Laserfiche WebLink
III IIIIIIIIIIIII III <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Ocpanmenl of Nalu ral Resources <br />1713 $hc•rman 51 . Ruum 215 <br />Dcnrer, Colorndn A0203 <br />Phunc. (4011 Ahh- f Sb7 <br />FA%: I$1.{I A72 Alllh <br />October 7, 1996 <br />Mr. Robert Montgomery <br />Western Energy Company <br />Box 99, Castle Rock Road <br />Colstrip, MT 59323 <br />RE: Reclamation, Golden Eagle Mine, #C-81-013 <br />Dear Mr. Montgomery: <br />~I~~~ <br />DEPARTMENT OF <br />NATURAL <br />RESOURCES <br />Roy Rome <br />Governor <br />lames 5. Lochhead <br />Executive Dueaor <br />Michael B. Long <br />Drvwon Dueaor <br />After my latest inspection visit to the Golden Eagle mine and conference call with you and <br />Ron Thompson, I thought it would be appropriate to document my understanding of plans <br />and activities related to reclamation at the Golden Eagle mine. <br />As we discussed, the Division does not agree with the proposed post-mining topography <br />changes as depicted on the three preliminary maps received on September 20, 1996. <br />Specifically, those maps are as follows: <br />1. Reclamation cross sections of the proposed post-mining topography <br />2. Proposed post-mine topography <br />3. Final reclamation of the site <br />Two significant proposed changes in the approved post-mining topography (PMT) are noted <br />on maps 1 and 2. One area is at, and above, the road behind the office building location <br />at 1880 feet on map 1, B-B'. The second is at the outslope of the material storage yard, <br />above the railroad tracks, at approximately 2400 feet on map 1, B-B'. The Division is <br />confused as to why, at the road location at 1880 feet, there is a difference between the <br />existing contour and the proposed contour. Please refer to the enclosed overlay of map 1. <br />If the road is to stay as permanent, then it would seem that the existing and proposed' <br />contour at this location would be the same. Assuming that is true, then there appears to <br />be a volume of fill from above the railroad tracks (at A) that could be used to backfill up <br />to the north edge of the proposed permanent road (at B), approximating the approved PMT <br />above the tracks. As discussed with you and Ron Thompson, the Division does not see the <br />need to modify the approved PMT directly above the railroad tracks, especially when this <br />