Laserfiche WebLink
,- r iii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii <br />999 <br />Mathews, Dan <br />From: Routten, Larry <br />Sent: Tuesday, January 11, 2000 4:10 PM <br />To: Mathews, Dan <br />Subject: RE: a couple requests <br />Well, I finally talked about your questions with Dave. Here is the gist of what we discussed. If you have questions or <br />disagree with any of it, give me a call. <br />Dave agreed with what you and I were thinking on Roadside (at least, what I think we are thinking!). I basically told Dave <br />I saw two potential scenarios. One is, <br />1. remove any facilities that won't be used in a gravel operations and reclaim any areas that won't be mined. <br />2. change the post mine land use. <br />3. start working the gravel pit. <br />4. release the coal bond. <br />The second scenario is, <br />1. remove any facilities and reclaim extraneous areas. <br />2. change the post mine land use. <br />3. demonstrate that essential hydrologic functions have been reestablished and cover is adequate to control <br />erosion. <br />4. start wokring the gravel pit. <br />5 release the coal bond. <br />suppose there is always a third scenairo, as well <br />1. remove any facilities and reclaim extraneous areas. <br />2. change the post mine land use. <br />3. demostrate that essential hydrologic functions have been reestablished and cover is adequate to control erosion. <br />4. two years later, if there is no gravel pit, reclaim the area to the performance stds that apply to the rest of the <br />mine and, start the 10 year clock at that time. <br />Does that jive with your thinking? If so, go ahead and tell Stover. If not, let me know what else you think. `~ <br />On Frvita, Dave suggests just going ahead with the planned work. WOCD doesn't even have this one on their screen <br />since there is no discharge permit, he doen't want to start getting permits from them far DMG work and, we' re doing the <br />most reasonable thing we know how to do on the ground. So, I suppose you have our permission to forget about your <br />concern. It was a good question, though. <br />Dave did say he is concerned about Krabacher's work in general. He is going to mention to McArdle that it might be <br />good to have Renner accompany him on a trp to the mine for a second or third opinion. Maybe you'll have more <br />company on your trip. Keep this one under your hat for now. <br />Finally, Dave said you and Sandy and Janet can go to the reveg workshop. Your lodging is not a problem so, make <br />whatever arrangements you need. Sandy will ask Sharon how she wants to pay the bill so, give her a call in a couple of <br />days for the logisitics. <br />Talk to you later <br />-Original Message- <br />From: Mathews, Dan <br />Sent: Friday, January 07, 2000 425 PM <br />To: Routten, tarry <br />Subject: a couple requests <br />First, Stover has requested an expedited approval for a fuel tank at McClave. I have attached the cover letter and <br />