Laserfiche WebLink
Dudash, Joe <br />From: Stark, Jim <br />Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2009 9:07 AM <br />To: Dudash, Joe <br />Subject: RE: TR-66, Terror Creek Vent Shaft <br />Thanks. <br />From: Dudash, Joe <br />Sent: 30 December, 2009 08:42 <br />To: Stark, Jim <br />Subject: FW: TR-66, Terror Creek Vent Shaft <br />I am forwarding to you this e-mail from the Forest Service to Bowie since you are reviewing the cost estimate for TR-66. <br />Bowie may have to upgrade the Terror Creek road and the Steven's Gulch road for the Forest Service. Some of the road <br />upgrades may be within the permit area but I don't know if the Forest Service will require Bowie to reclaim some of the <br />road upgrades. I don'.t know if we require an operator to bond for public road upgrades within their permit area. I'll let <br />you know how this progresses. Thanks! <br />From: Ryan Z Taylor [mailto:rztaylor@fs.fed.us] <br />Sent: Monday, December 28, 2009 3:25 PM <br />To: jestover@bresnan.net; bbear@bowieresources.com <br />Cc: Dudash, Joe <br />Subject: TR-66, Terror Creek Vent Shaft <br />Jim, Bill, <br />I just got the completeness letter from CDRMS on the proposed Terror Creek shaft (TR_66). Typically since this does not <br />involve USFS lands, I wouldn't be interested; however, I noticed the proposed access route is the Terror Creek Road via <br />Steven's Gulch from the North. <br />Just curious ...is there a reason you're not accessing the proposed shaft location from the south? <br />My concern is the current condition of the Terror Creek road and the amount of work (primarily gravel placement and <br />drainage control) that would need to be performed on that route to accommodate the traffic associated with shaft <br />construction. <br />Our standard for road improvements and maintenance on projects like this is: AASHTO (Guideline for geometric design of <br />very low volume roads ADT <400, 2001 edition), or as approved by Forest Engineer designed by a Colorado Registered <br />Professional Engineer, and submitted for USFS approval. We were able to avoid this issue with the Hubbard Shaft <br />because of the short mileage involved and the location of the shaft... Also, with the road upgrade requirements that would <br />have to take place, we almost certainly have to re-consult with USFWS on greenback cutthroat trout issues... <br />From the south, the route is certainly shorter and would probably be much cheaper because of the USFS requirements <br />that will be associated with road upgrades and maintenance on a project this size. If Bowie's long-term plans include a lot <br />of use on the Terror Creek Rd the upgrades would certainly be worthwhile... but it probably will not be an inexpensive <br />venture ...In addition the project would also have to include some engineering studies and subsequent gravel work on <br />Steven's Gulch, and would most likely come with a temporary road bond increase (during construction). <br />If access from private land to the south is not do-able (for whatever reason), I think looking at other alternatives that might <br />shorten the mileage on USFS lands would behoove us all. <br />Regards,