Laserfiche WebLink
iii iiiiiiiiiiiu iii <br />999 <br />David <br />From: Mathews, Dan <br />Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 5:20 PM <br />To: Berry, David <br />Subject: Powderhorn Monthly Report <br />I have a few comments regarding the July monthly report which you faxed to me today. The discussion under <br />Reclamation on the front page of the memo is in line with the permit reclamation schedule (in fact if CRDA-2 reclamation is <br />completed by the end of 2001 it would be ahead of schedule). I verified that CRDA-2 grading and wash plant demolition <br />had been initiated on my inspection last week. <br />On page 2 of the memo, the first sentence of Paragraph 2, which states that regrading of the Cameo Refuse Pile will be <br />partially completed by late Fall 2001, is a bit unclear, since there are two "Cameo Refuse Piles" (CRDA-1 and CRDA-2). <br />assume the reference is to CRDA-1, since on the previous page it is stated that CRDA-2 would be fully completed by the <br />Fall of 2001. The approved reclamation schedule calls for both CRDA-1 and CRDA-2 regrading to be completed by the <br />end of first quarter, 2002, and full reclamation of both piles to be completed by the end of 2002. The following sentence <br />indicates that the partial regrading would include placement of demolition debris at the property. This is of concern <br />because the approved reclamation plan does not allow for disposal of demolition debris in or on CRDA-1 or CRDA-2. <br />There is reference to haulage of coal and refuse remaining in stockpiles to a refuse area for disposal, but this is not <br />"demolition debris". <br />In reviewing the applicable permit sections, I did note reference to disposal of demolition debris in the vicinity of the old <br />Roadside Refuse Pile (RSRDA). On page 14-8, paragraph 1 states: <br />Regrading of the lower parking area and the preparation plant will begin with clean-up of refuse and coal <br />stockpiles. This material will be placed in the RSRDA. Concrete, asphalt and other non-toxic material remaining <br />after demolition of the surface facillities will be dozed into the area to be backfilled along the east edge o(this site. <br />We may need to have the operator clarify the specific location envisioned for debris disposal, and ensure that such debris <br />will not be placed in the refuse pile itself. <br />You mentioned that Powderhorn representatives had mentioned something about use of refuse material to achieve <br />required grades or elevations. This most likely would be in the vicinity of the old refuse pile/south portal area I assume. <br />We may need to get clarification that any refuse material would be contained within the perimeter of the 100 year diversion <br />system depicted on Exhibit 6C, and that such material would be placed in compacted lifts in accordance with applicable <br />refuse pile design and regulations. <br />In the 4th paragraph on page 2, there is reference to deferred removal of the [South Portal] office complex pending <br />determination of commercial interest in the facilities, and the statement that a minor revision would be submitted to <br />address these issues. Retention of the offce facilities for future commercial use would entail a land use change, AOC <br />variance, and other significant changes to the reclamation plan, and would probably need to be handled as a Permit <br />Revision. I assume that the referenced minor revision would be limited to a request to amend the reclamation schedule <br />until a determination of feasibility of commercial use has been completed. <br />also have some concerns with the final sentence under the Reclamation section, on page 2. First, it states that CRDA-1 <br />is scheduled for completion in 2004. As I mentioned previously, under the approved reclamation schedule, both CRDA-1 <br />and CRDA-2 are to be fully completed by the end of 2002. Secondly, it states that remaining reclamation other than work <br />addressed in the report will largely be structural demolition. This statement is questionable, primarily because of the <br />significant amount of earthwork associated with reclamation of the North Portal facilities area and the unit train loadout. <br />Let me know if you have questions, and how you would like to proceed regarding the issues which need to be clarified <br />