2008-05-05_REVISION - C1996083

• Permit No: C1996083
• IBM Index Class Name: REVISION
• Doc Date: 5/5/2008
• Doc Name: Review Memo
• From: Kent Gorham
• To: Joe Dudash
• Type & Sequence: PR11
• Email Name: KAG
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

STATE OF COLORADO
DIVISION OF RECLAMATION, MINING AND SAFETY
Department of Natural Resources
1313 Sherman St., Room 215
Denver, Colorado 80203
Phone: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
Interoffice Memorandum
COLORADO
DIVISION O F
RECLAMATION
MINING
- &-
SAF ETY
Bill Ritter, Jr.
Governor
TO: JOe DUdash Harris D. Sherman
From• Kent Gorh ~. Executive Director
CC: Sandy Broa'~-------` Ronald W. Cattany
Subject: PR-11 Bowie Resources C-96-083 Bowie submittal 2/4/2008 received vision Director
> > > ~ ~atural Resource Trustee
Date: May 5, 2008
I have reviewed the materials you provided to me in a February 15, 2007 memo requesting my
review of PR-11 for the Bowie No. 2 Mine, #C-96-083. My questions or comments are as
follows.
PR-11 proposes changing the longwall panel orientation by about 90 degrees resulting in three
B-seam longwall panels of about 9000 feet in length and one short panel of about 3000 feet
oriented in a NNE-SSW direction. Mining will be from north to south starting on the east in the
first short panel and progressing west into the three longer panels. The change also requires
expanding the permit boundary to the north to accommodate the three long panels.
The change in panel orientation between PR-10 and PR-11 will result in a different manifestation
of subsidence impacts. However, the application materials adequately address these impacts and
the orientation does not significantly change any of the predictions or result in new concerns
regarding impacts or mitigation. Please note proposed seismic monument lines B-12 and B-13
(Map 27, Subsidence, PR-10) will need to be moved to accommodate the new panel layout if
they are still necessary.
Our concerns regarding Terror Creek Reservoir and the associated Bruce Park Dam remain the
same with PR-11 as stated within the context of PR-10 review. From the results of our last
meeting with the applicant and their technical expert, I felt confident that PR-10 issues could be
adequately resolved and I see nothing within PR-11 that would change my opinion.
In summary, I have no new issues as a result of PR-11 with regard to subsidence and surface
impacts associated with subsidence that have not already been presented within PR-10.
Please let me know if you have any further questions.
Office of Office of
Mined Land Reclamation Denver Grand Junction Durango Active and Inactive Mines