My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL49539
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL49539
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:28:49 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 5:11:21 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980005
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
9/11/1990
Doc Name
ANNUAL TOPSOIL BALANCE REPORT SENECA II MINE PN C-80-005
From
DMG
To
PEABODY COAL CO
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
iii iiiiuiiiiiu iii <br />999 <br />MINED LAND RECLAMATION DIVISION <br />Departmem of Natural Resources <br />1313 Sherman St., Room 215 <br />Denver. CO 80203 <br />303 866-3567 <br />Fa x: 303 8328106 <br />c <br />STATE OF COLORADO ~ <br />pF COO <br />ti~~q <br />1 ~`~ ~.v'V .O <br />~ r876 a <br />Roy Romer, <br />Governor <br />Fretl R. Banta. <br />Division Director <br />September 11, 1990 <br />Mr. James Lunan <br />Peabody Coal Company <br />1300 South Yale <br />Flagstaff, AZ 86001 <br />RE: Annual Topsoil Balance Report, Seneca II Mine, Permit No. C-80-005 <br />Dear Mr. Lunan: <br />The Division has completed the review of the Annual Topsoil Balance Report for <br />the Seneca II Mine. We have two concerns with the report. <br />First, Peabody should inform reclamation personnel at the mine about Exhibit 3 <br />- Topsoil Redistribution Plan. It appears from recent inspections that the <br />Plan in Exhibit 3 was not followed. For example, areas which should have <br />received topsoil from stockpile HH have instead received topsoil from <br />stockpile P. While these changes may not affect reclamation success, they may <br />have an affect on reclamation bond figures and, therefore, on required bond <br />amount in the future. Further, if such discrepancies occur in the future, we <br />would like Peabody to update this redistribution plan. <br />Second, the Chronologic Topsoil Replacement Map was not included in this <br />submittal and should be included in future Annual Reclamation Reports so that <br />the report will be in compliance with Rule 2.04.13(1 )(d ). <br />If you have any questions, please contact me. <br />Sincerely, <br />~~ <br />arl B. Mount <br />Reclamation Specialist <br />CBM/gaw <br />9998E <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.