My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
APPCOR12144
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Application Correspondence
>
2000
>
APPCOR12144
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 6:32:29 PM
Creation date
11/19/2007 2:27:09 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981034
IBM Index Class Name
Application Correspondence
Doc Date
11/1/1982
Doc Name
ADEQUACY REVEW OF GRAND MESA COAL CO ADDENDUM TO THE PERMIT TO CONDUCT COAL MINING IN COLO RECEIVED
From
MLR
To
DAN MATHEWS & BRIAN MUNSON
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.
Page 1 of 1
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
<br />STATE OF COLORADO RICHARD D.~M, Gavmnm III IIIIIIIIIIIII III <br />DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES 999 <br />D. Monte Pascoe, Executive Director <br />MINED LAND RECLAMATION <br />423 Centennial Building, 1313 Sherman Street <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 Tel. (303) 866-3567 <br />David C. Shelton <br />November 1, 1982 Director <br />TO; Dan Mathews and Brian Munson <br />r <br />FR019: Jerry Zimpfer ~N''~ <br />i <br />I <br />RE: Adequacy Review of Grand Mesa Coal Company Addendum to the Permit <br />to Conduct Coal Mining in Colorado, Received September 9, 1982 <br />I have reviewed Grand Mesa Coal Company's September 9, 1982 response to uour <br />January 13, 1982 letter to Larry Reschke. The applicant has responded to <br />most of the adequacy issues raised in that letter. These responses appear <br />to include sufficient data and analysis to complete the required findings. <br />The applicant has failed to respond to two of the items requested in the <br />January 13, 1982 letter. The applicant has not identified an alternative <br />water supply or provided a stream channel reconstruction plan. Completion <br />of the review should not be delayed because these items are lacking. If <br />the Division still feels that they are necessary, they can be stipulated as <br />a part of permit approval. <br />You should compare the mine plan in the application with that assessed in the <br />September 9 submittal. The assessment of probable hydrologic consequences <br />provided is based upon limited extraction mining (50-55%).in the E-seam and <br />D-seam in the specific sequence and areas identified on Maps 4 and 5 in the <br />September 9, 1982 submittal. The mine plan included in the permit application <br />should be consistent with that assessed for probable hydrologic consequences. <br />An increase in the coal recovery rate or changes in the area to be mined could <br />invalidate the assessment of hydrologic effects. Should the applicant request <br />to mine additional areas outside those identified on Maps 4 and 5, or to mine <br />at a higher recovery rate, additional hydrologic analysis should be required <br />by the Division. <br />If either of you have any questions concerning this review, feel free to ask. <br />/mt <br />cc: Sim Pendleton <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.