Laserfiche WebLink
<br />STATE iii iiiiiiiiniiiiii <br />OF COLORADO <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />I }13 Sherman 5[.. Room ?15 <br />Denver, Colorado 80?03 D I v 15 1 0 N O F <br />Phone: (30]) 866-356i M I N E li A L S <br />FAX: (307) 83?-8106 & <br />February 2.2001 G E O L O G Y <br /> RECLAMATION <br />Mr. R1Ck MIl1S MINING•SAFETY <br />Twentymile Coal Company <br /> Ba. Owens <br />29515 Routt County Road No. 27 governor <br />Oak Creek. CO 80467 Greg E. Walther <br /> Executive D~reaor <br /> Michael B. Long <br />Re: Foidel Creek Mine, C-82-056, Midterm Review D~~~~~o~ Dhectnr <br />Dear Mr. Mills: <br />In accordance will Rule 2.08.3, the Division has reviewed the Foidel Creek Mine Permit for compliance with <br />the Act and Rules. The Division also reviewed the Reclamation liability bond in accordance with Rule <br />3.02.2(4). <br />The remaining items remain unresolved: <br />1) The Division reviewed the Foidel Creek 1998 AIII2 and sent the following questions to Twentymile <br />Coal Company on June 12, 1999. A second letter was sent to TCC requesting resolution of the <br />remaining questions on October 23, 2000. Please resolve these items remaining from the 1998 AHR <br />review: <br />a) The AVM sites require elevations to be annotated on the map with the site name. <br />b) Bedrock well 95M001 should be spotted on a map with its corresponding elevation. <br />c) FO-1 and FO-4 on Foidel Creek aze approximately 300 feet apart yet indicate dramatically <br />different values for total dissolved solids (TDS). Please explain the cause of this lazge water <br />quality difference over such a short reach of the alluvium. <br />2) The Division reviewed the Foidel Creek 1999 AHR and forwazded its review to TCC on October 23, <br />2000. The following questions still remain outstanding: <br />a) Site 8 on Foidel Creek shows a consistent flow throughout the monitoring period of about 4 cfs. <br />Please explain why this site does not show seasonal variation like all other surface water sites? <br />b) Figures 126 and 127 appeaz to be improperly labeled as Pond D. The table of contents and data <br />indicate site 115. Please correct as necessary. <br />c) Figure 71 title appears incorrect. Should it read "...Middle Creek..."? <br />The Division has reviewed TCC's reclamation cost estimate for the Foidel Creek Mine. The following items <br />need additional information in order for the Division to complete our review. <br />3) Twentymile Coal Company describes sealing of lazge diameter boreholes on permit pages 2.05-105.1, <br />2.05-106. Please provide additional information with regards to plugging the boreholes. What is the <br />volume of inert material that will be used? What is the source of the material, i.e. does it need to be <br />