Laserfiche WebLink
i <br />III IIIIIIIII IIII III <br />999 <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY oe~co~ <br />Department of Natural Resourres .~~ ~ <br /> Me ~ O <br />131 3 Sherman iL, Room '_ I S • fib= <br />Denver, CO 80303 ~`""~ <br />~ reP6 <br />Phone: i303~ ftb6-356% <br />rA% ;303)83'81 U6 <br />Roy ROmer <br /> Gnvemo~ <br /> Michael B. Long <br /> Division Director <br />March 16, 1993 <br />Kerr Coal Co. <br />c/o Mr. Jerry Nettleton <br />ACZ, Inc. <br />1475 Pine Grove Road, Suite 109 <br />P.O. Box 774018 <br />Steamboat Springs, CO 80477 <br />Re: Bond Calculation <br />Marr Mine, Permit No. C-80-006 <br />Dear Mr. Nettleton: <br />We have received your letter of March 3, 1993, which discusses the backfill volumes for <br />the Marr Mine. The volume provided for the 720 Pit overburden is accepted, since the <br />volume data are provided and substantiated in the correspondence from <br />Mr. Larry J. Edwards, P.E. (Hero-Metric Engineeringl. We have revised our previous bond <br />estimate to incorporate the provided 720 Pit volume, and to include the previously agreed <br />factors. Please review the attached estimate at your convenience. The current liability is <br />calculated to be 54,510,644.00. <br />You will see that the cost for power line removal remains in the estimate. This must be <br />done until we receive the previously discussed revised letter from Mountain Parks <br />Electric, Inc. <br />Also, you will see that we have not yet revised the Pit 1 backfill volume. Your letter of <br />March 3, 1993 indicates a reduced backslope volume (800,000 bcy to 664,659 bcy), but <br />we do not have any substantiating documentation from Aero-Metric Engineering. We will <br />need this information. Also, your letter indicates both the previously referenced <br />"backsloping" volume, plus an additional "backfill" volume of 827,032 cy. Please explain <br />these values. <br />Additionally, the Pit 1 reclamation maps provided with your letter indicate a different final <br />pit topography than is already approved. The proposed slopes appear to be steeper than <br />those already approved. We cannot use the new values until they are substantiated, and <br />until we receive and approve a technical revision addressing proposed final topography <br />changes. <br />