Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br />Assessment of impacts typically involves oanparison of data with baseline <br />conditions. Since no mining activity will occur in the Minnesota Creek basin <br />during this term of permit, monitoring data for Water Year. 1986 from the <br />Minnesota Creek basin is considered an extension of baseline monitoring. <br />Surface water, springs, and groundwater are considered separately even though <br />they are interrelated. The report attempts to show the interrelationships that <br />are significant or could be expected. Since mine water and groundwater aze so <br />interrelated, they are discussed together. <br />' 2.1 Assessment of Groundwater <br />There aze essentially two ways in which mining activities az Mt. Gunnison could <br />affect groundwater. First, extension of mine entries and <br />' mining of the opal <br />, <br />could cause water to move from formations above the opal seam into the mine. Of <br />particular concern is the role of possible roof collapse and mine subsidence on <br />water bearing formations above the coal. Second is the possible impact of <br />' <br />refuse material disposal on groundwater quality. <br />Although the permeability of the F seam and overlying strata is very low and the <br />' quantity of water stored in these units is also low, water from these strata <br />will occasionally seep into the mine. <br />The entries located neaz the outcrop, near the portals, and in Sylvester Gulch, <br />flowed during snowmelt runoff in the Spring and Summer of 1986. Inflows <br />occurred primarily from the roof in areas of low overburden cover and near the F <br />Seam outcrop. Sustained inflows were encountered only at the three locations <br />described previously. The estimate of sustained inflows is provided in table <br />1.4-3, The three locations where inflows were encountered are shown on E7~hibit <br />III. Sane mine dischagge water is lost to evaporation prior to discharge. <br />' Imported water is to a large extent transported out of the mine with the coal, <br />or lost in ventilating air. Sane seepage may account for a minimal amount of <br />water loss. <br />' The seasonal pattern of mine inflows observed near the Sylvester Gulch Return <br />and the mine entries indicate that the colluvium, coal and bedrock are rechazges <br />locally. The area near the Sylvester Gulch Fan location is also an area with <br />many naturally occurring fractures. Water moves down slope and discharges as <br />springs and seeps. Water inflows appear to be controlled by precipitation, <br />depth of overburden and location of fracture zones, and not by the extent of <br />underground workings. <br />The lower mine inflows during water year 1986 may be attributed to a localized <br />dewatering effect in the Sylvester Gulch area. Once mining was completed the <br />flows encountered during mining decreased since the area immediately near the <br />iorkings had been dewatered to a certain extent. Transmissivity to the surface <br />may not be as great as transmissivity in the immediate vicinity of the vx~rkings. <br />Precipitation was above average during the 1986 water yeaz but was less than in <br />1984 and 1985. This may also have contributed somewhat to lower inflows. <br />Precipitation was likely a small contributor to decreased mine inflows, however, <br />since base levels of the groundwater wells responsive to precipitation and <br />runoff remained as high as the 1984 and 1985 levels. <br />Mine water inflows for the 1987 water year aze expected to be similar to the <br />1986 water year. Sane minor inflows of the roof dripper, floor seep, rib seep <br />' (11) <br />