My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2009-03-17_REPORT - C1981010 (5)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Report
>
Coal
>
C1981010
>
2009-03-17_REPORT - C1981010 (5)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:44:27 PM
Creation date
3/18/2009 10:24:17 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981010
IBM Index Class Name
REPORT
Doc Date
3/17/2009
Doc Name
2008 Annual Hydrology Report
From
Trapper Mining Inc
To
DRMS
Annual Report Year
2008
Permit Index Doc Type
Hydrology Report
Email Name
JDM
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
58
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
be due to drilling for deeper coal in this area. Backfill well GD-3 is approximately 1200 feet <br />uPgradient of well GD-2. It is topographically higher and closer to D Pit. Water-level changes in <br />well GD-3 have been more gradual than changes in well GD-2. The unconfined backfill aquifer's <br />storage parameter would be much larger than the storage coefficient for the confined aquifer at GD- <br />2 and, therefore, would be expected to dampen responses. <br />Water levels in well GP-9 gradually increased in 2008 showing better recharge for the <br />last few years. This water-level change is likely natural except for the fourth quarter drop in 2007 <br />which seems to be an outlier. <br />Figure A4 presents water levels for wells GF-7 and P-8. These wells are completed in <br />the HI backfill and 3rd White Sandstone aquifers, respectively. Water levels in well GF-5 (see <br />Figure A-1) and GF-7 (see Figure A-6) were slightly higher in 2008 (both completed in the in <br />backfill). The larger storage value in the unconfined backfill aquifer may dampen the effects of dry <br />and wet years. The recovery from the A pit mining in this area may be complete. Overall the water <br />levels in well P-8 were higher in 2008. <br />Water levels for well GF4 are presented in Figure A-5. A large rise in water level in <br />well GF-4 was observed in the last half of 1999 after the repair of the casing on September 29, <br />1999. Water levels overall were fairly similar in 2008 to those observed in 2007 in well GF-4. <br />Mining occurred south of well GF-4 in the early 1980's and is expected to limit water-level changes <br />in the HI aquifer near well GF-4. Water levels in the upgradient unconfined backfill aquifer do not <br />fluctuate as much as the confined HI aquifer. It is also possible that the backfill spring in Johnson <br />Gulch may be limiting the head in the backfill aquifer. <br />Wells GF-6 and GF-11 are completed in the QR aquifer and QR backfill, respectively. <br />Backfill well GF-11 is located on the downgradient side of the inactive E pit, while well GF-6 is <br />located downgradient of the pit. GF-11 is 1150 feet upslope and upgradient of GF-6. Overall <br />increases in water levels were observed in wells GF-6 and GF-11 for 2008 (see Figure A-6). The <br />Trapper Mining Company 2-5 <br />2008 Annual Report
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.