REP10461

• Permit No: C1994082
• IBM Index Class Name: Report
• Doc Date: 8/19/2005
• Doc Name: 2004 ARR Adequacy Letter
• From: DMG
• To: Seneca Coal Company
• Permit Index Doc Type: Annual Reclamation Report
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

STATE OF COLORADO
DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY
Department of Natural Resources
1313 Sherman St., Room 215
Denver, Colorado 80203
Phone: (303) g66-3567
FAX: (303) 832$106
August 19, 2005
Roy Karo
Reclamation Manager
Seneca Coal Company
P.O. Box 670
Hayden, CO 81639
Re: 2004 Annual Reclamation Report for Yoast Mine, Permit No. C-94-082
Deaz Mr. Kazo:
COLORADO
DIVISION O P
MINERALS
GEOLOGY
EEC LANATIO N•NINING
EAfETY•ECIENCE
ear Owens
Govertwr
Russell George
Executive DlnYtpr
Ronald W. Canany
Division Director
Natu21 Resource Trustee
On Mazch 28, 2005, the Division received Seneca Coal Company's (BCC's) responses to
our 2003 Annual Reclamation Report (ARR) adequacy review comments. With
exception of item 1 below, all items associated with the 2003 ARR review have been
resolved. On March 31, 2005, the Division received the 2004 ARR. The Division has
the following comments regazding both the 2003 ARR comment responses from SCC and
the 2004 ARR.
In our 2003 ARR review Letter dated December 3, 2004, SCC was requested to
provide the 2003 graded spoil sampling and testing results. SCC stated in their
response letter that the 2003 graded spoil sample results will be included with the
2004 sample results. SCC did not provide the 2003 graded spoil sample results
with the 2004 sample results as indicated. Were any of the final graded azeas
sampled to confirm spoil suitability in 2003? If so, please provide the results of
the testing procedures to the Division.
2. The Division has reviewed all former ARRs prepared for the YOfISt Mine and
could not find any previous results for soil and regraded overburden sampling and
analysis. Please explain the reason that alt required spoil sampling and evaluation
prior to topsoil replacement, and testing of soil materials was not completed, in
accordance with permit conditions described in Tab 21 Minesoil Reconstruction
of the permit application package.
SCC provided a 2004 Soils Report as an addendum to the 2004 ARR but no
discussion of results was provided in the report section of the ARR. Please
explain how the limited data and number of samples presented to date provides
adequate data and analysis to demonstrate compliance with requirements of Rules
4.05.8, 4.0.6, and 4.14.3, and permit conditions of Tab 21. Please provide revised
ARR report pages for inclusion to the 2004 ARR addressing these concerns.
Office of Office of Colorado
Mined Land Rxlama[ion Active and Inactive Mines Geobgica! Survey