Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br />1 <br />1 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />William J. Carter Mazch 12, 1998 <br />Re: Response to Susan Burgmaier's comments on the 1996 Annual Hydrologic Report <br />From Mazch 8 to 13, 1991, another well was established in the Rollins Sandstone below SC-2 <br />along the Coal Gulch Road. Well SC-4 was installed to 360 feet. Initial monitoring of SC-4, on <br />Mazch 18, 1991, showed low electrical conductivity and total dissolved solids, but by April 30, <br />1991, the electrical conductivity and total dissolved solids were again compazable to the results for <br />the other Rollins Sandstone wells, SC-1 and SC-2. <br />Extensive bailing tests were conducted on wells SC-1 and SC-2 during Mazch of 1995, in response <br />to Division of Minerals and Geology's review of the 1993 and 1994 Annual Hydrologic Reports <br />regarding the high total dissolved solids in the two wells, reference Division of Minerals and <br />Geology memorandum from Kent Gorham to Tony Waldron, February 6, 1995, and February 7, <br />1995 correspondence from the Division of Minerals and Geology to Somerset Mining Company, <br />and February 17, 1995 correspondence from Somerset Mining Company to the Division of <br />Minerals and Geology. These tests further confirmed the low permeability and porosity, and poor <br />water quality, of the Rollins Sandstone. This information and additional monitoring data, in excess <br />of the requirements of the Colorado Division of Minerals and Geology, Permit Number C-81-022, <br />were submitted to the Division of Minerals and Geology on March 28, 1995. <br />Significant changes in the depth to water in the wells has not occurred, indicating no impact to the <br />Rollins Sandstone from mining in the azea of the wells. The entire azea in Sections 9 and 10 <br />surounding the wells has been mined out. During the routine December, ]997 quarterly sampling <br />for well SC-2, difficulty was encountered in collecting the required sample. The measurement of <br />the depth to water in the well with the small-diameter electrical cable was about as expected at 159 <br />feet. <br />However, when attempting to lower the baler in the 2-inch, PVC-cased well, the baler appazently <br />did not reach [he water level. Additionally, the pull on the rope when retrieving the baler indicated <br />the baler has the potential to stick in the well. The well was baled with asmaller-diameter baler, <br />and a sample was collected. Appazently, there is some obstruction, such as possible crushing of the <br />casing, that has occurred since the September, 1997 quarterly sampling. <br />It is my opinion that the Rollins Sandstone is not a regional aquifer, and the water cannot be put to <br />beneficial use. Sanborn Creek Mine will continue to attempt to collect a sample from well SC-2, <br />and keep the Division of Minerals and Geology informed of our progress. If a sample can not be <br />' collected from SC-2, well SC-4 can be monitored, and the data compared to the baseline <br />information from 1991. <br />' Well SC-3 monitors the water level and quality in the D-Seam above the mine. A significant drop <br />in the water level in SC-3 would indicate the mine may be having an impact on the D-Seam. Graph <br />' 1 shows the water level of SC-1, SC-2 & SC-3 along with the lowest elevation in the mine as it <br />advanced in the B-Seam. Graph 2 shows the increase in total dissolved solids values of SC-1 and <br />SC-2. <br />' 7 <br />XBOW MINING INC. <br />1 <br />