Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />The other issue at hand is the final configuration of RCR 27a once the Seneca II Mine is <br />reclaimed. In the letter addressed to Seneca, you state that when mining operations cease usage <br />of RCR 27A, the existing roadway is far beyond what is necessary to accommodate access to the <br />agricultural and mineral interests accessed by the county road. Under the Rules, the Division <br />requires that roads be sized to accommodate the post-mining land use. If the County believes that <br />a different configuration of the road would better suit the post-mining land use, the Division <br />could have Seneca address this issue in the abatement of the NOV. <br />In summary, the Division would like clarification from Routt County on two issues related to the <br />reclamation plan of RCR 27a; <br />1. Is the stability of the road cut in its current configuration acceptable to Routt County? <br />2. What does Routt County believe to be the appropriate configuration of RCR 27a once the <br />Seneca II Mine is reclaimed and Seneca Coal Company is no longer present on site? <br />I appreciate your assistance in this matter. These clarifications will greatly assist the Division <br />in determining the reclamation plan for RCR 27a. <br />If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me or Erica Crosby. <br />Sincerely, <br />Susan J. McCannon <br />Coal Program Supervisor <br />cc: Larry Routten <br />Erica Crosby <br />Michael Altavilla w/Seneca Coal Co. <br />c:\wp51 \misc\970129 <br />