My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2015-05-26_REVISION - C1981008 (3)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1981008
>
2015-05-26_REVISION - C1981008 (3)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 6:00:43 PM
Creation date
5/26/2015 12:48:44 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981008
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
5/26/2015
Doc Name
Formal Request to have Pond 11 reclaimed & Montoring Wellls
From
DRMS
To
JoEllen Turner & Michael Morgan
Type & Sequence
MR94
Email Name
BFB
DIH
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.
/
7
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
May 261510:24a Naturita Commuity Library 9708652157 p.4 <br />waddles, or any other means of filtering or structure, it is <br />considered "clean" and does not necessarily have to be <br />contained on that property, or within the permit boundaries. <br />Although a sediment pond is a primary sediment control <br />impoundment and waddles are considered as only a secondary <br />sediment control measure, the property has been revegetated and <br />it is also prime farmland where a pond should not have been <br />built and the waddles are removing the solids and seem to be <br />working very well with the minimal amount of run-off. This <br />sediment pond has been on this property of more than 13 years <br />and was maintained throughout the mining operations and <br />reclamation operations as required in 4.05.6, demonstrating it <br />can more than handle any amount of water that we have <br />received in that length of time and complied with the State and <br />Federal water quality laws. This pond would have been <br />required to be on this property if it had not been prime farmland, <br />but since it was and is, it should have been located elsewhere off <br />the Morgan property. The state has the authority to order its <br />removal . Therefore, we are requesting for the immediate <br />removal of pond 11 because all the rules and regulations are <br />being met for sediment control as well as prime farmland. <br />Waddles will be placed in that area once the pond has been <br />returned as part of the field. It also helps with the irrigation of <br />the prime farmland field because with the pond there, the wheels <br />of the side -roll must be dropped which is not an efficient way of <br />operating. Thank you, now to the next issue. <br />The monitoring wells are on our prime farmland in a portion of <br />the field. They have monitored these for 15 years or better now. <br />We see no use for those wells and either ask that they be <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.