My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL48554
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL48554
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:25:08 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 4:23:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980005
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
7/11/1989
Doc Name
SENECA II MINE ANNUAL TOPOGRAPHIC MAP
From
PEABODY COAL CO
To
MLRD
Permit Index Doc Type
RECLAMATION PROJECTS
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.
Page 1 of 1
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
Pe~y <br />PEABODY COAL COMPANY <br />Wa~tern Dlvlalon <br />July 7, 1989 <br />Mr. Carl Mount <br />Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Division <br />1313 Sherman Street <br />215 Centennial Building <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />RE: Seneca II Kline Annual Topographic Map <br />Dear Mr. Mount: <br />111 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII <br />999 <br />7300 Soutb Yaffe <br />Flagsratl. Ar¢ona 66001 <br />(602) 7745253 <br />~~~~~ ~~~ <br />JUL 11 ig89 <br />RECLA INED LAND <br />MATION JIV151C:ry <br />Please find enclosed two sets of an Annual Topographic Map <br />and three sheets of cross-sections, for the Seneca II <br />Mine. Depicted on the map are areas that were graded in <br />1987 and 1988. These areas include 37 acres graded in <br />1987 and 139 acres graded during 1988. <br />A\ <br />Several cross-sections were developed to compare the <br />existing to ography with the proposed postmining <br />topography. The existing topography compares with the <br />postmining topography fairly close. The only noticeable <br />discrepancies are at Sections C and F. Section C-C' <br />depicts a slightly higher surface than shown on the <br />postmining topography map. We do not believe this area to <br />be a problem, but will observe the future grading to <br />ensure that adequate material is available to reclaim the <br />future pits. Section F-F' depicts a surface lower in the <br />drainage and higher at the ends of the section than <br />proposed. This may be an advantage in that the dirt <br />volumes appear balanced, the graded area ties into the <br />surrounding tooography well, and the final grade of a <br />reclaimed chant may beTess steep. <br />If you have any questions, please give me a call. <br />Respectively, <br />~~~~ <br />Ronald J. Gehr e~ <br />Senior Engineer <br />kjs <br />~ Enclosures <br />c: Jim Lunan <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.