Laserfiche WebLink
iii iiuiiiuiiiiii <br />PEABODY COAL COMPANY <br />ROCKY MOUNTAIN DIVISION <br />10770 EAST HARVARD AVENUE <br />SUITE 400 <br />DENVER. COLORADO 003!1 <br />c!O!1 !l7~DB0! <br />July 9, 1985 <br />Mr. L. Ronel Finley <br />U. S. Department of the Interior <br />Fish and Wildlife Service <br />Colorado Field Office <br />730 Simms Street, Raom 292 <br />Golden, Colorado 80401 <br />Dear Mr. Finley: <br />RE: SENECA II-W PERMIT APPLICATION REVIEW <br />I ~ ~ ~ Y <br />JuL~ C~ <br />MINED LAND <br />RECLAMATION DIVISI~"' <br />In response to your memo of May 20, 1985 to Mr. Bill Kovacic (OSM), the meeting you <br />attended with Mike Lockhardt at our Seneca Mine with Tom Wainwright and Vern <br />Pfannenstiel and CMLR personnel on June 3, 1985, and subsequent conversations between <br />Mike Lockhardt and myself (phone conversation on June 25, 1985), following are <br />Peabody's understandings of the agreements reached concerning wildlife issues in the <br />Seneca II-W application. <br />I. Raptor Impacts -There is still some confusion as to how BLM is applying unsuit- <br />ability criteria pertaining to eagle nests, especially, as in the case of the II-W lease, <br />in lease renewal situations. However, as far as permitting is concerned, Peabody <br />will honor the Hubberson Gulch pair buffer zone during construction, per our agree- <br />ment as stated in the revised application. We will monitor the effects of construc- <br />tion on this eagle pair and, if the monitoring shows we have had an impact on this <br />pair's nesting, Peabody will enter into consultation with USFWS to determine appro- <br />priate mitigatory action. In my conversation with Mr. Lockhardt on June 25, we <br />agreed That it would be better to base any mitigatory action on more current data <br />(current to the time of action) than to specify activity at this time, such as enhanc- <br />ing cliff nesting substrate, which may not be appropriate. <br />Concerning the red-tailed hawk's nest, Peabody will ascertain the exact location of <br />the nest. If construction would cause abandonment of a nesting attempt, or if the <br />nest is to be directly destroyed (neither of which is currently anticipated), then <br />Peabody understands the requirement to obtain a special permit and mitigation <br />program for this nest from USFWS. There is no buffer zone around the red-tailed <br />hawk's nest. <br />Peabody's responsibility and authority for proper construction of powerlines is <br />limited to the mine site from the substation from which we buy the power from <br />Yampa Valley. The COOP is responsible for getting the power to that substation, <br />