1. Review of Blasting Procedures 1 Utah Regulatory Program Evaluation Year 2002 Review of Blasting Procedures to Ensure Public Notice, Public Participation, and Public Safety

2. Review of Blasting Procedures2 Topic Evaluation Team OSM-- Henry Austin OGM-- Peter Hess, Wayne Western, Daron Haddock

3. Review of Blasting Procedures3 SMCRA Goal Section 515 (b) (15)  A) provide written notice,  B) maintain a log of the blasts,  C) limit the blasts based on physical conditions of the site,  D) require that blasting be conducted by certified persons,  E) provide for pre-blast surveys

4. Review of Blasting Procedures4 Reason for Topic Selection  Surface Blasting in Utah has been infrequent  Inception of surface mining in Utah (Whisky Creek Mine)  Will ensure that Customer Service Needs are met by providing public notice, public participation, and public safety.

5. Review of Blasting Procedures5 Planned Review  Records review covering the last 3 years  3 mines would be chosen to further evaluate.  Records review in DOGM Office  On-Site Evaluation

6. Review of Blasting Procedures6 Records Review Required blast plan Blast schedule publication and distribution Comments from structure owners (1/2 mile) Pre-blast survey Seismic monitoring records

7. Review of Blasting Procedures7 On-Site Evaluation  Records Maintained at mine site Blasting logs Blast design and diagrams Notice of publication Blast certification  Blast Warning Signs

8. Review of Blasting Procedures8 Mines Evaluated  White Oak (Whisky Creek Mine)  Dugout Canyon Mine  Star Point Mine

9. Review of Blasting Procedures9

10. 10

11. Review of Blasting Procedures11

12. Review of Blasting Procedures12

13. Review of Blasting Procedures13

14. Review of Blasting Procedures14

15. Review of Blasting Procedures15

16. Review of Blasting Procedures16

17. Review of Blasting Procedures17

18. Review of Blasting Procedures18

19. Review of Blasting Procedures19

20. Review of Blasting Procedures20 CONCLUSIONS  The requirements as they relate to public notice, public participation, and public safety have been met All structures within ½ mile were identified Notification for pre-blast survey and blast schedule were provided to all structure owners. Blasting records including blast designs were maintained. (although evidence of the required written notification could not be produced for two of the mines) Blasting was done by a Utah Certified Blaster.

21. Review of Blasting Procedures21 RECOMMENDATIONS  DOGM should ensure that plans include provisions for the permittee to provide required written public notifications and provide evidence that the required written notifications were executed in a timely manner.  DOGM should inform permittees that newspaper publication is not required for underground coal mining and reclamation activities.