My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL36614
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL36614
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:57:05 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 8:47:34 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1996084
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
11/5/2003
Doc Name
Proposed Decision & Findings of Compliance for RN1
Permit Index Doc Type
Findings
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.
/
27
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
9. The Division finds that surface coal mining and reclamation operations to be performed <br />under this permit will not be inconsistent with other such operations anticipated to be <br />performed in areas adjacent to the permit area. (2.07.6(2)(I)) <br />10. The Division has determined based on information previously submitted by the applicant and <br />approved by the Division, the required liability is $2,853,681.00. Although Technical <br />Revision No. 8 (TR-08) was approved subsequent to this Permit Renewal, approved <br />activities under TR-08 were not implemented and the operator has indicated their desire to <br />not implement TR-08 activities (see Stipulations section). The Division currently holds a <br />bond of $2,400,000.00 that exceeds the reclamation cost estimate of $2,387,682.00 prior to <br />TR-08 (approved activities from Technical Revision No. 7 (TR-07)). <br />11. The Division has made a negative determination for the presence of prime farmland within <br />the permit area. The applicant has indicated that there are no soil map units that have been <br />designated by the National Resource Conservation Service (MRCS) that have been <br />designated as prime farmland. This complies with the requirement of Rule 2.04.12(2)(f). <br />12. Based on information provided in the application the Division has determined that an <br />alluvial valley floor (AVF) exists within the permit or adjacent area. The alluvial valley <br />floor is known as the Purgatoire River AVF and will be affected by the coal loadout located <br />adjacent to the railroad. (2.07.6(2) and 2.06.8(3)(C)) <br />For additional specific findings concerning the Purgatoire River AVF please see Section B, <br />XVII. <br />The Division has made a negative determination for all other streams within the permit <br />area. Based on the information presented in Exhibit 18 of the permit application, <br />Lorencito, Cow, Alamosa, Chimney, Puertecito, Little Pine, and Jeff Canyons are not <br />alluvial valley floors. <br />Lorencito Canyon contains unconsolidated stream laid deposits of reasonable size. <br />Minimum depths to the water table range from 11-15 feet, while soil depths are 5-6 feet. <br />Results of vegetation sampling indicate warm season grassland communities that aze not <br />dependent on subin•igation. Vegetative cover and production in these areas is poor, and <br />there is no evidence of past or present flood irrigation anywhere along Lorencito Canyon. <br />Cow Canyon valley floor covers approximately 187 acres within the permit area. The <br />sinuosity of the channel is low compared to other channels in the permit area and the <br />channel bottom exhibits bedrock control in multiple places. Soils exhibit no soil <br />moisture from subirrigation. The limited extent of contiguous areas, coupled with the <br />lack of available water from this intermittent stream, precludes possible flood irrigation. <br />Alamosa Canyon alluvial material covers 100 acres in the permit area. The canyon is <br />relatively narrow and exhibits high sinuosity. The stream is intermittent and the <br />minimum recorded depth to the water table is 13 feet. The drainage does not appeaz to <br />support sub-irrigation and local practice would not consider flood irrigation. <br />12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.