not detected at the reporting limit.



Client Sample ID: 001MS2 WY0046906 Collection Date: 04/11/06 10:00

Matrix: AQUEOUS


Lab ID: G06040313-003


DateReceived: 04/11/06Location: SENE_36_45N_74WSampled By: Mike Naus

Qualifier

Samp FRQ/Type: S_SA_Y

Project: House Creek 11304-1

Result Units


FIELD PARAMETERS04/11/06 10:00 / ***umhos/cm1257Conductivity, field FIELD04/11/06 10:00 / ***s.u.8.32pH, field FIELD04/11/06 10:00 / ***°C13.2Temperature °C, field FIELD

*** Performed by Sampler

MAJOR IONS, DISSOLVED04/12/06 15:55 / mlimg/L856Bicarbonate as HCO3 A2320 B14.0 meq/L04/12/06 23:52 / mlimg/L14Chloride E300.00.39 meq/L04/12/06 23:52 / mlimg/L0.5Fluoride E300.00.03 meq/L04/12/06 23:52 / mlimg/L8Sulfate E300.00.17 meq/L04/14/06 16:29 / eli-bmg/L37Calcium E200.71.85 meq/L04/14/06 16:29 / eli-bmg/L8Magnesium E200.70.66 meq/L04/14/06 16:29 / eli-bmg/L13Potassium E200.70.34 meq/L04/14/06 16:29 / eli-bmg/L276Sodium E200.712.0 meq/L

METALS, DISSOLVED04/26/06 16:41 / eli-bug/L<0.1Cadmium E200.804/26/06 16:41 / eli-bug/L<1Copper E200.804/14/06 16:29 / eli-bug/L97Iron E200.704/26/06 16:41 / eli-bug/L<2Lead E200.804/14/06 16:29 / eli-bug/L42Manganese E200.704/26/06 16:41 / eli-bug/L<0.06Mercury E200.804/26/06 16:41 / eli-bug/L<10Zinc E200.8

METALS, TOTAL RECOVERABLE04/18/06 01:39 / eli-bug/L252Aluminum E200.8

D 04/18/06 01:39 / eli-bug/L<0.4Arsenic E200.804/18/06 01:39 / eli-bug/L568Barium E200.804/18/06 01:39 / eli-bug/L<5Selenium E200.8

NON-METALS04/12/06 15:55 / mlimg/L713Alkalinity, Total as CaCO3 A2320 B04/26/06 12:28 / tlcmg/L130Hardness as CaCO3 A2340 B04/19/06 17:17 / tlcunitless10.7Sodium Adsorption Ratio (SAR) Calculation04/27/06 09:39 / mlimg/L797Solids, Total Dissolved TDS @ 180 C A2540 C04/14/06 11:23 / tonmg/L<1.0Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons SW1664A

DATA QUALITY04/19/06 17:07 / tlc%0A/C Balance A1030 E04/19/06 17:07 / tlcmeq/L14.8Anions A1030 E04/19/06 17:07 / tlcmeq/L14.8Cations A1030 E

ReportDefinitions:

RL - Analyte reporting limit. MCL - Maximum contaminant level.QCL - Quality control limit. ND - Not detected at the reporting limit.D - RL increased due to sample matrix interference.



Client Sample ID: 001MS2 WY0046906 Collection Date: 04/11/06 10:00

Matrix: AQUEOUS


Lab ID: G06040313-003


DateReceived: 04/11/06Location: SENE_36_45N_74WSampled By: Mike Naus

Qualifier

Samp FRQ/Type: S_SA_Y

Project: House Creek 11304-1

Result Units


RADIOCHEMICAL04/13/06 13:20 / eli-cpCi/L<0.2Radium 226 E903.0M

ReportDefinitions:

RL - Analyte reporting limit. MCL - Maximum contaminant level.QCL - Quality control limit. ND - Not detected at the reporting limit.

