Laserfiche WebLink
Rationale for Proposed Decision to Approve TR -69 <br />April 6, 2017 <br />Page 6 of 9 <br />The intent of the December 21, 2015, commitment was to investigate hydrologic communication in the <br />area where water was seen "disappearing" at the 90° bend in the Fontanari irrigation ditch. Any further <br />subsidence investigation is outside of the scope of the Rules. Pursuant to Rules 2.05.6(6) and 4.20, mine <br />operators are only required to remediate subsidence damage to structures and renewable resources. <br />Further, this comment is outside the scope of TR -69 <br />10. The scope and financial character of permanent injuries to Fontanari lands damaged by the <br />Snowcap Repair Plan, including, but not limited, to: (a) the lost value of basaltic minerals <br />prohibited from extraction after installation of the "grout plugs" in Fontanari Tract #71 as <br />proposed by Snowcap Coal; (b) lost arability of lands after installation of the "grout plugs <br />and, (c) diminution in or destruction of the value of water rights in the Martin Crawford Ditch as <br />a result of inability to irrigate lands in Tract #71 and all other lands owned by Fontanari. <br />Under both the Act and Rules the Division is without jurisdiction and authority to adjudicate property <br />rights. As such, comments a and b are both outside of the Division's jurisdiction. With regards to <br />comment c, the Division does not believe that installing the grout plug proposed in TR -69 will result in <br />the inability to irrigate these lands. To the contrary, the installation of the grout plug will limit the <br />hydrologic communication that currently exists. <br />11. An accurate layout of the sub -surface rooms, pillars and caverns of the South Portal Mine <br />during operation thereof by Powderhorn Coal Company and Snowcap Coal Company (both of <br />which were managed by Mr. James E. Stover). <br />While the Division agrees that an accurate map of the workings in question would be helpful, it is <br />outside the scope of TR -69. The Division believes that the testing and analysis conducted by Fugro and <br />HBET has located a source of hydrologic communication between the surface and mine. The Division <br />also believes that the repair plan submitted by SCC will adequately address the communication. <br />12. Whether sound science and engineering principles support the "grout plug" reclamation and <br />repair plan proposed by Snowcap Coal. <br />Using a grout plug to seal underground openings is a standard method employed by operators in <br />Colorado and other states. It is a preferred method and it is consistent with Rule 4.07 — Sealing of <br />Drilled Holes and Underground Openings. <br />13. Whether there is competent evidence supporting a DRMS decision to approve the Snowcap Repair <br />Plant, together with a reliability that such repair plan will, in fact, produce the results claimed by <br />Snowcap and its consultants. <br />Based on 30+ years of experience, the Division believes that the sealing plan submitted by SCC will <br />eliminate any hydrologic communication from the surface to the mine through the vent shaft. <br />14. The impact, if any, of the Snowcap Repair Plan upon existing water pipelines and other <br />installations made by the Ute Water Conservancy District and whether Snowcap's Repair Plan <br />properly protects such installations from present or future injury resulting from Snowcap's <br />