2008-11-24_REVISION - C1996083 ‎(6)‎

• Permit No: C1996083
• IBM Index Class Name: REVISION
• Doc Date: 11/24/2008
• Doc Name: Proposed Decision and Findings of Compliance
• From: DRMS
• To: Bowie Resources, LLC
• Type & Sequence: PR10
• Email Name: JJD
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

Renewal No. 1 to replace several aggressive introduced species with native species. Mulch will be applied
at an approximate rate of 4000 pounds per acre. The USDA-FS provided its own reclamation seed mixes
for disturbed areas on USFS lands. One seed mix is for the mountain shrub community and the other is
for the aspen/spruce/fir community. The Division had suggested the addition of three forbs into the seed
mixes. However, the USDA-FS declined the suggestion. BRL has accepted the USDA-FS reclamation
seed mixes, with the knowledge that the reclamation success standards will still apply. Approval of
Permit Revision No. 6 added two new seed mixes into the reclamation requirements. One seed mix is for
reclamation of the hayland areas and the other is for reclamation of the pasture areas.
The review of the permit renewal application revealed that the Colorado Division of Wildlife (CDOW)
had not been consulted on the woody plant stem density for reclaimed areas at the Bowie No. 2 Mine.
BRL sent a letter to the CDOW, dated March 18, 2002, requested their consultation and concurrence on
the matter. Because this matter would take some time to resolve, Stipulation No. 14 was added to the
approval for Permit Renewal No. 1 that required that BRL provide verification of concurrence from the
CDOW for the proposed plan. In Technical Revision No. 46, CDOW approved the operator's plan to use
shrub clumps instead of a woody plant density standard. Therefore Stipulation No. 14 was complied with.
Hydrologic and subsidence monitoring will occur throughout the operational and reclamation phases of
the Bowie No. 2 Mine project. While deleterious hydrologic or subsidence-related impacts are not
anticipated, the Bowie No. 2 Mine permit application contains mitigation plans to be implemented if
negative impacts are detected.
Permit Revision No. 10 contained several important submittals that detail the subsidence, seismic and
hydrologic monitoring requirements. They are as follows:
Permit application text in Section 2.05.6(6) of Volume I, pages 2.05-99 through 2.05-125, was
revised to explain the subsidence and seismic monitoring programs.
2. The "Geotechnical Data Report Bruce Park Dam" and "Addendum" are in Volume X and consist
of evaluations of the geotechnical characteristics of the Bruce Park Dam and adjacent landslide.
The evaluations were used in conjunction with the following mine-induced seismicity study to
determine the integrity of the Bruce Park Dam and Terror Creek Reservoir under seismic effects.
3. The "Geotechnical Evaluation of Mine-Induced Seismicity on Bruce Park Dam" can be found in
Volume X and is an evaluation of the possible effects of mine-induced seismicity on the Bruce
Park Dam and adjacent landslide.
4. An additional evaluation of the seismic effects on the landslide was made in the "Final
Geotechnical Investigation and Evaluation Report" for the Bruce Park Dam and is filed in Exhibit
20 of Volume IIIA.
5. The "Seismic Monitoring Network at Bowie Resources Longwall Coal Mine" is filed in Exhibit
18 of Volume IIIA and describes the seismic array that is being used to monitor seismic activity.
6. The "Seismic Monitoring - Summary Statement" in Exhibit 18 of Volume IIIA describes the
seismic monitoring program and includes a discussion of the threshold event that will trigger an
inspection of the dam. Bowie has committed to this inspection if the peak horizontal acceleration
(PGA) value of 0.05g is reached or exceeded, as recorded at the seismic station that is adjacent to
the dam (station TCR).
19