Laserfiche WebLink
///. COMMENTS -COMPLIANCE <br />Below are comments on the inspection. The comments include discussion of observations made <br />during the inspection. Comments also describe any enforcement actions taken during the inspection <br />and the facts or evidence supporting the enforcement action. <br />This was a "permit application review" inspection conducted by Tom Kaldenbach, Dan Hernandez, <br />and Janet Binns of the DRMS. The operator was represented by: Roy Karo, Jay James, Scott <br />Cowman, and Brian Dunfee. Jerry Nettleton also represented the operator during an introductory <br />meeting prior to the field portion of the inspection. It was a warm, sunny day and the ground was dry. <br />The inspection focused on delineation of the watersheds that will be used for establishing the permit <br />boundary between the pre-existing Seneca II Mine and the proposed Peabody Sage Creek Mine. Field <br />observations indicated that close attention needs to be given to delineating watersheds on maps in the <br />Peabody Sage Creek Mine permit application. <br />Vegetative cover and erosion control were examined on pre-law and interim law lands that are <br />proposed for transfer from the Seneca II Mine permit to the Peabody Sage Creek Mine permit. <br />Revegetation success is variable on these lands, with the sparsest cover in areas of acid spoil that did <br />not have topsoil replaced. Lime treatments were applied to the areas of acid spoil in approximately <br />2007. The pre-law and interim law lands are not subject to a liability period. <br />The following documents were received during the inspection: <br />1) A map showing the proposed permit boundaries of the Peabody Sage Creek Mine and the <br />Seneca II Mine, and the bond release status of lands in the Seneca II Mine permit area. <br />2) Spreadsheets showing a breakdown of reclamation tasks and dollar amounts that are proposed <br />for transfer from the Seneca II Mine to the Peabody Sage Creek Mine.