My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2009-12-21_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981012
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Coal
>
C1981012
>
2009-12-21_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981012
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:57:57 PM
Creation date
12/21/2009 2:59:41 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981012
IBM Index Class Name
GENERAL DOCUMENTS
Doc Date
12/21/2009
Doc Name
Review Letter
From
OSM
To
BLM
Permit Index Doc Type
General Correspondence
Email Name
KAG
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.
/
5
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
COMPETITIVE COAL LEASING, page 1 <br />There appears to be a conflict between the statement that none of the 20 unsuitable citation were <br />applicable and then bringing four (actually 6) forward. <br />BACKGROUND, page 3 <br />The background implies that there were a number of existing leases and permits in the area <br />which should be able to provide additional environmental information for evaluation. <br />Map 2, page 5 <br />The map needs to be revised to show the existing New Elk mine permit area relative to the LBA <br />and to depict the extent of the proposed new permit area including the LBA and private fee coal. <br />For clarity, if there is no Forest Service or BLM surface ownership within the whole proposed <br />permit area then they should be deleted from the map legend. <br />DISCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES, page 6 and 7 <br />The discussion under section needs to be revised to discuss the viability or non-viability of the <br />mine without the LBA. <br />The text needs to be updated to discuss the current status of the dewatering operations since it <br />has been a year since the dewatering was started and was only projected to take three months. <br />The EA should, at a minimum, provide a baseline for the successful development of <br />environmental compliance protection measures to be implemented. It is OSM belief based upon <br />the information provided there is no assurance of success. <br />All of the discussions of methane, its release into the atmosphere and potential mitigation <br />measures should be moved to one section such as Climate Change. <br />AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT / ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES / MITIGATION <br />Air Quality, page 8 <br />The discussion needs to be revised to describe the current ambient air quality in the region as <br />well as the proposed mine permit area including LBA. <br />Climate Change, page 11 <br />It is unclear if the methane drainage wells will be installed in advance of mining to mitigate the <br />amount of methane released into the mine as the seam is mined. Usually, there are no methane <br />gob vent wells in room and pillar mining operations. How many wells will be installed and for
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.