2012-05-28_HYDROLOGY - C1981014 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Hernandez, Alysha From: Binns, Janet Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2012 2:51 PM To: DRMS- Coal -Admin Subject: Southfield Mine C1981014 General Docs Landowner questions re SF -87 -07 Please scan to Laserfiche From: W D Corley, Jr. [mailto:ajjc @att.net] Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 9:45 AM To: George Patterson Cc: Binns, Janet Subject: Re: drill holes George, Your guess about SF -87 -07 is possible, but there is an entirely different possibility. As you say the casing was mined thru which means that the casing end intersects the mine void. My guess is that the mine at this point is filled with water, that the casing is partially blocked off, and there is sufficient passage to allow the water I put down the hole to slowly enter the mine. Part of my theory is supported by the fact that the water levels in SF- 87 -07, SF- 87 -09, and MW65 are at equal elevations. However, at this point there is no way to prove either theory. I do not agree that EFCI drill holes were marked. Yes, some were marked and some were not marked. SF -87 -07 was not reclaimed and certainly was not marked. I have previously sent you the list of drill hole status currently as I have done the field search for all of those drill holes. I still have no answer to the question of whether the bond for the drill holes has been released. I will ask another question. Did Energy provide DRMS proof of compliance for plugging all of the drill holes pursuant to 4.07.3(3)? Since you were monitoring the flow of Newlin Creek, I would like to get your record of the depths you observed at the wooden culvert in the Mountain Park, please. The fact that water never reached your NE monitoring point means that there has been a huge amount of water entering the ground. Yes, we can disagree about where it is going into the ground, but by simple observation and surveying this flow loss is happening only over the pillared areas of Southfield. Doug - -- On Mon, 5128/12, George Patterson <efcoal@gmaiLcom> wrote: From: George Patterson <efcoal @gmail.com> Subject: Re: drill holes To: "W D Corley, Jr." <ajjc @att.net> Date: Monday, May 28, 2012, 10:44 PM Doug, I will attempt to answer some of your questions. Perhaps I mentioned that given drill hole SF87 -07 was mined through & pillared it is undoubtedly broken and plugged off. You mentioned you dumped 5 or 6 gallons of water into the well, the level raised a bit & then returned to the previous level. I can only guess that perhaps the annulus (between casing & dirt wall) was perhaps not totally sealed at that level whereby it built up in the annulus momentarily & then flowed out to surrounding strata. Kent Gorham, hydrologist for the Division, as well as hydrologist engineers Bishop & Brogden, consultants for both Southfield and Northfield studies, have stated that it is not unusual for different water levels to be held at different elevations by different strata, aka, "perched water levels ". You mentioned you measured about 200 foot depth in SF87 -07. I don't see how SF87 -07 would be of any value to monitor the Southfield mine. Unmarked drill holes: From what I can find, it appears some of the Dorchester holes drilled perhaps during the "Interim Law Period" (pre 1983), were unmarked. It looks like EFCI holes, drilled later, were marked. I believe I mentioned before, at some point a field search may be required to try to locate holes based on the co- ordinates provided with the drill logs. If unable to find, I don't have an answer to that. SF87 -09: I assume Al Weaver was probably thinking of SF87 -09. He stated the well was capped, that a screen