My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2016-02-23_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981014
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Coal
>
C1981014
>
2016-02-23_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981014
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 6:19:26 PM
Creation date
2/26/2016 2:18:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981014
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
2/23/2016
Doc Name
Proposed Decision and Findings & Cost Estimate (SL3)
From
DRMS
To
Energy Fuels Coal, Inc.
Permit Index Doc Type
Findings
Email Name
RDZ
JRS
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.
/
27
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
Corley Comment #23 <br />In his letter, Dr. Mergen wrote the following: <br />For several years since EFCI stopped mining and the majority of the reclamation was finished, <br />Fremont County has been locked out of the area, and EFCI has only selectively maintained certain <br />parts of County Road 92. <br />Response to Comment #23 <br />Based on conversations with Fremont County staff. County Road 92 has dropped off the list of roads <br />that the County maintains due to budget constraints. <br />Corley Comment #24 <br />In his letter, Dr. Mergen wrote the following: <br />Prior to 2011, I observed on two occasions where George Patterson hired earthwork contractors tb <br />clean sediment from Pond 5 and to remove sediment from two culverts that drain under the County <br />Road 92 and into the south end of Pond 5. Before these two clean-out/removal occasions occurred, <br />Pond 5 runoff and sediment retention ability may have been reduced because the two culverts may <br />have been partially or completely blocked. Runoff and sediment that is expected to enter Pond 5 (and <br />retained within the permit boundary) may have been directed down the west ditch of the road. <br />Response to Comment #24 <br />The pond and the inlet culverts are currently functional. <br />Corley Comment #25 <br />In his letter, Dr. Mergen wrote the following: <br />One of the culvert inlets to Pond 5 has already shown signs of deterioration. Perhaps removal of these <br />culverts would be a best management option at this time. No support has been provided to <br />demonstrate that the holes in the culverts do not impact the flow capacity or function of the culvert <br />nor that these holes do not impact the structural integrity of the culverts. <br />Response to Comment #25 <br />EFCI patched the culvert on February 21, 2016. <br />The Division scheduled and conducted a bond release inspection on November 11 and 12, 2015. The site <br />inspection was conducted in accordance with Rule 3.03.2(2). Attendees included: <br />• Rob Zuber, Janet Binns, and Jim Stark, representing DRMS <br />• Al Weaver and Kent Gorham, representing EFCI <br />• Jack Robeda representing the Warnock family and Las Cruces, LTD. <br />• Carin Corley and Daryl Mergen, representing Dr. W.D. Corley and the Corley Company. <br />Mr. Robeda was present for the first two hours (approximate) on the first day, when CR92, the truck <br />tunnel, and part of the facilities area were inspected. Carin Corley and Daryl Mergen were present for <br />all of the inspection except the loadout (first part of second day) and the very end of the second day <br />(inspection of substation and sealed wells and holes). Other landowners were notified of the inspection <br />via certified mail but did not attend. <br />Southfield Mine SL -03 Page 9 of 21 February 23, 2016 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.