APPENDIX B

Water Balance and Mixing Analysis

Storage pre storm (ac-ft) = 39.62Summary: 10 year 24 hour storm (ac-ft) = 8.96

Storage Available (ac-ft) = 30.66Area at CBM Flow HWL (ac) = 5.19

Wells: Proposed Number of Wells = 25Initial Flowrate (gpm) = 8.73

Existing Number of Wells = 8Flowrate (gpm) = 0.74

Total number of wells = 33 Month gpm/acreJan 0.44

All Wells Feb 0.57

Time Period Decline Curve (% of prev.) Flow (gpm) Total Flow (gpm) Time Period Decline Curve

(% of prev.) Flow (gpm) Total Flow (gpm)

Total Flow (gpm) Mar 1.13

Months 1 - 3 NA 8.73 218.25 Months 1 - 3 NA 0.74 5.92 224.17 Apr 2.07Months 4 - 6 56% 4.89 122.22 Months 4 - 6 92% 0.68 5.45 127.67 May 2.95Months 7 - 9 83% 4.06 101.44 Months 7 - 9 92% 0.63 5.01 106.45 Jun 3.52Months 10 - 12 85% 3.45 86.23 Months 10 - 12 92% 0.58 4.61 90.84 Jul 4.53Months 13 - 24 84% 2.90 72.43 Months 13 - 24 92% 0.53 4.24 76.67 Aug 3.96Months 25 - 36 50% 1.45 36.22 Months 25 - 36 92% 0.49 3.90 40.12 Sep 2.51Months 37 - 48 50% 0.72 18.11 Months 37 - 48 92% 0.45 3.59 21.70 Oct 1.45Months 49 - 60 50% 0.36 9.05 Months 49 - 60 92% 0.41 3.30 12.36 Nov 0.75Months 61 - 72 92% 0.33 8.33 Months 61 - 72 92% 0.38 3.04 11.37 Dec 0.50Months 73 - 84 92% 0.31 7.66 Months 73 - 84 92% 0.35 2.80 10.46 Annually 2.03

Max Storage = 12.68

Month

CBM Inflow (gpm)

CBM Inflow (acre-ft)

Evaporation 1

(gpm)Evaporation 1

(ac-ft)Infiltration2

(gpm)Infiltration2

(ac-ft)Total Losses

(gpm)Total Losses

(acre-ft)Net Inflow

(gpm)Net Inflow

(ac-ft)Storage (gpm)

Storage (acre-ft)

Jan-07 224.17 17.16 2.28 0.31 93.32 12.54 95.61 12.85 128.56 4.31 32.06 4.31Feb-07 224.17 17.16 2.96 0.40 93.32 12.54 96.28 12.94 127.89 4.22 63.44 8.53Mar-07 224.17 17.16 5.86 0.79 93.32 12.54 99.19 13.33 124.98 3.83 91.92 12.36Apr-07 127.67 14.31 10.74 1.44 93.32 12.54 104.07 13.99 23.60 0.32 94.31 12.68May-07 127.67 14.31 15.31 2.06 93.32 12.54 108.63 14.60 19.03 -0.29 92.12 12.38Jun-07 127.67 14.31 18.27 2.46 93.32 12.54 111.59 15.00 16.07 -0.69 86.98 11.69Jul-07 106.45 12.21 23.51 3.16 93.32 12.54 116.83 15.70 -10.38 -3.49 60.99 8.20

