My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2011-05-05_REVISION - C1981012 (2)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1981012
>
2011-05-05_REVISION - C1981012 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:33:19 PM
Creation date
5/6/2011 1:49:45 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981012
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
5/5/2011
Doc Name
Response to Adequacy Review #1
From
DRMS
To
New Elk Coal Company
Type & Sequence
TR56
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.
/
13
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
10. No indication of panel width was provided in the subsidence analysis in <br />Exhibit 24. Please provide panel width and indicate the vertical projection of <br />the mined area used in the analysis in Figures 1 and 2. <br />NECC Response: With no subsidence, panel width is not germane. <br />DRMS Response: Response accepted. <br />11. No estimate of angle of draw was noted in Exhibit 24. If the complement <br />angle to the angle of influence can be assumed to be the angle of draw, <br />(23.8 degrees) at 450 feet in depth, the projection of measureable <br />subsidence would project outward 198 feet from the vertical projection of the <br />edge of the workings at the surface. if a 300 foot square pillar is used to <br />protect gas we!/s, and the we!! is centered in the 300 foot square, 198 feet <br />would intercept the gas well casing in the subsurface from all sides <br />assuming mining and subsidence on all sided of the protective square pillar. <br />In fact, if mining was to occur on all sides, no portion of the surface would be <br />spared from subsidence for the gas wells. This protective pillar area does <br />not appear to be large enough to protect gas wells from possible casing <br />rupture or other damage. Please review Exhibit 24 with regard to <br />subsidence control for the gas wells. <br />NECC Response: The 300 foot MSHA protection pillar remains and <br />development only mining surrounds this area. <br />DRMS Response: Response accepted. <br />12. In permit text narrative, define the term `pillar retreat line" and show in a <br />figure or cross-section how this "line" relates to surface features when used <br />in the context of a subsidence control plan. <br />NECC Response: Pillar retreat line is no longer relevant due to no planned <br />subsidence. <br />DRMS Response: Response accepted. <br />13. The paved road mitigation plan states ""visual monitoring should be <br />performed on the roads weekly beginning when retreat operations are within <br />a 40 degree vertical offset angle." The Division understands that no retreat <br />mining will occur from mining in the Allen seam in Section 13, 14, 23, and 24 <br />of T33S R68W. This would preclude subsidence of Highway 12, the <br />Purgato!re River, and any structures or residences in the described area. <br />Please explain and/or correct the subsidence control plan as necessary. <br />NECC Response: No retreat mining is planned and Exhibit 24 has been <br />revised.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.