My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL43067
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL43067
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:11:53 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 12:08:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980005
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
6/6/1989
Doc Name
SENECA II MINE C-80-005
From
MLRD
To
PEABODY COAL CO
Permit Index Doc Type
GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE
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.
/
2
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
... T III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII <br />999 <br />.~~~~a STATE OF COLOI~UO <br />Roy Romer, Govei <br />DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES <br />MINED LAND RECLAMATION DIVISION <br />FRED R. BANTA, Director <br />June 6, 1989 <br />Mr. James S. Lunan <br />Peabody Coal Company <br />1300 South Yale <br />Flagstaff, AZ 86001 <br />Re: Seneca II Mine, C-80-005 <br />Dear Mr. Lunan: <br />During a regular inspection of the Seneca II mine on May 23, 1989, Division <br />inspectors noted three areas where road drainage had resulted in excessive <br />erosion or had the potential to create excessive erosion. The areas of <br />concern are as follows: <br />1. Above the Wadge Impoundment where drainage from Ditch Al is <br />culverted under the haul road, <br />2. Above the Wolf Creek Underdrain where drainage from Ditch F1 is <br />channeled off the slope at the road bend, <br />3, Above Ditch Al and below Ditch F1 approximately 600 feet south of <br />the point where roads Al and F1 intersect. <br />These areas require stabilization. We have subsequently requested <br />that Roy Karo implement Peabody's erosion control plan in these <br />areas. We will monitor the effectiveness of these measures in <br />preventing further erosion in these areas. <br />Based on the occurence of these large sullies we would like Peabody to <br />reexamine the current practice of channeling road drainage across fills. The <br />permit application discusses the practice of water release along haul roads <br />on panes 12-28 through 12-30. We believe there may be a less maintenance <br />intensive way of handling the runoff which would not result in excessive <br />erosion. <br />Other concerns which arose during this inspection include the fact that <br />Exhibit 7-7 does not accurately reflect on the around drainage and ditch <br />locations. Specifically, along roads Al and Fl, it was observed that ditches <br />existed on both sides of the haul roads whereas Exhibit 7-7 indicates that <br />ditches should only exist on one side of the road. Also, Exhibit 7-7 does not <br />indicate where the MSHA Safety berm has been breached to allow water to flow <br />out of the side ditches. Therefore, we believe drainage design documentation <br />contained in the permit may not be accurate. <br />215 Centennial Building, 1313 Sherman Street Denver, Colorado 80203.2273 Tel. (303) 866.3567 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.