My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV93054
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV93054
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 3:14:25 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 11:26:57 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980001
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
2/9/1995
Doc Name
EDNA MINE C-80-01 TR 30
From
DMG
To
KENT GORHAM
Type & Sequence
TR30
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.
/
2
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
<br /> <br />III IIIIIIIIIIIII III <br />7399 <br />STATE OF COLOP`ADO <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Depanmenl of Natural Resources <br />1313 Sherman St., Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />Phone: 13031 866-3567 <br />FA%: (3031 832-8106 <br />DATE: February 9, 1995 <br />TO: Kent Gorham <br />FROM: Susan Burgmaier~ <br />RE: Edna Mine (C-80-O1) <br />Technical Revision 30 <br />I~~~~ <br />DEPARTMEI~]T OF <br />NATURAL <br />RESOURCES <br />Roy Romer <br />Governor <br />dames 5. Lochhead <br />Executive Direcor <br />Michael B. Lang <br />Division Director <br />Since you are assuming lead responsibilities for the Edna Mine in the middle of TR 30, you will <br />need to know where we are m the adequacy review process. For starters, the revls3on was <br />submitted September 20, 1994. P&M waived the sixty day decision deadline. There is currently <br />no due date for a decision on the revision. Outstanding issues, as numbered in the original <br />adequary review letter, aze as follows: <br />Items 1.2.19. and 21 <br />These questions all pertain to the issue of whether P&M's reclamation cost (liability figure) <br />should a lowered to reflect reclamation completed in the West Ridge azea. At this point, 1 <br />believe Larry Routten and Susan McCannon are going to discuss this further and formulate a <br />response. It looks like we will probably end up not approving their estimate, and retaining the <br />current liability figure of $7,171,916.00. <br />Item 5 <br />We still don't have a res once on this one. We told them to include a cost for materials for rip <br />rap in the reconstntctedpMoffat area drainages. When they submit this, I would be happy to <br />look at it and determine if it is adequate. <br />Item 12 <br />We still need a revised postmiaing topography map for the Moffat area that shows how drainage <br />will be reestablished. P&M requested we stipulate this one, and we agreed. The agreed <br />deadline for submittal of this will be September 30, 1995, and as such should be included in a <br />stipulation to your decision on the rev3s3on. <br />Item 14 <br />This one has been resolved, but we still need to send P&M the information they requested. <br />They want a copy of the criteria we use to evaluate soil fertility and a listing of the reference(s) <br />used in its development. Tony was involved in this one, is aware of their request, and has <br />indicated he will provide that information to pass on to P&M. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.