My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2008-03-07_REVISION - C1980007 (3)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1980007
>
2008-03-07_REVISION - C1980007 (3)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:24:37 PM
Creation date
6/18/2008 2:09:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
3/7/2008
Doc Name
E-mail Regarding E-Seam Methane Drainage Wells and Re-issuance of the ROD
From
Henry Barbe
To
Tom Kaldenbach
Type & Sequence
TR111
Email Name
DIH
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.
/
47
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 of Flaring Issues <br />Methane flaring from MDWs connected to underground mines is an untested technology which <br />gives rise to concerns by the regulatory agency (MSHA) for the safety of human lives. MSHA is <br />responsible for approving mining plans including ventilation plans. Absent years of research and <br />testing (L. Mattson personal communication A. Davis February 2008), MSHA will not approve <br />flaring as part of a mine's ventilation plan. <br />The Forest Service sole role in the OSM and State permit process is to manage surface resources. <br />Consequently, the Forest Service does not have the authority to require flaring of methane gas. <br />Authorized Officer Conclusions & Determination <br />This supplemental information report causes no change to the proposed action or to the decision <br />issued in November 2007, nor does it change the conclusions of the FEIS. No conditions have <br />changed since the preparation of the FEIS/ROD with regard to lands included. The Purpose and <br />Need of the project would not warrant further consideration of flaring of methane gas as an <br />alternative considered in detail due to the circumstances described above even if this analysis <br />were re-initiated today. Neither would the effects analysis change with regard to the proposed <br />action. <br />There is no need to change the original decision with regard to this clarified material; however <br />because of the reverse/remand language, the decision will be re-issued with a subsequent appeal <br />period. <br />This determination for the supplemental information above is purely administrative and therefore <br />not a decision subject to appeal under FSH 1909.15, Chapter 10, Section 18. <br />/? ? §i&lWRd/ <br />Charles S. Richmond, Forest Supervisor <br />3/7/0008 <br />Date <br />45
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.