Laserfiche WebLink
t ...time of dewatering days <br />The total inflow per (longwall panel) section of the mine or level is then calculated from: <br />Q = q x 1 <br />where: 1 ... length of dewatered section (m) <br />The total horizontal inflow per (longwall panel) section of the mine or level was calculated using hydraulic <br />conductivity that ranged from 0.034 to 0.098 ft/day. The geometry of the mined area and time of dewatering are <br />based on the mining plans. The analytical equation presented above was input into a simple spreadsheet computer <br />program (LOTUS 123) on an IBM computer. The results of the inflow calculations for the Eastem Mining District <br />are summarized and presented in Tables 3 and 4 of Exhibit 9A. The average inflow in one panel could range from <br />65 to 230 gpm and the total inflow in the Eastern Mining District could range from 110 to 601 gpm. <br />The geology of the Eastem Mining District is similar to the previously permitted areas. A syncline axis, oriented <br />northwest-southeast is located in the central section of the mined area. The southeastern edge of the proposed <br />mining is defined by a split in the Wadge Coal Seam. Additional exploration boreholes will be drilled in this area <br />to better define the coal seam composition. <br />The Eastern Mining District area sedimentary strata are not disturbed by any significant faults. The structural and <br />lithologic characteristics of the permit area are depicted on Geologic Cross Sections B-B' (east-west) and D-D' <br />(north-south), Figures 1B and lA, respectively. These figures are considered confidential. <br />EMD (Panels 2 Right through 6 Right)(PR 97-04) <br />The mine inflow predictions were generated using a different methodology than was used for the EMD. The <br />discussion and calculations are presented in Section 2.05 of this application. The methodology used amirror-well <br />technique, which should be adequate for predicting inflows into the mine. <br />NORTHERN MINING DISTRICT (PR 99-OS) <br />The mine inflow predictions were generated using a different methodology than was used for the EMD. The <br />discussion and calculations are presented in Section 2.05 of this application. The methodology used amirror-well <br />technique, which should be adequate for predicting inflows into the mine. <br />NMD (Panels 17 Right through 21 Right) (PR 03-06) <br />The mine inflow predictions were generated using a different methodology than was used for the EMD. The <br />discussion and calculations are presented in Section 2.05 of this application. The methodology used amirror-well <br />technique, which should be adequate for predicting inflows into the mine. <br />(2) The use of approved modeling techniques may be included as part of the Hermit application, but <br />the same surface and eround water information may be required for each site as when models are not used. <br />RESPONSE <br />Modeling of geologic conditions has been utilized to predict subsidence potential; the results of the <br />modeling are set forth in Exhibit 7, Subsidence Predictions. Overburden stratigraphy, uniaxial <br />compressive strength and tensile strength, angle of draw, caving, and flexure characteristics have been <br />modeled using methods described in the Subsidence Engineer's Handbook (NCB Mining Department, <br />1975). <br />PR 03-06 2.04-11 03/02/04 <br />