My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2003-06-30_PERMIT FILE - C1981010A (2)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Coal
>
C1981010
>
2003-06-30_PERMIT FILE - C1981010A (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:15:44 PM
Creation date
12/22/2010 10:47:04 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981010A
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
6/30/2003
Doc Name
pages 2-346 to 2-424 (2-392 to 2-401 confidential)
Section_Exhibit Name
2.7 Hydrology
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.
/
86
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
Gained only 1.7Z of [his fraction in [he unweathered material. As shown in Table <br />2.7-4 the shale tended to weather [o a greater degree than the sandstone plus <br />siltstone. After weathering, over twice as much of the shale appeared in the <br />smallest size fraction (-0.053 mm) compared to the sandstone plus siltstone, <br />indicating that the shale tends to break down faster and into finer particles <br />than sandstone plus siltstone. Thus, the initial overburden should be quite <br />resistant to erosion, but as weathering proceeds, the erosion potential will <br />increase. Therefore, significant predictions about erosion hazards of the over- <br />burden depend on the degree of weathering. <br />The potential problems with some of the weathered overburden will be eliminated <br />or reduced once topsoil is placed on the spoil surface. <br />Water Holding Capacity, Hydraulic Conductivity and Settling Volume <br />The data for water holding capacity, hydraulic conductivity and settling volume <br />after weathering appear in Table 2.7-5. Large differences occurred in the water <br />holding capacity at 1/3 bar suction and at IS bars suction. The difference <br />between these two values represents a measure of the amount of water available to <br />plants. The water contents in each column re Elect differences in the overburden <br />due mainly to texture. By linear regression calculations, the clay contents were <br />be estimated to range from 2Z in a layer (71'-96') in CR213 to 64 Y, in a Layer <br />(64'-109') in CR220. <br />The settling volume was very high for three overburden layers with clay contents <br />above 40$ i.e. 64'-109' and 161'-172' in CR220 and 114'-145' in CR223. It was <br />high for two other samples which contained an estimated 359. clay (150'-184' in <br />CR222) and 407. clay (96'-111' in CR223). These Eive samples with clay contents <br />of 359.' ar more were the only samples with ESP values greater than 15. These same <br />five samples had the Lowest values (<O,OOL cm/hr) foc hydraulic conductivity.. <br />The very low values for hydraulic conductivity in some of the overburden samples <br />weathered from shale indicate that problems could arise from erosion and poor <br />water infiltration if these materials were no[ going to be retopsoiled. The <br />resulting condition shoiiLd be very similar to many pre-mining areas where very <br />clayey subsoils occur naturally. <br />2-365 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.