My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL47522
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL47522
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:22:40 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 3:35:01 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
3/16/2006
Doc Name
Final EIS & Record of Decision for the Dry Fork Lease
From
US Forest Service
To
DMG
Permit Index Doc Type
Other Permits
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.
/
141
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
Summary <br />and on the south by inferred mineable coal <br />(unleased) (BLM 2004}. Therefore, it is assumed <br />that access to the coal reserves in the Dry Fork LBA <br />tract would most easily be achieved from the <br />existing underground workings at the West Elk <br />Mine with existing surface facilities. <br />Understanding that Federal coal is leased through a <br />competitive bid process, the analysis assumes that a <br />company other than Ark Land/MCC may be the <br />successful bidder at the lease sale. If there were a <br />successful bidder other than Ark Land/MCC, the <br />tract could potentially be subleased back to MCC <br />(because the successful bidder would not have the <br />advantage of existing coal handling facilities or <br />control of adjacent coal reserves, as does MCC). <br />Subleasing would be a high-risk business <br />proposition for an outside bidder because MCC <br />may refuse any such sublease agreement. The coal <br />does not outcrop on the Dry Fork LBA tract, <br />therefore no portals could be located, and there may <br />not be a reasonable shaft location. <br />Production at the West Elk Mine is limited to 8.2 <br />million tons per year based on current air quality <br />and mining operation plans and corresponding <br />permits. Current production ranges between 6.5 and <br />7 million tons per year using the Longwall mining <br />method, and is capable of peaking at a rate of 7.5 <br />million tons per year. Annual production will <br />depend on several factors, including rail <br />transportation, which ultimately limit production <br />from the North Fork Valley. It is assumed that the <br />coal would be transported to market using the <br />existing coal handling facilities and existing spur <br />rail line. <br />The RFMA for the Dry Fork tract assumes that coal <br />in the E Seam would be extracted from Longwall <br />panels trending northwest southeast. These Longwall <br />panels and corresponding development mining are <br />planned to occur on an adjacent lease already held <br />by MCC. The foreseeable mine operations plan in <br />the Dry Fork LBA tract is an eastward extension of <br />the Longwall panels planned in the existing lease to <br />the west. The mining would "retreat" to the main <br />entries of the mine. Continuous miner development <br />would be used to drive development entries for the <br />Longwall panels, with the primary coal production <br />being achieved using the Longwall method and <br />equipment. <br />The E Seam coal reserves in the Dry Fork LBA <br />tract represent about 30 months of additional coal <br />reserves based on the rate of mining currently <br />employed at the West Elk Mine (BLM 2004). The E <br />Seam coal in the Dry Fork LBA tract would be <br />mined from about 2008 to 20 ] 5. Some variations to <br />these timeframes may occur based on permitting, <br />unforeseen mining or geologic circumstances, coal <br />contract variability, etc. <br />Ark Land's application for the Dry Fork LBA tract <br />did not include foreseeable mining in the B Seam. <br />However, BLM has documented possible <br />recoverable reserves in the B Seam. The coal lease, <br />if it is issued, will encompass all coal within the <br />lease boundaries. Therefore, although it is not <br />anticipated that the B Seam reserves would be <br />mined at this time, the RFMP includes a projection <br />for eventually mining in the B Seam. The B Seam <br />coal in the Dry Fork LBA may be mineable in the <br />northwestern portion of the tract. Longwall panels <br />would likely extend into these reserves from the <br />northwest. The RFMP assumes the B Seam coal in <br />the Dry Fork LBA tract would be mined between <br />2015 and 2016. The B Seam coal reserves represent <br />about 14 months of additional coal reserves based <br />on the rate of mining currently employed at the <br />West Elk Mine. If the B Seam were ever to be <br />mined, it is presumed that it would be mined in a <br />similar fashion to the E Seam, from the existing <br />mine and using existing facilities. <br />The RFMP assumes a Longwall panel configuration <br />that would cross Deep Creek and the Dry Fork of <br />Minnesota Creek perpendicularly to obliquely. The <br />RFMP was used to develop the coal mine <br />subsidence prediction used to assess potential <br />surface resource impacts. <br />Reasonably Foreseeable Post-lease Surface <br />Use <br />In recent years, coal mines operating in the <br />Somerset coal field have experienced build-up of <br />methane gas in the underground workings after the <br />rock strata have subsided due to mining. Under <br />Mining, Safety, and Health Administration <br />regulations, mines are required to maintain methane <br />levels at or below certain levels to ensure worker <br />safety underground. Typically, the mine ventilation <br />system cannot effectively keep methane levels <br />Dry Fork Lease-By-Application FEIS S-3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.