PERMFILE111392 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

II ~II ~I~~I~~I~I~~~II~ ~~ 999 STAT~ OF COLORADO _ MINED LAND RECLAMATION DIVISION oF.~o~ Department of Natural Resources ti~~~-~~~4-, Ve ., Sr'7r .t$ 7313 Sherman St.. Room 2t 5 Denver.C080203 ~~~~ ~ ~~ 303 866 ~ 3567 ~ ~%: /e ~6 Fnx~303 832-6106 ~ one Governs iretl R. 0anty. Dins~on Dnepor May 25, 1990 Mr. David R. Sturges Attorney-at-Law P.0. Box 101 Glenwood Springs, CO 81602-0101 Re: Carbon Junction Mine Permit Renewal File No. C-82-054 Dear Mr. Sturges: Jim Stevens indicated that after the Board meeting you asked if we would update you on the status of the Renewal Adequacy concerns for the Carbon Junction Mine. I believe the issues which have been resolved to date are the submittal of Annual Hydrologic Reports for 1986 through 1989, and submittal of an updated probable hydrologic consequences evaluation (PHC) as specified in Items 3 and 5 of the January 10, 1989 Adequacy Letter, and Condition C of the Letter of Agreement. The updated PHC discussion will need to be modified to some extent and paginated for direct insertion into the permit document. Some additional issues have arisen recently, other than the bonding issue of which you are aware. By letter of March 13, 1990, we indicated a concern that diversion and collection ditches associated with the excess overburden fill had apparently not been designed to handle runoff from the 100-year, 24-hour precipitation event. We stated in that letter that the 100-year, 24-hour design criteria would apparently apply to Diversion Ditch #2, the East and West Fill downdrains and the permanent channel realignment. Since the West Collection Channel currently functions to divert the f]ow of Carbon Junction drainage around the excess overburden fill, it too would need to meet 100-year design criteria. A related concern is that an alternative plan is necessary for handling road drainage which is currently routed over the face of the fill into Sediment Pond No. 2. An appropriate plan for conveying drainage into the pond via a designed ditch located off the fill will need to be submitted as a part of the permit renewal response. Jim Hendricks responded to the above concerns in a letter we received April 5, 1990, and contended that the referenced criteria did not apply because ditches of concern were in-pit disturbances. I do not believe this to be the case and we may need to schedule a meeting to discuss the issue further. Correspondence applicable to this issue is enclosed. Finally, I received a phone call yesterday from a Mr. Terry Oliver of the First Interstate Bank of Denver, Trustee of the Elizabeth Anne Ewing Trust, the surface and mineral owner of the Carbon Junction Permit Area. Mr. Oliver indicated that it was possible that the Pueblo Coal Inc, lease would be terminated. Our records indicate that the lease expired in June, 1989.