Laserfiche WebLink
Peabod <br /> y <br /> PEABODY COAL COMPANY 1300 South Yale <br /> Western Division Flagstaff,Arizona 86001 <br /> (602)774-5253 <br /> September 8, 1988 <br /> Mr. Carl Mount <br /> Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Division <br /> 215 Centennial Buildin <br /> 1313 Sherman Street IRELg _ <br /> Denver, CO 80203 <br /> `�f-P iI 1988 <br /> RE: Permit C-81-008, Permit Revision No. 2 <br /> 'AIrNEU <br /> Dear Mr. Mount: IIECLAMIATION DIVIZ'SION <br /> Enclosed please find 3 copies of responses to the <br /> Division's technical deficiency letter of July 5, 1988 <br /> concerning Permit Revision No. 2 (PR 2) to the Nucla Mine <br /> permit. Included in each package are: the responses to <br /> comments, instructions on inserting the revised material <br /> into the PR 2 volumes, followed by the revised pages and <br /> exhibits. The revised material is separated with colored <br /> paper by tab. <br /> As we have discussed, the responses to the technical <br /> deficiencies have resulted in a reduction in the permit <br /> area from 234.5 acres at Nucla East to 219.9 acres. All <br /> exhibits which were revised for other reasons also had the <br /> permit boundary revised. Also, those exhibits which you <br /> and I had determined to be critical to the review process <br /> also had the permit boundary revised. The remainder of the <br /> exhibits will be modified and submitted in the near future. <br /> Issues which still require additional information for final <br /> resolution include the blasting plan, final receipt of the <br /> road closure agreement from Montrose County, waivers from <br /> those owners of occupied dwellings within 300 feet of the <br /> revised permit boundary, and a final decision on the Air <br /> Pollution Emission Control Permit from the Colorado <br /> Department of Health. <br /> All of the enclosed material has been discussed with <br /> Division staff. If, upon review, you still have questions, <br /> please let us know. With the approval of Minor Revision <br /> No. 8 and somewhat reduced orders for coal from the <br /> customer, the rather critical time frames for permit <br /> approval that were forecast when we first submitted this <br />