My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2006-05-01_REVISION - C1980007
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1980007
>
2006-05-01_REVISION - C1980007
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:16:25 PM
Creation date
7/20/2010 2:16:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
5/1/2006
Doc Name
USFS Comment Letter
From
USFS
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
PR10
Email Name
TAK
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.
/
4
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
Comment: <br />2.04-36 and 37 <br />This discussion should acknowledge that the Forest Service has stipulations on Federal Leases <br />that state surface use is prohibited on slopes greater than 60% and that special evaluation is <br />needed for surface use on slopes between 40% and 60%. <br />Response: <br />The appropriate change has been made within the document recognizing stipulation for surface <br />occupancy or use on slopes greater than 40%. <br />Comment: <br />2.04-44 - 1St sentence <br />In some cases determining the cause. of rockfalls (either natural or mining induced) is quite easy <br />to make (e.g. Bowie's recent release in Hubbard Canyon). Please add a related comment that <br />states unless rockfalls occur in close temporal and spatial timing to a passing longwall (likely <br />induced by subsidence from mining) it is difficult to determine if it was natural or mining <br />induced... <br />Response: <br />The appropriate changes have been made. <br />Comment: <br />2.04-44 <br />This discussion should include that the active ground water zone includes water in near surface <br />fractures (especially along outcrops) that daylights along cliff faces in the form of springs or <br />seeps. <br />Response: <br />This comment is included in following sections of the document with respect to bedrock springs. <br />Comment: <br />2.04-49 &50 <br />Under the "Methane" section there is no mention about the quantity and surface impacts <br />associated with methane drainage wells. Please-include a number of wells drilled in previously - <br />mined areas as well as surface disturbance estimates, and if possible include an estimate for <br />MDWs needed for the South of Divide area. <br />Response: <br />References to Methane drainage wells, although not present in the "operations" section can be <br />found in Volume 11A of the permit document. <br />Comment: <br />Figure 15 (all) -- Please add surface ownership to maps. <br />Response: <br />Through our discussions, MCC and USFS have agreed not to include surface ownership on <br />these maps. <br />Comment: <br />2.05-15 Operation Plan section <br />There is no mention of the methane drainage wells in this section. It seems that MDWs (and <br />their associated surface disturbances [roads, pads]) are significant features of the West Elk <br />Mine's surface facilities. Please include a general write-up (similar to other topics in this <br />section) describing the purpose and need for MDWs, typical construction method, site layout, <br />and well life. <br />Response: <br />References to Methane drainage wells, although not present in the "operations" section can be <br />found in Volume 11A of the permit document.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.