Laserfiche WebLink
Mato and Assoelafes, LC <br />data do not provide meaningful information regarding potential impacts due to mining. Per <br />[he regulations, analyses should continue for TDS, EC, pH, and iron. <br />• <br />SOM-45-H-1 and SOM-45-H-2 are located above an area ofpotential future mining. No <br />significant water level fluctuations or chemical abnormalities have been observed in either of <br />these wells that may be attributed to mining. The close proximity and different screened <br />intervals of the two wells make them a good nested pair to evaluate potential mining impacts <br />and to evaluate differences in hydrodynamic responses due to depth. The shallow well of the <br />pair, SOM-45-H-2, shows a seasonal response in water level to annual recharge, whereas the <br />deeper well does not. Botlr of these wells should remain in the monitoring plan provided <br />they remain in good working order. <br />Wells SW-1 through SW-6 are a cluster of 6 shallow monitoring wells constructed in 1985 [o <br />evaluate the possible effects of mining the 2W 1 S panel in the F-seam and the 1 NW longwall <br />panel in the B-seam. All of the wells are less than 60 feet deep and are located along a linear <br />trend, which is about 2,500 feet from end to end. The INW panel was longwall mined in late <br />1992 and early 1993, and except for possibly SW-3, no mining effects are observed in the <br />hydrograplr data. The water level decline in the 1993 and 1994 data for SW-3 may show <br />sotne effects of mining; however, the absence of data between 1989 and 1991 make this <br />conclusion uncertain. Dry conditions are often found in these wells and the water levels are <br />seasonally influenced because of the shallow depths. No significant water level fluctuations <br />or chemical abnormalities have occurred during the 14 years of monitoring of the wells in <br />Evaluation of the West Elk Mine Monitoring Plan <br />29 January 1999 <br />Page 5 <br />