My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2010-02-09_REVISION - C1981019
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1981019
>
2010-02-09_REVISION - C1981019
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:59:27 PM
Creation date
2/10/2010 8:10:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981019
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
2/9/2010
Doc Name
3rd Adequacy Review (Memo)
From
Kent Gorham
To
Jim Stark
Type & Sequence
TR78
Email Name
JRS
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.
Page 1 of 1
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
STATE OF COLORADO <br />DIVISION OF RECLAMATION, MINING AND SAFETY <br />Department of Natural Resources -41 <br /> <br />1313 Sherman St., Room 215 A <br />* <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 C O L O RA D O <br />Phone: (303) 866-3567 D IM S ION OF <br />RECLAMATION <br />FAX: (303) 8322--81810 06 Interoffice Memo MINING <br /> <br /> SAFETY <br />To: Jim Stark <br />% Bill Ritter, Jr. <br /> <br />From: Kent Gorham r(y Governor <br /> James B. Martin <br /> Executive Director <br />CC: Sandy Brown <br />Date: February 9, 2010 <br />RE: 3rd Adequacy review, TR-78, Colowyo Mine <br />I have completed my review of the latest materials submitted (January 18, 2010) for <br />Technical Revision No. 78 (TR-78) for the Colowyo Mine, permit no. #C-81-019. My <br />comments are as follows. <br />General Comments <br />Over 13 months has passed since my first memo on this revision. TR-78 was in direct <br />response to an NOV issued for various hydrologic failures on the Prospect watershed. In the <br />latest responses Colowyo continues to delay any approval through either a non-response or <br />a commitment that they will submit future revisions for a "new PMT" and "a new worst case <br />hydrologic situation in the Prospect watershed". <br />None of their responses are adequate. If future revisions are necessary, I'm not sure what <br />the point of TR-78 really is, other than to appear to comply with the abatement for the NOV. <br />This kind of back and forth is, at best, dysfunctional and serves no purpose other than to <br />prolong any decision and more importantly, put off any real changes in the field that are <br />obviously necessary. <br />Let me know if I can be of further assistance. <br />Office of Office of <br />Mined Land Reclamation Denver • Grand Junction • Durango Active and Inactive Mines
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.