Laserfiche WebLink
STATE OF COLORADO <br />DIVISION OF RECLAMATION, MINING AND SAFETY <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />1313 Sherman St., Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />Phone: (303) 866 -3567 <br />FAX: (303) 832 -8106 <br />COLORADO <br />D IV IS I ON OF <br />RECLAMATION <br />MINING <br />SAFETY <br />April 20, 2012 <br />John W. <br />Governo Hickenloaper <br />Mike King <br />Executive Director <br />Tonya Hammond Loretta E. Pineda <br />Snowcap Coal Company, Inc. Director <br />P.O. Box 1430 <br />Palisade, CO 81526 <br />Re: Roadside Portals (Permit No. C- 1981 -041) <br />Permit Revision No. 5 (PR -5) Adequacy Review <br />Dear Ms. Hammond: <br />The Division of Reclamation Mining, and Safety (Division) has reviewed the above referenced permit <br />revision application materials submitted to gain approval from the Division to remove Ponds 6, 10,11 <br />and 13 along with other drainage control features at CRDA #1 & #2, CBA #1 & #2 and the North <br />Portal. With this revision Snowcap Coal Company (SCC) also seeks approval to make changes to the <br />final reclamation plans of Ponds 6, 10, and 11, Coal Gulch, the Coal Canyon drainage and Roadside <br />North Portal. SCC has demonstrated with PR -5 that the untreated drainage from CRDA #1, CRDA #2, <br />CBA #1, CBA #2 and the North Portal disturbed areas will contribute fewer suspended solids to <br />streamflow or runoff outside the permit area than untreated drainage from the natural surrounding <br />premining area. This was accomplished by a soils loss comparison between these disturbed locations <br />and corresponding non - disturbed reference areas using the Universal Soil Loss Equation. SCC has <br />also adequately demonstrated that the quality of untreated drainage from these disturbed areas meets <br />the State and Federal water quality standard requirements applicable after the sedimentation ponds and <br />other drainage control features are removed, for receiving streams. The Division has the following <br />adequacy review comments regarding the PR -5 revised application materials to be incorporated into <br />the existing reclamation plan. <br />1. The reclamation plan(s) Tab 14 text was updated appropriately for all of the above mentioned <br />drainage control features with exception of the CBA #1 and CBA #1 Sump. An appropriate soil <br />loss demonstration was provided for these features (new Appendix 14 -3) but the reclamation <br />plan description was not updated. CBA #1 is discussed on pages 14 -5 and 14 -11 but no <br />reclamation description is given. Please update the reclamation plan accordingly. <br />2. SCC is requesting that the remaining portion of Topsoil Pile 2 be left in place due to guy wire <br />anchors supporting transmission power poles buried in the remnant of Topsoil Pile 2. This <br />seems to be the appropriate course of action and the height of the pile is not significant to <br />require a variance from the approximate original contour. Please add a discussion to page 14- <br />10 describing the configuration of the pile. The pile should be stable and well vegetated, blend <br />into the surrounding terrain and shall not impede the drainage pattern of the surrounding terrain <br />or impound water. <br />Office of Office of <br />Mined Land Reclamation Denver • Grand Junction • Durango Active and Inactive Mines <br />