GENERAL35449 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

_lg_ No springs or seeps were located within the life-of-mine permit boundary. A perennial seep exists along the base of the Grass Valley Reservoir. The seep has an average flow of 5 gpm. The quality of this seep is documented in Table 1. Seeps along the base of the reservoir create the perennial flow in the Harvey Gap Drainage during periods when no water is released from the reservoir for irrigation. The applicant completed two wells into the coal seams overlying the E-Seam within the permit boundary. The well yields and chemistry are documented in Table 1. This in-seam water is typified as high in total dissolved solids (TDS), conductivity and sulfate. The sodium absorption ratio (SAR) is relatively low. The yields from these wells range from .023 gpm to .6 gpm. The applicant has also sampled water seeping into the portal area of the established mine. The quality and quantity of this water is documented in Table 1 as mine seep. The quality of this water is more typical of fresh water and has little resemblance to the quality of water found in the wells of the overlying coal seams. The applicant communicated that the seep appears to be emanating from the burn zone overlying the uppermost entry. The source of the water is most probably recharge from snowmelt and runoff. The seep has an average yield of 2 gpm. The applicant has submitted a computer model for prediction of worst case inflows into the mine during the five-year permit term. This model is described on pages 53D-0 and in Appendix F of the permit application. The first portion of the model predicts inflows resulting from the coal seam face during the greatest mine extent of the permit term. This model predicts a maximum inflow rate of 233 cubic feet/day or 1.21 gpin. The second part of the model predicts inflow occurring from recharge at the subcrop in Harvey Gap. This is projected at 0.47 gpm. As the actual data submitted by the applicant for inflow occurring along the subcrop is 2 gpm, the model projection does not appear to predict worst case conditions. The inflow from the subcrop is high, due to the contact of the burn zone above the portal entry with the surface water system. As the mine is developed away from the subcrop, these inflows should not increase measurably. For the purpose of worst-case prediction in quality changes, the modeled inflow from the coal seam of 1.21 gpm was used in conjunction with worst-case chemistry sampled from the upper seams of 3040 mg/1 TDS (see Table 1). The measured portal inflow of 2 gpm at a worst case TDS of 873 mg/1 was mixed with the coal inflow to predict worst case chemistry from the mine.