My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE108142
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
100000
>
PERMFILE108142
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:00:36 PM
Creation date
11/24/2007 4:19:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007A
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
6/6/2003
Doc Name
pages 2.05-84 to 2.05-166
Section_Exhibit Name
2.05 Operation & Reclamation Part 2
Media Type
D
Archive
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
76
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 />.~ Water and methane intrusions were also common at least three years before the mine closure. In <br />a letter to the Director of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) on Jattuary 25, 1950, the <br />president of Calumet Fuel Company described the following conditions in the Oliver No. 2 Mine <br />(unpublished letter written to BLM Director Marion Clawson by Claude P. Heiner, January 25, <br />1950): <br />1. In October 1949, water seeped into the 3" West entries from Sylvester Gulch, as the <br />entries were driven beneath the gulch. The water softened the entry floors and caused the <br />roof to swell and cave. Mining was halted because of mining problems (it became <br />impossible to operate the mobile loaders and shuttle cars) and to protect the miners. <br />2. About this time, the south main, consisting of four entries, was driven southward in an <br />attempt to turn another set of entries either east or west. Sudden, lazge outflows of water <br />and methane were encountered in the development entries. The volumes were large <br />enough to force the company to remove the mobile loaders and shuttle cars and replace <br />them with shaker conveyors in order to continue development. <br />Water and Methane Drainage After Oliver No. 2 Mine Closure <br />• <br />\J <br />Seals, consisting of a double row of cinder blocks, were installed 75 to 150 feet north of the <br />northern entry of lu West entries of the Oliver No. 2 Mine in December, 1953 (Boyd Emmons, <br />oral communication, November 6, 1996). They were installed to seal off the water and methane <br />coming from various areas of the mine. Appazently these seals did not completely seal off either <br />water or methane under pressure because water was observed draining from the Oliver No. 2 <br />Mine in the eazly 1970's and the methane was detected with a methanometer above the portal azea <br />(Dunrud 1976, p.33). Although no water was observed in the Oliver No. 2 portal area during a <br />field inspection in October 1996, water may be flowing beneath the road grade of State Highway <br />133. According to Bob Barrett, Grand Junction District Geologist for the Colorado Department <br />of Transportation (CDOT), a drainage system (cobble and geotechnical fabric) was installed <br />within the drainage area of the unnamed drainage west of Box Canyon to channel the numerous <br />springs that were encountered during highway construction in 1980 (oral communication, Bob <br />Barrett to John Rold, November 14, 1996). The springs encountered during construction of <br />Highway 133 are thought to reflect flows emanating from the Oliver No. 2 Mine. <br />In addition to observations of flows from the Oliver No. 2 Mine portal in the 1970s, additional <br />observations were made regarding surface flows in the Sylvester Gulch drainage. One particular <br />observation, (Blll Bear oral communication, 1972) was that there was a substantial decrease in <br />surface flow (and dewatering of a beaver pond) from the first east fork of Sylvester Gulch above <br />its confluence with the North Fork. There has been speculation that this appazem decrease in <br />flow was the result of Oliver No. 2 mining activities, however, the reported decrease iri the flow <br />during the 1970s is puzzling for two reasons: <br />2.05-128 RevisedJw. 1995 PR06; !/96 RN03; RevfsedJtm. 7998PR08 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.