My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2022-09-29_PERMIT FILE - C1980007 (2)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Coal
>
C1980007
>
2022-09-29_PERMIT FILE - C1980007 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/6/2022 2:39:13 PM
Creation date
10/6/2022 2:29:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
9/29/2022
Doc Name
pg 2.05-200 to 2.05-300
Section_Exhibit Name
2.05.6 Mitigation of Surface Coal Mining Operation Impacts Part 2
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.
/
102
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
West Elk Mine <br />Fork drainage is less than one acre-foot. The losses that do occur (as a consequence of <br />infiltration into surface cracks) will eventually be discharged to the North Fork as either <br />springs/seeps or shallow groundwater return flow. MCC recognizes that this may affect the <br />"timing" of discharges into the North Fork, but the key point is that water will be returned to the <br />river. Also, as described later in this section, given the large fault inflows in 1996 and early <br />1997, MCC has been a net exporter of water to the river. <br />2. Springs -As discussed at length in Section 2.05.6 (3) (b) (iii & viii) Springs/Seeps, there are no <br />springs in the Apache Rocks and Box Canyon permit revision areas which are within the <br />fracture zone above the B Seam or the combined caved/fractured zone above the B and E <br />Seams. As such, no spring flow is expected to be lost to the mine workings. Surface cracks <br />could disrupt some of the colluvial springs, but this would ultimately result in the downgradient <br />displacement of the flows, and there would be no loss to the river. <br />3. Groundwater - There is extensive discussion in Section 2.05.6(3)(b)(iii & viii), Groundwater <br />Quantity Effects, on groundwater impacts including fault system inflows and underground <br />storage of water. There are no "aquifers" in the current permit area. Most of the groundwater <br />resulting from primary porosity occurs in small, discontinuous "lenses." Fractures and faults <br />within the stratigraphic column have provided secondary porosity, which contributes the <br />majority of the groundwater into the mine. <br />Most of the groundwater intercepted in the mine is collected, pumped to the surface, treated, if <br />necessary, and released to the North Fork. Until 1996, this treated and released groundwater <br />represented approximately 20 acre-feet of "new" water in the North Fork. This is based on the <br />observation that most of the B Seam dips under the North Fork in a downgradient direction from <br />West Elk Mine. Therefore, discharges to the North Fork of this "developed water" constitute <br />new water in the North Fork system. In 1996 and 1997, MCC encountered inflows up to 2,500 <br />gpm and 8,000 gpm, respectively, which exceeded the hydraulic capacity of their treatment <br />facilities. This necessitated the subsurface storage of water in previously mined areas or sealed <br />sumps (see discussion in Section 2.05.6(3)(b)(iii & viii), Groundwater Quantity Effects). <br />Isotope analysis of tritium and carbon-14 (Mayo 1998) has been used to determine the <br />groundwater "age" (or mean residence time) of the fault water to be at least 50 years (per 3H <br />analysis) and between 5,000 and 20,000 years (per 14C analysis). This fact, coupled with no <br />known claim of reliance or water rights on these fault inflows, suggests that this water has not <br />been appropriated. MCC has appropriated the fault water and storage rights to these inflows. <br />Water Rd ghts Aspects of?Vorth Fork Diversions, FamIt Inflows and Sealed Panels Sumps <br />In light of the large fault inflows experienced by MCC in 1996 and 1997, in conjunction with <br />MCC's utilization of sealed panels sumps, the following text has been prepared to summarize the <br />resulting water In addition, MCC'S a t0= a___ _____.. rattern of diversions and <br />return flows to the North oric are described. <br />• <br />2.05-213 Revised Jane 2005 PRIO; Rev. March 2006; Rev. April 2006 PR 10; A1ay 2006 PRIO; Sep. 2007 PR12; Feb 2008 PR12
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.