My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2008-03-21_PERMIT FILE - C1980007A (46)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Coal
>
C1980007
>
2008-03-21_PERMIT FILE - C1980007A (46)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:25:41 PM
Creation date
6/20/2008 3:24:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007A
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
3/21/2008
Doc Name
pg 2.05-200 to 2.05-300
Section_Exhibit Name
2.05.6 Mitigation of Surface Coal Mining Operation Impacts 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.
/
102
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 />Bedrock Springs <br />From the information available, roughly one third of the springs in the permit area can be <br />considered bedrock springs. All of the springs associated with formations are located well above <br />the projected E Seam fractured zone; consequently, these springs will not be measurably affected <br />by fractures extending up from the mine workings. As noted above, if the relevant formations fall <br />within the caved zone or the lower portion of the fractured zone, the springs may be lost and the <br />recharge water may enter the mine workings. Springs associated with the upper portion of the <br />fractured zone may be either lost into the mine workings or they may relocate to a lower elevation. <br />Although highly unlikely, consider an example in which 50 percent of the bedrock springs in the <br />South of Divide permit revision area are in the caved and fractured zone. In this very <br />conservative scenario, the spring recharge water would drain into the mine workings. The <br />implications of this scenario are not significant. <br />1. The maximum number of springs that would be lost under this scenario within the South of <br />Divide permit revision area is 8. <br />2. The combined discharge of the relevant springs is, conservatively, 50 gpm. This represents less <br />than 10 percent of the total spring discharges in the permit area. <br />3. The source water for these springs would be discharged into the mine workings. Losses within <br />the mine workings are estimated to be less than 5 percent. The remaining 95 percent of the <br />inflow water would. therefore be collected, treated and discharged to the Dry Fork or the North <br />Fork. <br />Bedrock springs could potentially be impacted by surface cracks, but the logic presented in the <br />previous section for colluvial/alluvial springs applies to bedrock springs also. Simply stated, there <br />is no significant risk to bedrock springs from surface cracks. <br />In summary, there is a small, if any, potential for springs to be affected by mining-induced <br />subsidence. The majority of springs within the permit area have alluvium or colluvium as their <br />source of water. These springs may be affected by the natural instability characteristics of the steep <br />hillsides within the permit area that may be increased as a result of mining activities. In this <br />situation, the likely response of an alluvial/colluvial spring will be to relocate downgradient. <br />Vegetation supported by the spring would also likely migrate downgradient to the new spring <br />location, i.e. translated effects to habitat and the ecosystem. <br />Bedrock springs are far less prevalent in the permit area and are less likely to be affected by surficial <br />disturbances. In the unlikely event that a spring's bedrock source is intercepted by the fracture <br />zone, the water would enter the mine workings, where it would be collected, treated, and discharged <br />to the Dry Fork or the 'North Fork. iii such an event, vegetation supported by the sprung would lose <br />its water source. However, the probability of this occurrence is remote, in part due to the lenticular <br />nature of the bedrock fonmations, which would tend to limit the recharge area for the spring to an <br />area near the outcrop. <br />2.05-205 Revised June 2005 PRIO; Rev. March 2006; Rev. Apri12006 PRIO; May 2006 PRIO.Sep. 2007 PR12;Feb 2008 PR12
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.