My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2010-11-10_REVISION - C1981008 (2)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1981008
>
2010-11-10_REVISION - C1981008 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:26:41 PM
Creation date
11/10/2010 5:06:16 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981008
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
11/10/2010
Doc Name
Items & Exhibits for FPH Part 2
From
JoEllen Turner & Michael Morgan
To
MLRB & WFC
Type & Sequence
PR6
Email Name
SB1
MLT
DTM
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.
/
88
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
p.1 <br />0 <br />LI <br />0 <br />Ms Marcia L. Talvitie, P.E. March 18,2009 <br />Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining, and Safety <br />691 CR 233, Suite A -2 <br />Durango, Co. 81301 t - ceived <br />1313 Sherman Street V/C FqX <br />Room 215 MAR 19 2009 <br />Denver, Co. 80203 /3 <br />Vuru., c , held 0 1 1FIea <br />Division of tteclaMAUOn, <br />Mining and SafGtY <br />RE: Revision of TR 57 the New Horizon Mine (permit No. C -1981 -008) submitted by Western <br />Fuels- Colorado,LLC. Sections 2.04.9 and 2.05.4(d) have been revised for the purpose of <br />addressing Prime Farmland designations and topsoil redistribution in prime farmland areas. <br />We guess since you won't give a 10 day extension for all of us to have time to read and re -view <br />TR57, We are totally objecting to it and it's contents for these reasons: <br />(1) Bench 1 is about 55 feet thick within the permit area ans approximately 83% is suitable <br />subsoil. Why is only 34 inches of material being returned as suitable. This is not acceptable. <br />(2) The total amount of topsoil and suitable will be approximately 4 feet. Where did you get <br />this? <br />Since some places our topsoil depth alone is 72 inches. This is not right. <br />(3)Topsoil stockpiles : It says 1 -13 as listed on the chart. Only there is 10 listed on the chart. <br />Where are these and they are all listed as mixed. Where is the rest and why are they not listed <br />and where are they out here? There is not 13 stockpiles ? ? ? ?? And they list A -K on the chart, <br />where are those 11 stock piles ? ? ? ? ? ?? <br />(4)Much of the upper overburden is suitable subsoil. NO!!!! <br />NO topsoil is available to be salvaged from existing ponds, roads, residences, farmyards. This is <br />an absolute untrue statement. There is a lot of topsoil in these areas!!!!!!!!!!!! ! ! ! <br />(5)Permit was submitted March 2008. There was NO newspaper addressing this. Mr. Morgan <br />received no letter addressing this. No ONE Knew Anything! ! ! ! Mr. Morgan is blind and it has <br />been discussed and re- discussed between Western Fuels and right here at the table with the <br />division and we were promised that any permitting or re- permitting that directly affected the <br />Morgan place that as letter and a copy would be sent to Frank Morgan. This never happened <br />either. <br />(6) It is a shame that we are forced to Knitpick and can't have 10 days to examine all of this. We <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.