REV100028 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

III III 11111111 IIIII C c~RUs ~ Yampa Valley Cyprus Yampa Valley Coal Corporation 29587 Routt County Road #27 Oak Creek, Colorado 80467 303-879800 June 17, 1992 Kent Gorham Reclamation Specialist Mined Land Reclamation Division 1313 Sherman Street, Room 215 Denver, CO 80203 uN i ~ 1~gp ~~ned land Reclam^+;nom n: •:...~n Dear Mr. Gorham; Re: 1992 Permit Renewal Application: Permit C-81-071, Mines 1, 2 and Eckman Park Enclosed please find FIVE copies of application and associated pages. Gi fications associated with the midterm completed within the past year, it is enclosed revised pages will need to be the current permit up to date. The timit in conjunction with the completion of final reclamation has resulted in a than that previously required, and as review process. The format of the renew the pages can either be kept separatel; the existing permit document body. the signed permit renewal ven that the final modi- review of this permit were anticipated that only the adressed in order to bring tg of the midterm completion ' mining and initiation of maller application package such should facilitate the al application is such that ~ or inserted directly into As discussed with Mr. Berry on June 16, CYCC experienced a power outage which knocked out our capabilities for word pro- cessing, photocopying, typing, and the phone system with the associated fax machines. As a result of this, CYCC was not able to get the package to the overnight delivery service prior to their deadline on June 16. Due to these circumstances beyond our control, Mr. Berry has indicated that the fax transmittal of the signed Permit Renewal Application Form along with associated materials as required under Rule 2.08(5)(2) today (June 17) followed by receipt of the enclosed signed original copies by overnight express would satisfy the deadline requirements of June 17 for CYCC's right to successive renewal. Within the renewal, the following items are worthy of mention 1) The acreages submitted with this application differ slightly from those submitted with the midterm review. This difference is due to the corrected acreages associated with reclamation liabilities and the transfer of facilities to Twentymile Coal Company (approximately 225 acres difference), along with a discrepancey in the previously submitted values of some 214 acres which may be attributed to the improper inclusion of a