My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
APPCOR10306
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Application Correspondence
>
1000
>
APPCOR10306
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 6:26:42 PM
Creation date
11/19/2007 2:09:42 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981041
IBM Index Class Name
Application Correspondence
Doc Date
11/23/1982
From
POWDERHORN COAL CO
To
MLRD
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.
/
5
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
22. Page 16, 7th paragraph, insertion of "less than" before 0.1% for soluble <br />salts and insertion of "less than" before 0.2% for dissolved iron. <br />23. Page 16, 7th paragraph, delete the last sentence which reads, "These effects <br />have ocurred since the mines were opened." <br />24. Page 17, 1st paragraph, the first sentence will be changed to read, per Brian <br />Munson, "The disposal of coal processing waste in the Cameo and North Decline <br />is not planned until cessation of that particular component." Brian Munson <br />suggested the wording abandonment of these facilities." <br />Jerry Zimpfer was not available for Stipulation No. 5, therefore the parties <br />involved agreed to skip Stipulations No. 5, No. 6 and No. 7 until Mr. Zimpher <br />could attend the meeting. <br />25. Page 19, 1st paragraph, under Facilities Area, Powderhorn Coal Company's position <br />on this is that significance was discussed in Kamman-Tempo's Assessment of <br />Alluvial Valley Floor Issues, Unit Train Loadout Site, Powderhorn Coal Company, <br />Cameo Mine, June 1, 1982, which was submitted to CMLRD as a response to the pro- <br />posed draft findings document. <br />26. Page 19, 5th paragraph, under Facilities Area Powderhorn Coal Company's position <br />is that the area in Section 26 should not be an exception with regards for <br />eligibility fo the "grandfather" exemption. Powderhorn Coal Company recommended <br />deletion of the findings fora non-exempt alluvial valley floor located within <br />Section 26. Fred Banta concurred that CMLRD doesn't have a leg to stand on with <br />regards to this issue.. <br />27. Page 22, Significance to Agriculture,a more reasonable statement will be made. <br />28. Page 22, 4th paragraph, Brian Munson mentioned that the insertion of a state- <br />ment "unrelated to the operator" be added to "previous mining activities..." <br />29. Page 25, 4th paragraph, the insertions of "if needed" added to "riparian veg- <br />etation..." The statement was made that if there are no riparian areas no plan <br />would be required provided the baseline data indicate that there are no riparian <br />areas. <br />30. Page 27, Stipulation No. 11, if baseline data show that Powderhorn Coal Company <br />is not operating in riparian areas then Stipulation No 11 will be deleted and <br />no plan will be required. <br />31. Page 28, 1st paragraph, the word "typically" will be inserted at the beginning <br />of the first sentence. <br />32. Page 29, Stipulation No. 12, the deletion of the word "complete" and insertion <br />of the words "comprehensive". Fred Banta told James Herron that this stipulation <br />must be changed. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.