Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Randy <br />Ms. Susan <br />August 1, <br /> <br />• <br /> <br /> <br />Spencer <br />Mowry <br />1985 <br />C.4 <br />Bear Coal Company stated they would like, as a first step, <br />to evaluate the current year's monitoring data on the land <br />slide and if it shows that there has been significant <br />movement that re-engineering would be in order. If <br />re-engineering repair or replacement is necessary, plans to <br />do so would be submitted to the Division for approval. <br />D.1 <br />Bear Coal Company stated in the meeting that the bridge and <br />conveyor footings have been removed as of July 22, 1985. <br />Page Four <br />E.1 <br />The Bear Coal <br />with Gunnison <br />to reclaim the <br />Company agreed to discuss a <br />County and to develop a plan <br />flood control berm. <br />reclamation plan <br />for the Division <br />E.2 <br />The Bedr Coal Company agreed to review hydrology information <br />in the area and supply any spring locations on the current <br />geology/hydrology map (Map 6). It was suggested by the <br />Division to look at the West Elk Coal Company mine permit <br />and review their information on springs in the area. <br />E.3 <br />The Bear Coal Company agreed to submit a map .showing <br />alluvial monitoring well locations at the Bear No. 3 Mine <br />along with piezometric contours. It was pointed out that no <br />alluvial monitoring wells were present at Bear No. 1 and No. <br />2 Mines. The Division agreed that Bear Coal Company did not <br />need to supply a map showing wells or piezometric contours <br />at Bear No. 1 and No. 2 Mines. <br />E.4 <br />Bear Coal Company stated that they had the Mine Usage and <br />Inflow Report and that it would be submitted. <br />LI <br />