Laserfiche WebLink
pumps that are not installed vertically may perform poorly. Concerns with discharges <br />into Sylvester Gulch were also expressed. <br />Horizontal drilling in advance of the wntinuous miner in the area of the fault. As <br />above, the drillers may not recognize when the fault has been encountered, since initial <br />comact with the fault appears to generate relatively little water. <br />Vertical drilling of a hole from the surface in Sylvester Gulch into the sump azea. As <br />with other drilling on U. S. Forest Service surface lands, authorization to access and <br />construct the drilling site is typically a lengthy process and is a concern. The type and <br />cost of pumping equipment necessary to remove the sizable volumes of water from the <br />sump and handling discharges into Sylvester Gulch are also concerns. <br />The surface land above the fault area is in the upper Sylvester Gulch drainage. Many of the spring <br />and seep locations in the area were visited and the general temperature (by touch) of the water <br />was noted. All of the flows observed were considerably colder than those emanating from the <br />fault area in the B-seam. A significant sandstone outcrop is located in the approximate location of <br />the fault area. More than 1,000 feet of the outcrop was inspected along its base and observed <br />from across the drainage. No evidence of the fault was observed. Comparing the line of the <br />outcrop (from a distant vantage point) to the outcrop on the east side of the gulch, a subtle offset <br />was observed. These outcrops are separated by several hundred feet with excessive soil, possibly <br />from sliding or slumping activity. <br />Flows in the western tributary of Sylvester Gulch, downhill from old drill site SOM-4A, were <br />estimated at 100 to 150 gpm (based on the cross-sectional azea and estimated velocity). Along a <br />100-foot length of the channel, approximately 300 feet to the north, flows diminished to nothing. <br />From this location to the flagging marking the approximate surface location of the fault, a bearing <br />of N65~ was observed (and noted to be surprisingly close to the projected orientation of the <br />fault). <br />Based on the observations of this evaluation, WWE provided the following conclusions and <br />recommendations. <br />• The temperature of the water from the fault indicates that it is not directly connected <br />to a surface water source. The hydrostatic pressure on the system could result from a <br />surface source. The recommendation is to continue monitoring the temperature of the <br />water from the fault in the B-seam to see if the temperature decreases showing some <br />ind'vect connection with a neaz-surface source. <br />• Given the inflow history of the West Elk Mine, where initial flows from water-filled <br />pockets or fractured areas diminishes over time, the observed flows in the fourth entry <br />were also projected to diminish. The recommendation is to complete installation of in- <br />line flow meters for better measurement of the flows. <br />• As tapping into the fault in the fourth entry caused the flows in the fifth entry to the <br />south to dry, the source of the water may be to the north. However, the flow is <br />obviously fracture controlled and cannot be thought to be the classic "porous media" <br />case (i.e., saturated aquifer with flow direction downhill). The fault may be a neaz- <br />vertical plane filled, or partially filled, with water_ The flow direction is controlled by <br />the path of least resistance (i.e., where the fault system is most open) and may be the <br />