My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2010-08-27_REVISION - C1996083
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1996083
>
2010-08-27_REVISION - C1996083
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:20:19 PM
Creation date
8/27/2010 1:59:19 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1996083
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
8/27/2010
Doc Name
Response to Adequacy Review
From
J.E. Stover & Associates, Inc.
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
TR67
Email Name
JJD
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
J. E. STOVER & ASSOCIATES, INC. <br />2352 NORTH 7th STREET, UNIT B <br />GRAND JUNCTION, COLORADO 81501 <br />PHONE: (970) 245-4101, FAX 242-7908 <br />MINE ENGINEERING <br />MINE RECLAMATION <br />August 25, 2010 <br />J. J. Dudash <br />Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety <br />1313 Sherman St., Room 215 <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />Re: Bowie Resources, LLC, Bowie No. 2 Mine <br />Technical Revision No. 67 <br />Ventilation Shaft Construction <br />Permit C-1996-083 <br />Dear Mr. Dudash: <br />CIVIL ENGINEERING <br />CONST. MANAGEMENT <br />A??z?ZOlO <br />man <br />9' efon, <br />The DRMS' letter dated August 18, 2010 transmitted its adequacy review for the referenced <br />technical revision. On behalf of Bowie Resources, LLC, (BRL) following are its responses to <br />the DRMS' comments and concerns: <br />1. BRL has asked BLM for their consentto the shaft construction project. <br />2. BRL accepts the $198,905 reclamation cost estimate. <br />3. No comment required. <br />4. Small area exemption number 16 (SAE 16) was added to page Exh-8-238 and <br />Map 42. Amended page Exh-8-238 and Map 42 are enclosed. <br />5. According to my version of SedCad, the tie back distance doesnot change the silt <br />fence efficiency. Having a tie back distance allows a Stage Capacity Discharge <br />Table to be generated. The peak stage is 0.38 feet The berm will be 2.5 feet <br />high to match the height of the silt fence. <br />6. Comment noted. <br />7. Permit application page 2.05-57 states in part: "Vent shafts will be sealed in <br />accordance with Map 29, Shaft Seals". Map 29 shows how the vent shaft will be <br />sealed. <br />Sincerely, <br />ell <br />J. E. Stover, P.E. <br />Consulting Engineer <br />cc: Wm. A. Bear, Jr.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.