My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2010-11-10_REVISION - C1981008 (3)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1981008
>
2010-11-10_REVISION - C1981008 (3)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:26:41 PM
Creation date
11/10/2010 3:11:20 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981008
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
11/10/2010
Doc Name
List of Exhibits and Witnesses and Exhibits
From
Carver Schwarz McNab & Bailey, LLC
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
PR6
Email Name
SB1
DTM
MLT
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.
/
148
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
Page 3 of 19 <br />was Prime Farmland Soil. Mr Dearstyne spoke in great length on each parameter of <br />what was needed for a soil to be cataloged as Prime Farmland soil. In conclusion, the <br />Barx, Darvey and Nyswonger soils west of 27 Road all met the Prime Farmland <br />criteria. <br />Mr. Dearstyne spoke at great lengths his findings concerning the 1998 Order 1 Soil <br />Survey conducted by Mr. Jim Irvine of InterMountain West, Ridgeway, Colorado. First, <br />the 1998 Soil Survey was a requirement from the Division before mining started and <br />was used in all WFC Mine Permit documents since 1999. The Division had approved <br />this document in the 1999 Permit renewal application as well as all other Permit <br />reviews since. In conclusion, Mr. Dearstyne stated, Mr. Irvine did a very good job <br />classifying the soils within his scope of work but had used a miss printed value of not <br />to exceed a 7.4 PH for Prime Farmland Soil that a preliminary NRCS soils report <br />had stated. The real PH value should have been a value of 8.4. Since soil samples <br />taken from the Morgan field registered PH values higher than 7.4, Mr. Irvine stated that <br />Is there was no Prime Farmland within the study area. Mr. Dearstyne said he would <br />have made the same mistake if presented the same documents at that time. <br />Western Fuels then took that soil information and formulated a plan similar to what <br />they had done east of 2700 Road, spread whatever topsoil was available (two lifts) <br />equally across all reclaimed land. Perfectly legal, providing it was not Prime Farmland. <br />Mr. Dearstyne's presentation was so convincing that it was decided then and there, <br />that all soils south west of the intersection of 2700 & BB Road, within the study area, <br />on the Morgan land, was Prime Farmland Soils. Once that was decided upon, then <br />the Regulations state that any Prime Farmland Soils must go back on the same land, <br />in other words, the same landowner gets his own Prime Farmland Soil. Salvage and <br />replacement thickness will be discussed below. <br />Since WFC had already disturbed a sizeable acreage of this now reclassified Prime <br />Farmland Soil on the Morgan land, a new plan was discussed on how to remediate the <br />affected Prime Farmland area and any future Prime Farmland Soils. The plan for the <br />affected area was soon labeled as the "Backwards Plan" and the plan for the non- <br />disturbed soil was named "Forward Plan". <br />WFC Exhibit 9 <br />Page 3 of 19
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.