REP46932

• Permit No: C1994082
• IBM Index Class Name: Report
• Doc Date: 11/7/2005
• Doc Name: 2004 ARR & Reveg Report Response Letter/ Revised ARR Form
• From: Seneca Coal Company
• To: DMG
• Permit Index Doc Type: Annual Reclamation Report
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

E
S co~dcompsm Seneca Coal Company
November 4, 2005
Mr. Mike Boulay ~ \ D
Division of Minerals and Geology ^ ' ~E
1313 Sherman St., Room 215 E~
Denver, CO 80203 `, Q -~ 205
[phone] '~~~
proscn of Mmn~a~ z~ G•d~
RE: Yoast Mine (Permit No. G94-082)
2004 Annual Reclamation and Revegetation Reports
Response to Comments
Dear Mr. Boulay,
Seneca Coal Company (SCC) has reviewed your letters of August 19, 2005 and September 27, 2005 regarding the 2004
Annual Reclamation and Revegetation Reports. The following discussions present responses to the concerns listed.
A~urt 19.2005 Adeauacu Comments Regtrrding the 2004 AAA
1. In our 2003 ARR review ktter dated December 3, 2004, SCC mar requested to provide the 2003 graded spoil sampling and testing
resxltr. SCC stated in their response letter that the 2003 graded spoil sample results will be included in the 2004 sample rerulu. SCC
did not provide the 2003 graded spoil sample rerultc wltb the 2004 sample results as indicated IY/ere any of the fznalgraded areas
rarnpkd to confirm spoilsuitability in 2003? If so, pleareprovide the results of the testingprocedurer to the Division.
Response: No spoil samples were collected in 2003. The data/sampling results for 2004 were included in the 2004
ARR.
2. The Division bar reviewed adl formerAI~Rr prepared for the Yoart Mine and could not find any previous results jor roi! and regraded
overburden sampling and analysis. Pkose eapkrin the reason that all required spoil sampls'ng and evaluation prior to topsoil
rrplaczment, and terting of roil materials war not compkte~ in acrordance with permit conditions described in Tab 21 Minesoi!
Aeconstnrction ofthepernritappkcationpackage.
Response: In the 2004 replacement area, SCC was under an NOV and in a hurry to abate the violation, therefore no
regraded spoil samples were collected. The results of the samples collected in the graded area to the south are included
in the 2004 ARR.
3. SCC provided a 2004 Soils Deport as an addendum to the 2004 ARR but no dircurrion of results war provided in the report section
of the AAR Please explain how the limited data and number aframples presented to date provides adequate data and analysis to
demonstrate compliance with requirements of Auks 4.05.8, 4.0.6, and 4.14.3, and permit conditions of Tab 21. Please provide revised
AAA report pages for includon to the 2004 ARA addressing there coneerru.
Response: Additional sampling has been conducted in 2005 and those results will be presented in the 2005 ARR To
date, no problems have been noted in the analyses.
Seneca Coal Company • P.O. Box 670 • Hayden, Colorado 81639
Telephone [phone] • FAX [phone]