Laserfiche WebLink
Stephen W. Seifert <br /> January 13, 1993 <br /> Page 4 <br /> should permit some reduction of the $800, 000 allocation. Further <br /> reductions may be achieved if a purchaser of the property has a <br /> post-mining use for the structures located on the property, which <br /> could eliminate the need to remove some of the buildings, <br /> electric lines, and facilities. <br /> One of the uncertainties involving the cost of <br /> reclamation is whether Resources will be given time to remove <br /> structures, so as to shift the expense of removal to M&E. For <br /> example, one of the highest priorities in the entire reclamation <br /> project is sealing mine portals . The biggest problem is the air <br /> shafts which now are covered with the large fans and related <br /> structures (these fans and structures are the equivalent of a <br /> large building) . M&E is required to remove the fans and <br /> structures, but they understandably want to delay removal until a <br /> purchaser is at hand, because the cost of removal will be <br /> considerable. The M&E contract gives M&E until July 1994 to <br /> remove these structures. If regulatory agencies require earlier <br /> removal, it will be at Resources ' expense. <br /> Assuming that we can achieve our goal of shifting over <br /> most of the expenses of removal of structures to M&E, we should <br /> be able to hold the cost of reclamation to between $1 .5 and 2 <br /> million under the existing reclamation plan. <br /> At the November 5 meeting, Resources indicated that it <br /> intended propose modifications to the current reclamation plan <br /> which would achieve further cost savings. After further <br /> consideration, Resources has concluded that the existing plan <br /> should not be modified, because modifications could lead to <br /> greater rather than less expense. <br /> The problem with modifying the plan is illustrated by <br /> the reclamation of haul roads. There are 16 miles of haul roads <br /> on Forest Service land alone. The existing plan, which was <br /> approved by the Forest Service, provides that haul roads should <br /> be "modified but not eliminated. " If the reclamation plan is <br /> reopened, the Forest Service is likely to seek more stringent <br /> requirements, as evidenced by the letter of Kevin Riordan, <br /> District Ranger, to Michael Long of the MLRD dated October 28, <br /> 1992 ( "none of the haul or exploration roads should be left open <br /> for use after the final reclamation is completed . . . our goal <br /> is the complete reclamation of Coal Basin" ) . <br /> Resources ' representatives, John Reeves, Diane Delaney, <br /> and Bruce Collins, attended a meeting with Tony Waldron of the <br />