PERMFILE54840

• Permit No: C1980007
• IBM Index Class Name: Permit File
• Doc Date: 12/11/2001
• Section_Exhibit Name: Exhibit 47 Design Criteria for MB-5 & MB-6
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

•

ANACONDA 1Ainerala Company
555 Seventeenth Street
Denver, Colorado 80202
Telephone [phone]
June 7, 1984
Mr. Robert Liddle
Reclamation Specialist
Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Division
1313 Sherman Street
Denver, Colorado 80203
Dear Bob:
e~
Reference is made to your letter of May 29, 1984 in which you
requested additional information pertaining to West Elk Coal
Company's (WECC) technical revision to Permit C-007-80 to redis-
turb the "U.S. Steel° laydown area.
The information you requested is provided below in the order in
which they were discussed and in the revised attachments to the
application.
1.
Prior sampling of topsoil depth indicates that between 12
18 inches of suitable topsoil exists in the
be disturbed. All suitable topsoil will
stockpiled at the southeast corner o f the
area as shown on Attachment B. One or more
signs will be posted as appr opriate on the
identification.
and
area proposed to
be stripped and
proposed laydown
topsoil stockpile
pile for proper
2. A letter of agreement between WECC and U.S. Steel indicating
right-of-entry to the proposed laydown area or a copy of the
lease will be provided to you prior to your approval of the
revision.
3. The Mt. Gunnison 5-year permit boundary in the vicinity of
the laydown area has been provided on the revised Attachment
B.
4. It is estimated that removal of the outlet structures in the
sedimentation pond and backfilling and regrading of the pond
and sediment control ditches using a 08 hulldozer will take
approximately 10 hours. The additional cost far this work is
estimated to be, using current contractor costs, E850. I
have revised the Revegetation Cost Estimate provided in the
application to reflect these additional costs. I also took
the opportunity to correct an error in the Reve etation Cost
Estimate. The cost of topsoiling (E850) provide in tie
estimate was the cost for retopsoiling the entire 5.5 acres
of disturbance, not the per acre cost as described in the
estimate.
~M~COXD~ LinoN. COinp~nY p . GInYOn o1 htl,neeRleelMeQe~neMl
~MCO-\000-~ 14~])