My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV12927
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV12927
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 1:23:54 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 10:37:33 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1996083
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
9/24/1999
Doc Name
PR 3 FACILITIES EXPANSION AND PRODUCTION INCREASE BOWIE 2 MINE PN C-96-083 BOWIE RESOURCE LIMITED
From
DMG
To
BOWIE RESOURCES LIMITED
Type & Sequence
PR3
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.
/
16
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
<br />5 million tons per year (presumably in the year 2000). However, on proposed revised <br />Map 1 ~, `Mine Plan'; the second year production (presumably the year 1000), is stored <br />as being 2, 6-J5, 000 tons. Further, on proposed revised page 4 of Technical Revision No. <br />30 for the Bowie No. 1 Mine, the anticipated tonnage at the loadottt jor the year 1000 is <br />stated as being ~ million tons. Please reconcile these differences. <br />The Division has no further concerns. Text page 2.05-.1 has been revised to reflect the 5 <br />million tons per yeaz anticipated production. TR-30 has been withdrawn for the Bowie <br />No. 1 Mine and replaced with TR-32, which involves a production limit of ~ million tons <br />per year. Map 14 was not revised because the reserves in private coal may be less than 5 <br />million tons. The yearly production rate is a rate only and does not necessaril}~ reflect the <br />total available tonnage. <br />2a. The PHC and the Hydrologic Reclamation Plan presented with the revised text do not <br />adequately address the potential for perpetual discharge from the mine. The Hydrologic <br />Reclamation Plan states that no hydrologic reclamation plan is proposed for potential <br />mine discharge. The potential for discharge from the portals (once mining has ceased) <br />should be evaluated and included in the PHC portion of the revised text. <br />BRL has not responded to this question yet. Please provide a response. <br />25. Permanent entry seals are proposed for the mine portals. If a perpetual discharge <br />situutiot; arises, stow will mine discharge be conveyed front the mine? Please update the <br />Hydrologic Reclamation Plan to include additional detail on how the discharge (ijit <br />occurs) will be conveyed, handled, and treated prior [o discharge. <br />BRL has not responded to this question yet. Please provide a response. <br />28. There is an incomplete sentence at the start of paragraph two on proposed revised page <br />1.05-77. Please revise this page. <br />The Division has no further concerns. The submittal dated May 12, 1999 contained a <br />revised page 2.05-77 with the correction. <br />If you have any questions, please call me. <br />Sincerely, <br />sTbse' phvJ. ash <br />>~ °"~ <br />Environmental Protection Specialist <br />cc: Jim Stover P.E. (J.E. Stover & Associates) c:\ms97\bowie2\pr3adeg2 <br />16 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.