My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2013-01-29_REVISION - C1981008
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1981008
>
2013-01-29_REVISION - C1981008
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 5:12:31 PM
Creation date
2/20/2014 7:55:50 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981008
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
1/29/2013
Doc Name
Paintiffs Opening Brief 2010 CV 548
From
Christopher G. McAnany Dufford, Waldeck, Milburn & Krohn, LLP
To
District Court, Montrose County Colorado
Type & Sequence
PR6
Email Name
DAB
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.
/
36
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
12. Although WFC and DRMS claim that the Bench One material is a suitable <br />replacement topsoil, it is actually inferior because it has electrical conductivity <br />levels (a measure of total salt content) which exceed the parameters for prime <br />farmland soils and the levels existing in the native soil. See R. 5430 -531 (Bench <br />One has an EC level of not greater than 6 mmho /cm, as compared to levels not <br />greater than 4 for Lift A material); compare with 7 C.F.R. § 657.5(2)(i)(requiring <br />that prime farmland soils have an EC level of not more than 4 mmho /cm —see <br />definition of prime farmland soils, infra.). <br />13. The Bench One material is inferior to native topsoils (A and B lift) in terms <br />of its rock content. The data relied upon by DRMS shows 25% rock content over 3 <br />inches in size, as compared with no reportable rocks in the native A and B lifts. R. <br />5430. <br />14. The Morgans objected to the use of the Bench One material, stating that it <br />was inferior because of increased rock content and rock size, increased salt content, <br />and stating that this would not produce the crop yields previously existing on the <br />Barx soils. R. 7384. <br />15. OSM engaged in a comprehensive review of PR6 and determined that it does <br />not satisfy state coal regulations because it, inter alia: a) had insufficient data to <br />10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.