My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2008-11-05_REVISION - C1980004 (2)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1980004
>
2008-11-05_REVISION - C1980004 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:37:44 PM
Creation date
2/11/2009 3:33:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980004
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
11/5/2008
Doc Name
Review Memo
From
Dan Mathews
To
Mike Boulay
Type & Sequence
TR16
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.
/
3
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
Mathews, Dan <br />From: Mathews, Dan <br />Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 20081:17 PM <br />To: Creeden, Paul <br />Cc: Romatzke, JT; Kaal, Kimberly; Boulay, Mike; Brown, Sandy <br />Subject: McClane Canyon Mine, Technical Revision 16 (New Coal Waste Pile and Associated <br />Facilities) <br />Greetings Paul, <br />I realize you are probably not in the office much this time of year, but I need to touch bases with you (or other DOW staff <br />as appropriate), regarding the referenced McClane Canyon Mine TR-16. Specifically, we need to get DOW comment <br />regarding responses submitted by McClane Canyon Mining LLC (MCM, formerly CAM Mining LLC), to previous DOW <br />concerns identified in a letter of August 19, 2008, from JT Romatzke to Michael Boulay. Concerns identified by DOW in <br />that letter focused on potential water quality impacts to East Salt Creek associated with mine water discharge, and waste <br />pile and sediment pond leachate, and the letter requested further analysis of such potential impacts. <br />We summarized DOW's concerns in a letter of 9/19/08 to the operator (Adequacy Item No. 52), and enclosed a copy of <br />the letter, along with a request that DOW's concerns be addressed. We received responses from the operator in a <br />submittal package dated 10/23/08, which the operator indicates was concurrently submitted to Division of Wildlife. In the <br />response submittal, the operator included proposed amendments to Permit Appendix N [Probable Hydrologic <br />Consequences (PHC)...1, to address the DOW concerns of Adequacy Item 52, as well as PHC refinements previously <br />requested by DRMS in Adequacy Item 57. <br />Due to my original invovement in the matter, Mike Boulay asked that I coordinate with DOW. The decision date for this <br />technical revision has been significantly extended and we are attempting to bring the remaining adequacy issues to <br />resolution in a timely manner. If you have concerns with the'amended analyses and plan, please let me know as soon as <br />possible. A meeting including appropriate operator, DRMS, and DOW staff might expedite the process at this point, if <br />DOW does have remaining concerns. <br />Please contact me regarding this matter at your earliest convenience. <br />Thanks Paul <br />Daniel T. Mathews <br />Colorado Division of Reclamation, <br />Grand Junction Field Office <br />101 South 3rd, Suite 301 <br />Grand Junction, Colorado 81501 <br />daniel mathewsna state.co.us <br />Phone (970) 242-5025 <br />FAX (970) 241-1516 <br />Mining and Safety
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.