2009-10-30_REVISION - C1982056 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Eastern Mining District (Longwall Panels 6R-2R) during 1999. One had been occupied year round, one was vacant and is owned by Twentymile Coal Company, and the third was occupied only during portions of the year. Twentymile Coal Company has a subsidence agreement with Mr. Kenneth Ashley regarding his dwellings. (2.07.6(2)(d)(v)). The full-time residents were moved by Twentymile Coal Company to alternative accommodations prior to subsidence of the house. Twentymile Coal Company took precautions with the home by bracing floor joists and door frames prior to undermining. The house was located near the center of Longwall panel 5 Right. After subsidence occurred, Twentymile Coal Company and the Ashley's agreed upon mitigation of the house by replacement of the structure. Twentymile Coal Company demolished the original structure, backfilled the foundation, constructed a new foundation and installed a modular home as agreed upon with the landowner. The smaller residence owned by the Ashley's overlay gateroad 6 Right, and experienced roughly 4 inches of subsidence. Twentymile Coal Company conducted repairs to the smaller residence in accordance with the subsidence agreement with the Ashley's in the fall of 1999. The residence owned by Twentymile Coal Company also overlay gateroad 6 Right. This structure was not monitored for subsidence impacts and will not undergo any mitigative measures as a result of subsidence. 6. On the basis of information obtained from the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) and archeological and cultural resource surveys submitted by the applicant, the Division finds that subject to valid existing rights as of August 3, 1977, the mining operation will not adversely affect any publicly owned park or place listed on or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places as determined by the State Historic Preservation Office. On April 14, 1997, the Division sent a letter, map and permit text to the SHPO indicating the scope of the project and requested their evaluation of the project with regard to cultural and historic resources in the area. On April 24, 1997 the SHPO responded and believed that the nature of the proposed project would not necessitate further cultural resource work and provided concurrence for the project to proceed (2.07.6(2)(e)(i)). In conjunction with DMG's review of PR8, the Colorado State Historic Preservation Office provided a letter to the Division on June 22, 2009 that indicated that the activities proposed by PR8 had potential to impact cultural or historic sites in the Western Mining District (WMD). The Division provided SHPO additional information and maps of the areas expected to be affected. The Division received a second letter from SHPO on July 22, 2009, stating that SHPO believed that a finding of no historic properties affected was appropriate for the activities associated with PR8. 7. Foidel Creek is solely an underground operation, therefore the documentation required by Rule 2.03.6(2) is not required (2.07.6(2)(f)). On the basis of evidence submitted by the applicant and received from other state and federal agencies as a result of the Section 34-33-114(3) compliance review required by the Colorado Surface Coal Mining Reclamation Act, the Division finds that Twentymile Coal Company does not own or control any operations which are currently in violation of any law, rule, or regulation of the United States, or any State law, rule, or regulation, or any provision of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act or the Colorado Surface Coal Mining Reclamation Act (2.07.6(2)(g)(I)). 9. Twentymile Coal Company does not control and has not controlled mining operations with a demonstrated pattern of willful violations of the Act of such nature, duration, and with such resulting irreparable damage to the environment as to indicate an intent not to comply with the provisions of the Act (2.07.6(2)(h)). The Applicant Violator System was queried on October 19, 2009 and October 29, 2009. The result of both queries was the operator has no outstanding violations. The system recommendation is "issue" the permit. 17