My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE114594
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
200000
>
PERMFILE114594
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:10:41 PM
Creation date
11/24/2007 11:50:14 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981044
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/11/2001
Section_Exhibit Name
EXHIBIT 39 PAR 10/17/86 RESPONSES
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.
/
38
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
RESPONSE: See responses to individual concerns below. <br />C~ <br />Subsidence Inventory <br />1. Map No. 25, entitled "Structures and Renewabl Resources", should <br />be amended to depict the boundaries of the Yampa and Williams Fork <br />alluvial valley floors. <br />RESPONSE: Map 26, Structures and Renewable Resources has been <br />revised to address this issue. <br />2. Table 78, entitled "Inventory of Structures and Renewable Resource <br />Lands", indicates that subsidence is "Not Planned" for State <br />Highway 13. The applicant states that it intends to subside the <br />Highway during the life-of-mine, but not during the first five year <br />permit period. Table 79, entitled "Maximum Predicted Worst Case <br />Subsidence for Structures and Renewable Resource Lands", projects a <br />• maximum predicted worst case subsidence of 6.0 feet for State <br />Highway 13. The applicant should correct or clarify this issue. <br />RESPONSE: Table 78, page 2.05.6(6)-3 and Table 79, page <br />2.05.6(6)-10 have been revised to address this issue. <br />Description of Worst Possible Consequences <br />1. The application observes that the AMOCO Oil Pipeline might need <br />repair if affected by subsidence. While earlier mining plans for <br />the No. 5 mine included subsidence control components to protect <br />the oil pipeline, the plan under review does not. The application <br />states, on page 2.05.6(6)-13, that the pipeline might be affected <br />by general lowering of the ground surface with grade changes and <br />surface cracking. However, on page 2.05.6(6)-22, the applicant <br />observes that surface lowering and cracking have been observed <br />• above existing longwall panels No. LW-I & LW-2 in the No. 5 mine. <br />Surface lowering has reached a maximum vertical magnitude of 4.8 <br />39-23 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.