My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV15008
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV15008
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 1:26:16 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 11:00:15 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981019
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
5/12/1987
Doc Name
PERMIT RENEWAL COLOWYO COAL MINE FN C-81-019
From
MLRD
To
COLOWYO COAL CO
Type & Sequence
RN1
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.
/
8
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
Mr. Rich Atkinson - 3 - May 12, 1987 <br />stockpileland total disturbed acres (including areas stripped of <br />topsoil) once every five years. The survey would be submitted as <br />part of each renewal application in order to verify that sufficient <br />topsoil was available to reclaim the current disturbance. If <br />Colowyo agrees to this requirement, the appropriate pages should be <br />revised accordingly. <br />10. A description of soil 32D-Yamac loam, appears to be missing from the <br />narrative, and this should be inserted. <br />Rule 2.05 - Operation and Reclamation Plans <br />1. Table 1 shows a decrease in acreage disturbed and topsoil removed <br />when compared to the original soil balance table. It also shows a <br />general increase in the amount of stockpiled topsoil-. A brief <br />explanation of these differences should be included either in the <br />narrative or in a separate response letter. <br />2. Seam A3 should be listed either under the truck -shovel or _ <br />dragline operations on pages 2.05-7 & 8. <br />3. The operator should discuss the methods of erosion control and other <br />protective measures to be used in the (temporarily) unreclaimed <br />strip in Streeter drainage. In addition, the operator should <br />explain why it was necessary to increase the width of this area as <br />compared to the original plan. <br />4. The reclamation seed mix tables on pages 2.05-44 and through 2.05-49 <br />appear to have listed some species under the incorrect life form. <br />These tables should be revised to include winterfat and fringed sage <br />as shrubs, ~~ <br />~- <br />5. The discussion of shrub reestablishment on page 2.05-53 should <br />include the areas seeded to shrubs only. All shrub establishment <br />areas should be depicted on Map 4 if possible. <br />6. Page 2.05-57 discusses the mulching requirements at the site. It is <br />the Division's interpretation that Stipulation 4, which Colowyo has <br />agreed to, summarizes these requirements. Monitoring data to date <br />indicates no significant difference between mulched areas on a 3:1 <br />slope versus non-mulched areas on flat slopes. However, it should <br />be noted that this data cannot be correlated to suspension of <br />mulching on steep slopes, as currently proposed: The Division will <br />approve Colowyo's request to discontinue further monitoring of <br />mulched versus non-mulched areas with the understanding that the <br />requirements of Stipulation 4 remain in effect. Specifically, if in <br />the future, on-site inspection by the Division or information <br />collected by Colowyo indicate that the suspension of the mulching <br />requirement is detrimental to vegetation establishment or <br />contributes to excessive erosion, mulching will be resumed. <br />7. The rewrite of the grazing management plan on page 2.05-63 deleted <br />many specifics from the original. The operator should include the <br />plan in full, or justify this deletion. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.