Laserfiche WebLink
MT8 2.05-31 Revised 02/28/22 <br />underlying the No. 9 Mine. This estimate is based on the water level contour map for water levels measured in <br />November 1995 (1995 Annual Hydrology Report, Permit C-81-044, Figure 12). The Twentymile Sandstone lies <br />approximately 350 ft. below the “P” seam. Historic water levels in the Twentymile Sandstone have apparently not been <br />effected by mining in the area, as they have remained relatively constant since 1981 (ibid., Figure 10) indicating a <br />limited hydrologic connection between the aquifer and the mine. <br /> <br />The maximum piezometric level of the White Sandstone is estimated to be approximately 6,300 feet where it overlies a <br />location in the No. 9 Mine where measurable flow was encountered. This is based on the mine inflow study (Eagle No. <br />9 Mine Inflow Study, Map IV-11a, 5/8/83) and the December 1985 water level measurements (1985 Annual Hydrology <br />Report, Permit C 81-044, Figure 17). In addition, the maximum projected piezometric level of the White Sandstone <br />where it overlies any portion of No. 9 Mine is less than 6,320 feet; however, this is at the White Sandstone’s outcrop <br />area where it is probably not saturated. The White Sandstone overlies the mine by approximately 125 feet and outcrops <br />approximately 1,000 feet north of the portal. Historic water levels in the White Sandstone were not significantly affected <br />by the mining (refer to 1985 Annual Hydrology Report, Permit C-81-044, Figures 12 –14), again indicating that there <br />is not a good hydrologic connection between the aquifer and the mine. <br /> <br />The indicated vertical groundwater gradient, based on a comparison of the piezometric surfaces in the overlying and <br />underlying sandstones, is downward in the No. 9 Mine area. Even if there were a good hydrologic connection between <br />the aquifers and the mine, the groundwater gradient indicates that the mine would not fill to the surface. Instead, it <br />would refill to an equilibrium level corresponding to the potentiometric surface of the upper (White Sandstone) aquifer. <br /> <br />None of the historic underground mines in the area are known to discharge. This includes the Wise Hill No. 4 Mine, <br />which was accessed by a portal in the “bottom area” and had gradually filled with discharge the No. 5 Mine. It <br />discharged briefly when water from the No. 5 Mine was injected; however, when injection stopped, the discharge ceased. <br />The following summarize key hydrologic considerations: <br /> <br />• The piezometric surface in the aquifer below the mined seam is lower than the portal elevation <br />• The piezometric surface in the aquifer above the mined seam is lower than the ground surface at the portal <br />site <br />• Where there was measured inflow to the No. 9 Mine, the highest piezometric head in the overlying aquifer <br />was lower than the portal elevation <br />• The vertical component of the gradient in the area is downward <br />• The mine was driven in a down-dip and down-gradient direction <br />• The mine portal is located at the crop line <br />• There are no historic springs in the area <br /> <br />None of the historic underground mines in the area are known to discharge, and the No. 9 Mine Portal is at a higher <br />elevation than any of the old mines <br /> <br />Effects of Seepage from No. 9 Portal Backfill <br /> <br />The No. 9 Mine portal backfill will have surface area of approximately five acres. Using an infiltration rate of three- <br />inches per year, the annual infiltration will be less than 1 gpm. This amount is insignificant and will, therefore, have no <br />measurable effect on nearby aquifers. Also, the backfill area is stratigraphically separated from the nearest aquifer, the <br />Twentymile Sandstone, by 360 feet of very low permeability interbedded claystone, siltstones, and sandstones. <br /> <br />No. 5 and No. 6 Mine Water Handling System <br /> <br />The No. 5 and No. 6 mine water handling system was removed and associated disturbance areas reclaimed as it is no <br />longer needed to support ongoing or anticipated future operations. The area in which the ponds and dewatering <br />boreholes were located was returned to the hay cropland land use.