My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2010-07-02_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981008
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Coal
>
C1981008
>
2010-07-02_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981008
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:14:41 PM
Creation date
7/2/2010 1:57:28 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981008
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
7/2/2010
Doc Name
Letter Requesting Withdrawal of PR6 by Ms Turner
From
JoEllen Turner
To
DRMS
Permit Index Doc Type
General Correspondence
Email Name
MLT
SB1
DAB
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.
/
10
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
<br />2.05.4(2) © -7 The new topography We don't' like it, put it back as good as or better than it was. <br />Thick or thin overburden ?????? How do they figure?? <br />2.05.4 "approximate original landform" How did they get this? <br />2.05.4 (2) © -9 "Slightly higher than in pre-mine. This is 25 feet higher and on the Morgans 7 <br />feet higher. How is that slightly? This is not APPROXIMATE original land contour. <br />2.05.4(2) © CAL Benson should be CARL Benson <br />1. "Gentle sloping banks" Nothing GENTLE here. <br />2.05.4(2) (c)-12 the side slopes will be no steeper than l Ohiv. Check again <br />2.05.4 (2) © -12 <br />Trapezoid with 10h:iv side slopes????? <br />2.05.4(2) (d)-6 In 2008, this was modified under TR57. Technical Revisions cannot be used for <br />MAJOR changes about 300 pages of MAJOR changes. <br />2.05.4(2)(d)-6 "Permit Amendment 06 This is a REVISION <br />2.05.4(2)(d)-7 55 feet thick of Bench 1 material and is classified as suitable THE SALT content <br />was raised to pass the test and is not agreeable to us. They had a meeting in grand junction <br />which we were not allowed to attend and made decisions that they SWORE would not be made. <br />The road was put right through our prime farmland field Against the law. <br />2.05.4 (2) 9d)-8 The amount of topsoil is approximately 4 feet. The law states to a minimum of 4 <br />feet, a minimum of 4 feet or to the natural SOIL Depth. Our Barx Darvey soils were in some <br />places 72 inches and they need to quit limiting to 4 feet. If it was there, put it back. <br />We have a 4 feet of lift A or better and we have 15 feet or better of lift B and then lift C which <br />should be salvaged is 55 feet thick. <br />2.05.4 (2) (d)-10 Ripping, chiseling etc are bringing up big rocks that are not being removed <br />prior to the topsoil and when we disc and ripped in our general prctice of farming, we some times <br />go much deeper and then we are now hitting rocks that were NEVER there in our prime soils. <br />2.,05.4(2)(d)-12 NOT ACCEPTABLE. The chemical properties are quite favorable.. The SALT <br />content was raised and may not grow everything we grow. <br />Salinity levels in the upper 4 feet of spoil are comparable to pre-mine values.. This is not true.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.