My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV02770
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV02770
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 1:00:29 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 9:03:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1984065
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
3/11/1994
Doc Name
COAL RIDGE MINE C-84-065 MIDTERM REVIEW
From
DMG
To
BARBARA PAVLIK
Type & Sequence
MT3
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.
/
2
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 />M <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Depanmenl of Nzlural Resources <br />1313 Sherman SL, Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />Phone: 13031 866 3567 <br />FA%:130)1 832 A106 <br />March 11, 1994 <br />I~~~~ <br />DEPARTMENT OI <br />NATURAI <br />RESOURCE` <br />Roy Romrr <br />To: Barbara Pavlik eOVe'°°` <br />Ken Salazar <br />E+ecmive Dnenor <br />From: Janet Binns M¢hacl R. Long <br />Division Drrenoi <br />Re: Coal Ridge Mine (C-84-065): Midterm Review <br />I have reviewed the following sections of the Coal Ridge Permit (C-84-065) for compliance <br />with the applicable Rules: <br />Permit Section : 3.5 Rule: 2.04.9 & 2.05.4(2)(d) <br />3.6 2.04.10 <br />3.7 2.04.11 <br />3.8 2.04.12 <br />4.4.3 2.05.4(2)(b) <br />2.11 2.08.3(1) <br />Items used for this review include: <br />Coal Ridge Mine Permit (C-84-065) <br />Proposed Decision and Findings of Compliance for Permit Renewal Coal Ridge No.l <br />November 17, 1992 <br />Coal Ridge Reclamation Cost Estimate; Prepared by J. Binns of DMG, dated <br />November 16, 1993. <br />Regulations of the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board for Coal Mining <br />Review of Permitting Actions Since Last Bond Estimate 11/92 <br />The permit currently does a good job of covering items required by the above mentioned <br />rules. I identified a few concerns, though of minor significance. I will state concerns or <br />discrepancies 1 noted first, then follow with general comments regarding the permit. <br />Soils: 1. Two tables are included describing soil types in the permit. These are Tables <br />3.5-1 and 3.5-2. There is a significant difference in the particle size analysis <br />of the Heldt Silty Clay soil type. One table shows the textural classification <br />as Silty Clay while the other table shows a particle size distribution of Clay <br />Loam. Please explain why this difference exists. <br />iii iiiiiiiiniiiiii <br />999 <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.