Laserfiche WebLink
-� OV <br />- _ Y— YYN January 4, 2008 <br />Division of Reclamation, Mining, and Safety <br />1313 Sherman Street <br />Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />+o 4, � <br />.fur <br />-� 0 - 6 � <br />� -, r <br />Re: Renewal of Existing Permits. Also, Technical Revision of the New Horizon Mine <br />Permit No. C -81 -008. This Technical Revision is to Section 2.05.4(2)e. This is by Western <br />Fuels- Colorado (WFC) in Nucla, Co. <br />Dear Sirs: <br />I am writing this letter as a formal protest to the application for renewal of existing permits <br />as well as to the application for a Technical Revision to the New Horizon Mine Permit No. <br />C -81 -008. This Technical Revision covers the change in Success Standards in irrigated <br />Pasture from a standard to a reference area.. <br />I have worked for Western Fuels doing their reclamation for 13 years until last year. I <br />have lived and farmed in Nucla for the most part of 50 years. All of the fields that you <br />see around the mine as well as NHI, the old mine sight, I did. NH1 and NH2 were put <br />back into fields, farmed, and irrigated by me. There are many truths here that are not being <br />spoken or presented to you as fact ny Western Fuels. The area that is being mined and <br />about to be mined affects me greatly, as I have a lot of it leased for the farming, besides <br />being involved in the ownership. Let's start at the beginning. When I did the reclamation <br />on the mine, I disked, rock raked, rock picked, leveled(very Critical), and cultipacked these <br />grounds to the best possible. These ground were much nicer than they were before the <br />mine began their mining process. Everyone around here was very pleased. It is not the <br />mines fault (for the most part) nor was it mine that production was not made. In this <br />area production is the greatest the 2, third, fourth years. As everything, as the grasses <br />alfalfa, etc. gets up in the years, production seems to take a downhill dive. When the 10 year <br />mark approaches, of course, production will be considerably less than it was the first <br />six years. This is the fault of regulations they have to abide by which should be adjusted <br />to meet the farming practices in this area. We would like to see the mine get their bond <br />release just as soon as they have done everything possible to meet the requirements and <br />production is met the first few years. 10 years is unheard of in the farming profession. <br />If the mine must hold the property for a full 10 years and they continue to irrigate, fertilize, <br />and do everything possible like a real farmer, then that land should be returned to it's <br />owners. Why do you make them produce 10 years away? We put up approximately <br />1000 ton or better a year and our best production is the first 6 years. Then we either <br />re-pla w d completely redo our fields or we make adjustments that the coal mine is <br />(• not a to do. I guarantee the fields I did were put back as good or better than any <br />other tticr in this area. To now use a reference area to get bond release for those <br />areas would not even be necessary if you had counted the production rates from years <br />ago. It is only right to just return those areas back to the farmers because everything has <br />