Laserfiche WebLink
III lllllllllllll III <br />Mountain Coal Company <br />West Elk Mine <br />Post Office Box 597 <br />Somerset, Colorado 81434 <br />Telephone 3039245015 <br />Fax 303 929-5595 <br />~iECEIvEC <br />/\ <br />Mazch 20, 1995 <br />Ms. Christine E. Johnston <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Office of Mined Land Reclamation <br />1313 Sherman Street, Room 215 <br />Denver. CO 80203 <br />~1AR 2,x'1995 <br />-~ ~L <br />Division of Nunerals ~ Ue~ioyy <br />Re: West Elk Mine, Permit No. C-80-007, 4th Quarter 1994, Lower Refuse Pile Compaction <br />Testing Response <br />Dear Christine: <br />Based on the Division's comments per your letter of Mazch 07, 1995, it is apparent that the <br />Division may have incorrectly assumed that a past proctor "...deternuned from a series of tests <br />(Proctor) run on a typical sample..." had been used in determining the maximum dry density of the <br />lower refuse pile for the fourth quarter of 1994, when in fact MCC had sampled and rerun the <br />Proctor test at the time of that specific compaction test. (Note the date of the Proctor test sample <br />in the lower right corner of the copy of the curve attached.) Even though not required, MCC has <br />had the Proctor test rerun each quarter in 1994, and to date in 1995, that a compaction test was <br />taken. To clarify the results of the subject compaction tests and to verify that the ASTM methods <br />utilized (and approved in Exhibit 51) are equivalent to the AASHTO specifications, MCC's <br />contractor, Lambert and Associates, has prepared the attached response. <br />As MCC has not utilized a Proctor test of a "typical sample" of the lower refuse pile material to <br />determine the maximum dry density, MCC does not believe that a revision, as recommended by <br />the Division, is necessary. Please contact me should you have questions. <br />Sincerely, <br />Kathleen G. Welt, <br />Environmental Supervisor <br />cc: Henry Bazbe <br />Phil Schmidt <br />