Laserfiche WebLink
The aquifer characteristics of the Wolf Creek (low transmissivity and storativity <br />values) indicate that very little water is available for upward movement. Due to the <br />distance between the Wadge and Wolf Creek, fracturing of the Wolf Creek due to <br />mining is improbable. Inflow from the Wolf Creek coal seam into the open or <br />reclaimed pits is not expected to occur. <br />The Wadge coal and its overburden, which may locally contain the Lennox coal <br />seam, generally stores and transmits water. While mining, water will be induced to <br />flow into active and reclaimed pits. This water will flow mainly from the Wadge <br />coal, but also from the overburden. The operator estimated the following values for <br />aquifer characteristics in the Wadge Coal and Wadge Overburden: <br />* Hydraulic conductivity of overburden = .O1 ft./day <br />* Hydraulic conductivity of coal = 0.02 ft./day (north pit), .O1 ft. day (south pit) <br />* storativity = 10-Z for both aquifers <br />* Transmissiviry = 4.5 ft. Z/day for overburden <br />* Transmissiviry = 0.12 ft.:/day for coal <br />* Hydraulic gradient of overburden = .165 (north pit), .085 (south pit) <br />* Hydraulic gradient of coal = .15 (north pit), .11 (south pit) <br />The preceding estimated values for hydraulic conductivity and transmissivity are <br />somewhat lower than most values reported for these aquifers by mines in the azea. <br />Tables 5 and 6 in Robson and Stewart's (1990) report indicates ranges in hydraulic <br />conductivity from 0.1 to 0.6 ft./day for the overburden aquifer and two values of .02 <br />and .4 ft./day for the Wadge Coal. <br />The Division's PHC findings are based on the possibility of greater inflows than <br />those predicted by the applicant. The Williams Fork Formation overburden which <br />locally contains the Lennox Coal Seam, may contain perched aquifers as well as <br />acting as a limited aquifer system neaz the Wadge coal. The overburden does not <br />contain or transport significant amounts of water in this azea. <br />.~ <br />~'-•" ' The applicant states that no hydrologic effects due to mining will be noticed at <br />',r t''' `~ ~ Temple Well No. 1 (a domestic water right), located south and west of the mine site. <br />Eventually, some effects will be seen at this well. The effects may be exhibited as <br />increased levels of dissolved solids or other chemical parameters (sulphur, iron) <br />and/or diminished quantity of water at the well. These effects will probably not be <br />seen until a number of years after mining has reached its closest point to the well. <br />Eventually, effects will diminish as the dissolved solids are leached from the spoils, <br />and the aquifer chazacteristics return to normal. <br />Locally, the major impacts of mining include affecting the quantity and/or quality <br />of Springs S-I, S-5, S-23, 5-41 and 5-45. Effects of mining at these sites will not <br />be observed for a few years afrer mining is at its closest to these points. <br />Seneca II-W Findings Documen[ 2g November 3, 1999 <br />