2009-10-22_REVISION - C1992080

• Permit No: C1992080
• IBM Index Class Name: REVISION
• Doc Date: 10/22/2009
• Doc Name: Email Regarding SL-4
• From: Mike Savage
• To: Dan Hernandez
• Type & Sequence: SL4
• Email Name: DIH
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

Hernandez, Daniel
From: [e-mail]
Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2009 9:31 AM
To: Hernandez, Daniel
Subject: Re: FW: Carbon Junction SL4 Bond Release Application
Dan,
There were the specifics of a couple of the options we discussed that I wasn't sure I got down completely. The e-mail
rounds out what my notes didn't. Thanks.
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: "Hernandez, Daniel"
Sent: Oct 22, 2009 7:19 AM
To: savaaeandsavape(o)earthiink.net
Subject: FW: Carbon Junction SL4 Bond Release Application
Hi Mike -
As requested yesterday, I'm forwarding my 5/20/09 e-mail to Wally Erickson regarding our 5/12/09 Carbon Junction SL4 meeting.
Let me know if there is anything else we can help with.
Dan
Danie(I. Hernandez
Daniel I. Hernandez
Senior Environmental Protection Specialist
Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety
1313 Sherman St, Room 215
Denver, CO 80203
New Phone Number: 303-866-3567 ext 8126
Fax: [phone]
Website: www.mining.state.co.us
From: Hernandez, Daniel
Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2009 2:51 PM
To: Erickson, Wally
Cc: Kaldenbach, Tom
Subject: Carbon Junction SL4 Bond Release Application
Wally -
Just wanted to let you know that Tom Kaldenbach, Dave Berry and I met with Mike Savage on May 12th regarding the Carbon
Junction Mine SL4 Phase II/III bond release application. We informed Mike that we could not approve the SL4 bond release
application at the moment, as we felt that what was on the ground was not meeting the requirements of Rule 3.02.3(2)(c).
Rule 3.02.3(2)(c) states, "For lands with approved industrial or commercial, or residential post-mining land use, the minimum period
of liability shall continue until the permittee demonstrates that development of such land use has substantially commenced and is
likely to be achieved, and until compliance with the revegetation requirement of 4.15.10(2) or alternative requirements of 4.15.10(3)
is demonstrated".
The revegetation part of this rule has been complied with, as we've approved (and Oakridge Energy Inc has implemented) removal
of the coal mine sediment ponds. However, as the approved post-mining land use for the majority of the remaining disturbed area
is "Residential", we informed Mike that we did not see on-the-ground evidence that development of a Residential land use had
substantially commenced or was likely to be achieved.
We informed Mike that we weren't saying that a Residential post-mining land use bond release couldn't be approved at some point
in the future; we told Mike that based on what's on the ground at the moment (or, more to the point, what's not on the ground at
the moment), we were saying that we do not feel we can approve a residential post-mining land use bond release at the Carbon
Junction Mine at this time.
We informed Mike that one thing Oakridge Energy could consider doing was changing the approved post-mining land use from
"Residential" to "Industrial or Commercial", and then attempting to create some type of commercial venture (horse stables,