Laserfiche WebLink
J. E. STOVER & ASSOCIATES ~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~ <br />r6s coMPASS DRIY6, sU1T~ tot 999 <br />GRAND JUNCTION, COLORADO 81506 <br />PHON&: (970) ]AS-4101, FAX t42-7908 <br />n~veeNCnvaexavc <br />nmve necr.~nnoN <br />November 26, 1996 <br />NOV ? 9 1996 <br />Gregory S. Bacon <br />Division of Ivfinerals & Geology <br />1313 Shermar- St., Room 215 <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />Re: Coal Ridge No. 1 Mine <br />Permit Renewal <br />Technical Revision (TR-013) <br />Permit C-84-065 <br />Dear Mr. Bacon: <br />~ECE~~IEC <br />crvn. ®rcnvearnvc <br />CON6r. MANAGRINRM <br />LIYISiCn Cf MinCr2lC E GECO9V <br />The DMG's letter dated October 8, 1996 transmitted its concerns regarding TR-013 and permit <br />renewal issues. Following are NCIG's responses to the DMG's questions and concerns. <br />Identification of Interests <br />Enclosed is a Certificate of Good Standing for NCIG issued by the Secretary of State of the <br />State ofMinesota. <br />Reclamation Cost Estimate <br />2. NCIG accepts the DMG's explanation on how the bond is calculated. NCIG does not intend <br />to pursue the bond calculation method any further. <br />Revegetation <br />No response required. <br />4. No response required. <br />No response required. <br />6. As noted before, the reclaimed hayland disturbed area will be evaluated only for productivity <br />as allowed in Rule 4.15.9. No baseline data were collected regarding this community. No <br />reference area was selected during the initial permitting process. As noted in M. S. Hayes' <br />August l5, 19961etter, it was Mr. Hayes' intention to address this issue prior to December <br />