Aug-07 106.45 12.21 20.55 2.76 93.32 12.54 113.88 15.31 -7.42 -3.10 37.95 5.10Sep-07 106.45 12.21 13.03 1.75 93.32 12.54 106.35 14.30 0.10 -2.09 22.43 3.01Oct-07 90.84 10.30 7.53 1.01 93.32 12.54 100.85 13.56 -10.01 -3.26 0.00 0.00Nov-07 90.84 10.30 3.89 0.52 93.32 12.54 97.22 13.07 -6.38 -2.77 0.00 0.00Dec-07 90.84 10.30 2.60 0.35 93.32 12.54 95.92 12.89 -5.08 -2.59 0.00 0.00Jan-08 76.67 5.39 2.28 0.31 93.32 12.54 95.61 12.85 -18.94 -7.46 0.00 0.00Feb-08 76.67 5.39 2.96 0.40 93.32 12.54 96.28 12.94 -19.61 -7.55 0.00 0.00Mar-08 76.67 5.39 5.86 0.79 93.32 12.54 99.19 13.33 -22.52 -7.94 0.00 0.00Apr-08 76.67 5.39 10.74 1.44 93.32 12.54 104.07 13.99 -27.40 -8.60 0.00 0.00May-08 76.67 5.39 15.31 2.06 93.32 12.54 108.63 14.60 -31.96 -9.21 0.00 0.00Jun-08 76.67 5.39 18.27 2.46 93.32 12.54 111.59 15.00 -34.92 -9.61 0.00 0.00Jul-08 76.67 5.39 23.51 3.16 93.32 12.54 116.83 15.70 -40.16 -10.31 0.00 0.00

Aug-08 76.67 5.39 20.55 2.76 93.32 12.54 113.88 15.31 -37.21 -9.91 0.00 0.00Sep-08 76.67 5.39 13.03 1.75 93.32 12.54 106.35 14.30 -29.68 -8.90 0.00 0.00Oct-08 76.67 5.39 7.53 1.01 93.32 12.54 100.85 13.56 -24.18 -8.16 0.00 0.00Nov-08 76.67 5.39 3.89 0.52 93.32 12.54 97.22 13.07 -20.55 -7.68 0.00 0.00Dec-08 76.67 5.39 2.60 0.35 93.32 12.54 95.92 12.89 -19.25 -7.50 0.00 0.00

36* 40.12 35.00 10.54 17.01 93.32 150.53 103.87 167.54 -63.75 -132.54 0.00 0.0048* 21.70 19.93 10.54 17.01 93.32 150.53 103.87 167.54 -82.17 -147.61 0.00 0.0060* 12.36 18.34 10.54 17.01 93.32 150.53 103.87 167.54 -91.51 -149.20 0.00 0.0072* 11.37 16.87 10.54 17.01 93.32 150.53 103.87 167.54 -92.50 -150.67 0.00 0.0084* 10.46 0.00 10.54 17.01 93.32 150.53 103.87 167.54 -93.41 -167.54 0.00 0.00

* Values in table are for 12 month period

2 Reservoir Infiltration - as determined from 10-month field study in K-Bar field = 29 acre-ft/acre/yr

Table 6: Water Balance, Reservoir T44NR74W2NWSWDevon Energy Production Company, L.P.


1 Evaporation rates were taken from document WWRC 85-21, "Design Information for Evaporation Ponds in Wyoming" found at http://library.wrds.uwyo.edu/wrp/85-21/85-21.html


Evaporation rates1

Proposed Wells Existing Wells


Reservoir Name = T44NR74W2NWSWStorm Event Contained = 10-yr, 24-hr

Contributing Watershed = 305 acresCN = 63

(ac-ft) % of Total10-yr, 24-hr Storm Volume = 8.96 23%

CBM Water Storage Volume = 30.66 77%Total Water Volume (HWL) = 39.62

Site Ca (mg/L) Mg (mg/L) Na (mg/L) SAREC

(umhos/cm)

Hay Creek 1 = 195 182 241 3 2500MS2 Facility 2 = 37 8 276 11.4 1257

Water Quality Weighted Average of CBMMixed Water from Reservoir* = 73 48 268 6.0 1543

2 4/11/2006 sample from 001MS2.


Table 7: Mixing AnalysisDevon Energy Production Company, L.P.


Reservoir Information

*Weighted Avg. Formula = (23%*Hay Creek Value) + (77%*MS2 Facility Value). Every SAR value was calculated from the corresponding calcium, magnesium, and sodium concentrations.

