Laserfiche WebLink
<br />- Their cortcnitment to reclaim "in general accord with the permit <br />reclamation plan" does not help our comfort level. 'de woula like to know <br />what this means exactly. <br />- Item 2 paragraph 2 should also address the AOC question. <br />- Rockcastle proposes not to abate NOV C-89-034. Rather they propose to <br />exchange reclamation for abatement activities. Unfortunately the <br />reclamation will not resolve all the concerns of the NOV. Therefore they <br />should be held to abatement as specifies. We feel this is especially <br />important during the final reclamation phase since the NOV relates to <br />hydrologic control at all the pits and along the haul road, <br />- Lastly, we need a specific proposal on the expedited bond release. We <br />believe no bond release can begin until after the difference between the <br />proposes bond and the existing bond had elapsed. Thus, by our <br />calculations, Rockcastle will have to pay out at least $125,000 <br />themselves for the first month's reclamation. Secondly, we need to agree <br />on the volume of material which is there. It appears that we were <br />shortchanged by the compromise, and that we should at least use the <br />Rockcastle number of 611,61S LCY. <br />Backfill Volumes <br />Rockcastle MLRD Cathy Compromise <br />Overburden (LCY) 567,083 585,968 516,384 560,000 <br />Topsoil (LCY) 44,536 54,071 54,071 49,675 <br />TOTAL blT6T~ b'~; 03~ ~5~ bU~S , 6Tr <br />Rockcastle calc~ilated volumes based on cross-sections generated from aerial <br />photos. FtLRD estimated the volume of overburden by measuring the size of the <br />pit. MLRD assumed the topsoil volume equaled the amount that was supposed to <br />be salvaged. Cathy estimated the volume of the overburden by using I+ILRD pit <br />calculations and subtracting the volume of the coal which was removed. <br />Bond Costs <br />MLRD Estimate <br />Compromise <br />Existing bond <br />- $617,884 <br />- $572,017 <br />- $446,680 <br />6801E/scg <br />