My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2012-12-20_REVISION - C1996083
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1996083
>
2012-12-20_REVISION - C1996083
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 5:11:34 PM
Creation date
12/20/2012 1:28:15 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1996083
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
12/20/2012
Doc Name
Preliminary Adequacy Review (Memo)
From
Marcia Talvitie
To
Susan Burgmaier
Type & Sequence
TR76
Email Name
SLB
MLT
SB1
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.
Page 1 of 1
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
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM <br />Date: 20 December 2012 <br />To: Susan L. Burgmaier, Lead Specialist <br />From: Marcia L. Talvitie, P.E. <br />Subject: Bowie No. 2 Mine —Permit No. C- 1996 -083 <br />TR -76 — Expansion of Coal Mine Waste Pile No. 2 <br />Preliminary Adequacy Review — Engineering/Geotechnical <br />With TR -76, Bowie Resources, LLC (Bowie) seeks to increase the area available for permanent <br />disposal of Coal Mine Waste (CMW, "Gob ") at the Bowie No. 2 Mine. Specifically, Bowie <br />plans to increase the storage height of CMW Disposal Area No. 2 by approximately 80 feet and <br />expand the structure westward to join it with existing CMWDA No. 4. These changes are <br />projected to increase the available CMW storage volume by 600,000 cubic yards. <br />Text in Volume IX has been revised, and a new Buckhorn Geotech stability analysis has been <br />performed for the proposed expansion of CMWDA No. 2. I have identified only two adequacy <br />items for Bowie's response. <br />There appears to be an inconsistency regarding the steepness of the hillside cut slope that <br />is proposed for a portion of the expansion area. The third paragraph on Page lindicates <br />that a segment of the hillside will be graded back (steepened) to a slope of 1.5H: IV. On <br />Figure 1, Section F -F' shows a cut slope of 2.OH:1V through this area. Section F -F' in <br />the Buckhorn report also depicts 2.OH: IV. Please clarify the intended slope ratio to be <br />cut at this location. <br />2. Subdrainage systems for Valley Fill disposal sites are required by Rule 4.09.2(2)(d). An <br />alternative subdrainage system was previously approved by the Division, as allowed by <br />4.10.3(5). Volume IX page 5 of the current application indicates that the subdrain for <br />CMWDA No. 2 will be extended as shown on Figure 2. While there is nothing to <br />prohibit extension of the subdrain, the proposed expansion of the waste pile in this area <br />does not appear to be a valley fill configuration. The Division suggests that construction <br />of a drain to intercept any groundwater seeps identified would be sufficient. <br />This concludes my adequacy review let me know if you have any questions or comments. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.