Laserfiche WebLink
.~ _ <br />To: MathewsD@COAL@DNRML <br />Cc: <br />Bcc: <br />From: Burnell)@COAL@DNRML <br />Subject: Roadside TR <br />Date: Thursday, April 1, <br />Attach: BEYOND.RTF <br />Certify: N <br />Priority: Normal <br />Defer until: <br />Expires: <br />Forwarded by: <br />To: MathewsD@COAL@DNRML <br />Cc: <br />Bcc: <br />From: Burnell)@COAL@DNRML <br />Subject: Roadside TR <br />Date: Thursday, April 1, <br />Attach: BEYOND.RTF <br />Certify: N <br />Priority: Normal <br />Defer until: <br />Expires: <br />Forwarded by: <br />1999 13:57:46 MST <br />1999 13:57:46 MST <br />INTERNAL MEMO <br />T0: Dan Mathews <br />FROM: Jim Burnell <br />SUB): Roadside Mine TR-29 <br />Dan, <br />III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII <br />999 <br />4/1/99 <br />I have reviewed the text and maps of TR-29 and have a couple of very general com <br />ments - general because they don't provide me much to get specific with. <br />They should say something about groundwater conditions in the C-seam. The only <br />comment right now is that there is no water in the C-seam, because it overlies <br />the B-seam, so all water that might have been in the c-seam flowed down to the <br />B. Not very convincing. I understand their situation there about needing to ge <br />t something going, but the fact is, the C-seam where they plan to work it lies <br />beneath the level of the river, just as the B-seam does. They need to make so <br />me assertions on the amount of water in the C-seam, if water in the C-seam beha <br />ves in an unconfined manner (it actually achieves a "They should say something <br />about groundwater"They should say something about groundwater conditions in the <br />C-seam. The only comment right now is that there is no water in the C-seam, be <br />seam, so all water that might have been in the c-seam flowed down to the B. No <br />t very c <br />