Laserfiche WebLink
:, <br /> iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii <br />999 <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Deparlmenl ni Natural Resources <br />I J R Sherman SL, Room ? { 5 <br /> <br />Denver, Colorado 80207 ~~~ <br />~ <br />Phone 13031 866J567 ~ <br />~ <br />FAY: 13011 87?-81 U6 <br /> DEPARTMENT OF <br /> NATURAL <br /> RESOURCES <br />April 28, 1998 RoY Romer <br /> Gm•ernor <br /> lames 5 Lochhead <br />Ms. Christine Johnston Fxecmrve Dvecmr <br />Mountain Coal Company Michael B Loop <br /> <br />P.O. Box 591 Division Directu. <br />Somerset, Colorado 81434 <br />Re: West Elk Mine (Permit No. C-80-007) <br />Technical Revision No. 82 <br />Train Loadout Improvements <br />Deaz Ms. Johnston: <br />The Division has reviewed Mountain Coal Company's (MCC's) responses to the Division's <br />comments regazding the Technical Revision No. 82 (TR-82) application for improving the loadout <br />area drainage. Based on our review of your responses, additional information will be required from <br />MCC. The Division has the following comments regazding the April 10, ]998 TR-82 adequacy <br />response submittal. The comments numbered below correspond to the same numbered pazagraphs <br />in our original review letter dated September 1 1, 1997. <br />Based on the predicted stormwater runoff and the volume of wash water and sediment at the <br />loadout area, the Division does not believe silt fences or straw bales would be adequate to <br />treat runoff from the azea. It would appear that it is possible to construct the new pond prior <br />to backfilling the existing pond. The Division will require that either a sediment pond be in <br />place to treat runoff at all times, or MCC must submit a demonstration that an alternate <br />means of sediment control will be effective. The Division must approve any alternate <br />controls prior to their implementation. <br />2. Response accepted. <br />[n our previous letter, the Division requested that MCC provide a demonstration that the <br />CDOT culvert is adequately sized to handle runoff from the train loadout area in addition to <br />any runoff for which it has already been designed. Such a demonstration would include a <br />prediction of the maximum discharge through the culvert, based on watershed characteristics <br />(area, soil type, vegetation type and cover, whether or not it is disturbed, etc.) We did not <br />find this demonstration in MCC's response. Please provide the requested demonstration. <br />We also requested acknowledgmentof the plan from CDOT. While MCC notes that CDOT <br />