My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2017-06-02_REVISION - C1981038 (2)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1981038
>
2017-06-02_REVISION - C1981038 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/6/2017 9:30:44 AM
Creation date
7/6/2017 9:29:09 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981038
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
6/2/2017
Doc Name
Follow up Questions
From
Judy Martin
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
PR5
Email Name
CCW
JRS
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.
/
15
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
DATE: 6/2/2017 <br />QUESTIONS AND FOLLOWUP QUESTIONS (Note—some of the questions from my original question <br />sheet from May 1S were not yet answered but are not included here). <br />The $2.2 million cost summary dated 2/9/2015—was this developed with Bowie or by Bowie, and if <br />performed, inspected and approved by DRMS would allow release of just that $2.2 million portion of <br />the $4million of the bond, or all of the bond? <br />Answer: The Division creates an estimate of reclamation liability, based on the approved reclamation <br />plan in the permit, independent of the operator. This calculated liability is what the Division uses to set <br />the required bond. It is based on independent and verifiable costs and is updated in its entirety a <br />minimum of every two years to account for changes in costs <br />FOLLOWUP QUESTIONS: in the RCE some of the larger numbers (site maintenance) are <br />provided by User. Is the User the Operator? Did you update the reclamation estimate (since <br />this estimate was done 2/5/2105? <br />The areas around the East Mine and West Mine are very detailed as to what needs to be done to <br />meet reclamation requirements. Without maps though, it isn't clear what relates in particular to the <br />Steven's Gulch parcel to be sold after change of use. What, if any, of the East Mine area is still left <br />to be reclaimed? <br />Answer: I will need to have the specialist in charge of this site look up this information. He will be back <br />from the field on Monday. <br />What constitutes "Final Abandonment" and does this trigger time frames for required reclamation <br />of all mining related sites for Bowie? Does Final Abandonment apply to each Bowie mine #1 and #2 <br />separately? Has Final Abandonment occurred for both Bowie #1 and Bowie #2 officially? If so, was <br />there a notification to DRMS? <br />Answer:Although the Bowie No. 1 and Bowie No. 2 Mines have the same operator, they are <br />independent permits. The Bowie No. 1 Mine is in permanent cessation and has been conducting <br />reclamation. The Bowie No. 2 Mine is in temporary cessation and can return to active status and restart <br />operations once they notify the Division. <br />FOLLOWUP QUESTIONS: Task#158- The sediment ponds mentioned for cleanup—how many were <br />related to the Mine 1 ? Have any been cleaned up since this estimate was completed? Do any affect <br />Steven's Gulch property? This was a "user" provided estimate—will you update it? Will the ponds be <br />"cleaned up" if the change of use is approved? <br />Does the liability for monitoring and/or fixing some of the potential effects of NOT doing the <br />reclamation (subsidence, monitoring water contamination, allowing old structures or infrastructure <br />to deteriorate without regard for visual and or hazardous conditions on the site) accrue to the new <br />owner once the change of use has been inspected and validated by DRMS? <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.