1 Surface water quality data collected for the PAW Tributary Monitoring Program, 4/24/2001 (Appendix A). Hay Creek is a nearby tributary of the Belle Fourche.

Mixing Analysis


APPENDIX C

Reservoir Reclamation Estimate Summary and Reclamation Plan

Length (ft) Height (ft) HWL Area (acres)

Embankment Area (ac)

Volume (cu.yd.)

Volume (cu.yd.) + 18%***

Cost Length (ft)

X-Sect Area

(sq.ft.)

Volume (cu.yd.) Cost Gypsum (ton) Gypsum Cost

($240/ton)Sulfur (ton)

Sulfur Cost ($220/ton)

Spreading Cost

($15/ton)

Amendment Cost Seed (lb) Seed Cost

($5.50/lb)

Seed Spreading ($200/ac)

Total Cost to Seed

Hay (ton)

Hay Cost ($20/ton)

Spreading Cost

($200/acre)

Total Mulch Cost

002MS2 T44NR74W2NWSW 702 18.0 5.84 1.09 22,464 26,508 $29,158 1,781 51 3364.1 $3,701 29.2 $7,008 1.8 $385 $464 $7,858 139 $762 $1,386 $2,148 13.86 $277 $1,386 $1,663 $44,528Total $29,158 $3,701 $7,858 $2,148 $1,663 $44,528

** 2005 Values were used for Table 1 of the BLM "Engineer's Estimate of Reclamation Costs for Containment Structure" form.***18% was added to the embankment volume to account for shrink / swell.The unit cost of moving earthen materials is $1.10 per cubic yard. Seed will be spread at 20 pounds per acre, and the seed costs $5.50 per pound. Gypsum costs $240 per ton, delivered; recent soil amendment recommendations for produced water land application usually require 5 tons per acre of gypsum. Sulfur costs $220 per ton, delivered, and 600 pounds per acre is typical. It is estimated that soil amendments will cost $15 per ton to spread and $200 per acre to broadcast the seed. Hay mulch costs $20 per ton, and 2 tons per acre is needed.Mulch will cost $200 per acre to be spread, based on 2005 Means Handbook.

Campbell County T44N and T45N R74WReceiving Stream: Mud Spring Creek and Unnamed Tributaries of Mud Spring Creek (Class 3B)

Receiving Drainage: Belle Fourche River (Class 2ABWW)

MulchTotal Cost

per pit (2005dollars)**

Seed

Table 8: Reservoir Reclamation Cost EstimatesDevon Energy Production Company, L.P.

Mud Springs 2 WYPDES Permit Renewal WY0046906

Associated Outfall Reservoir

Embankment Channel Reconstruction Soil Amendments


DischargePoint

#(Outfall)Immediate Receiving Stream

Distance fromoutfall to mainstem

(stream miles)Mainstem Q/Q Sec Tnp Rng Latitude Longitude County

Reservoir PermitApplication

Submitted to SEO?

SEO ReservoirPermit #

Reservoir Name SEO Reservoir Requirements

001MS2 Mud Spring Creek 6.56 Belle Fourche SENE 36 45N 74W 43.83235 -105.6905 Campbell NA NA NA NA002MS2 Mud Spring Creek 11.79 Belle Fourche SWSW 2 44N 74W 43.81297 -105.72029 Campbell Yes P11226R T44NR74W2NWSW None

ICP Mud Spring Creek 11.43 Belle Fourche NWSW 2 44N 74W 43.81628 -105.72159 Campbell NA NA NA NAIMP Mud Spring Creek 10.69 Belle Fourche SWSW 35 45N 74W 43.82331 -105.72440 Campbell NA NA NA NA

Strikethrough indicates removal from pervious permit.Bold type indicates changes from previous permit.


Devon Energy Production Company, L.P.Table 1: Outfall Information



ms2 cover letter - deq.state.wy.usdeq.state.wy.us/wqd/wypdes_permitting/wypdes_pns...devon energy...

Documents