My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE130754
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
400000
>
PERMFILE130754
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:31:39 PM
Creation date
11/25/2007 10:38:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980005
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/11/2001
Section_Exhibit Name
TAB 15 PR1
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.
/
10
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
Mr. Tom Wainwright <br />-4- <br />September 25, 1984 <br />• <br />PCC has requested an exemption from topsoil salvaging within the Wolf Creek <br />revision area as shown on Exhibit 9-3. Topsoil can not be salvaged on these <br />areas without contaminating the resource. Due to equipment limitations, <br />topsoil on these slopes would contain 40 to 50 percent coarse fragments. <br />Topsoil from the proposed exemption areas is derived from the Splits, Wienvada <br />and Skylick soils (40% slopes). It was deemed unsuitable for topsoil salvage <br />in the permit application and therefore, topsoil from these areas were not <br />included in the original topsoil balances. There will not be a loss of <br />topsoil from the original plan if topsoil is not salvaged in the exemption <br />areas. However, topsoil balances for the remainder of the permit term and the <br />life-of-mine area have been revised in the permit revision. These are found <br />in Tab 9. With the topsoil exemption, the life-of-mine replacement depth is <br />proposed to be 12.2 inches. <br />The Division recommends approval for the topsoil exemption. Topsoil quality <br />is poor in the proposed exemption area and there is sufficient topsoil <br />material available to achieve good reclamation. <br />Reclamation fees required by 30 CFR, Chapter VII, Subchapter R are paid and up <br />to date at the Seneca II Mine (Personal communication, John Sinder, OSM, <br />September 17, 1984). Therefore, Peabody Coai Company is in compliance . <br />Worst-case reclamation costs will increase as a result of the proposed <br />changes. Therefore, the bond will have to be increased. Calculations <br />presented in Tab 13 figure reclamation costs at $3,453,662.00. This is an <br />increase of $164,662.00 from the Wadge revision. Therefore, a rider to the <br />existing bond must be posted prior to implementation of this permit revision. <br />The following stipulation is necessary. <br />Stipulation 4: <br />PEA80DY COAL SHALL POST A BOND OR A RIDER TO THE EXISTING BOND FOR A <br />TOTAL AMOUNT OF $3,453,66.00 PRIOR TO IMPLEMENTATION OF THE WOLF CREEK <br />PERMIT REVISION. <br />With the acceptance of the stipulations stated in this letter by Peabody Coal <br />Company, the Division recommends approval for the Wolf Creek permit revision. <br />Notice of the Division's proposed decision will be published in the Steamboat <br />Pilot once a week for two weeks. If no request for a hearing is received <br />within 30 days after the first publication and the additional reclamation bond <br />has been posted, tfie proposed decision of the Division will be final. <br />Please contact me if you have any questions. <br />Sincerely, <br />Sandra L. Emrich <br />Reclamation Specialist <br />• <br />I 1 <br />lJ <br />SLE:VGT <br />cc; Mr, Floyd Johnson <br />Doc. 4217 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.