REP38423 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Sampling Station ~ EC Tem °C Flow m 10 8.3 1,560 14 see note 11 8.3 1,728 13 24.5 I2 6.9 2,340 14 2.2 471.6 gpm NOTE: Sump in 9th East was being pumped and discharging through 4" pipe - Flow not measureable. A comparison of Tables 3, 4 and 5 reveals that some of the mine inflow cannot be measured directly. This is due to the fact that parts of the mine are sealed or flooded and cannot be observed. Using the data from Table 3 and comparing it against th data presented in Table 5, approximately 261 gpm cannot be mea~~r~s~ured. It is assumed this is associated with sealed and flooded areas of the mine. 1.6 Conclusions The study reveals that conditions within the mine are remaining essentially the same as during the prior two years. Tiuat is the eastern portion of the mine is relatively dry, while the western portion of the mine produces the majority of the flow. The flow is associated with the same areas as described in the prior study. The fault system west side of the mine is producing water at about the same rate as measured during the previous year. Although the flow has decreased from prior years. It is approximately 46 gpm less this year. This data indicates that the inflow has not changed appreciably since May, 1983. The field parameters measurement obtained from the water flowing from the fault and west side of the mine is essentially the same as prior years. The reasons for the difference in water quality between the Trout Creek sandstone water and the fault water has been explained previously. It appears the source of water to the fault is from aquifer(s) below the coal seams. It is potulated that the Trout Creek sandstone could be the source of water for the 2 west fault. The water levels obtained from the No. 5 Mine indicate that the water level is remaining relatively stable. From this it appears the inflow from the fault ins approximately a steady-state condition. The water levels in the well remain about 6 feet below grade and have been maintained this level for about a year. A study of the results indicate that a number of uncontrollable variables, both in the ground water system itself (i.e. modified local gradients), and in mine conditions (flooded or sealed areas) m+~nifest themselves during the study. The resulting variation points out the difficulty in conducting inflow studies on an annual basis to address the MLRD's contention that it is imperative to identify what arez~s of the mine are drying up or have started producing water. The inflow predictions Empire Energy made in the permit application are reasonable, and Empire Energy provided for an approach for conducting additional inflow studies if