My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL31417
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL31417
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:54:34 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 7:00:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982057
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
6/23/1989
Doc Name
TECHNICAL REVISION 4 RESPONSE TO STIPULATION 6
From
PEABODY COAL CO
To
MLRD
Permit Index Doc Type
BLASTING
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
:./° <br />Pa_y _ ................... <br />999 <br />• PEABODY COAL COMPANY t300 Soutn vale <br />W~st~m Dlvl~lon Fiagsten, Anzona fi600t <br />(602) 77~~6253 <br />~. <br />ems. gg,,,~ P <br />June 22, 1989 <br />JUtI ";q lygg <br />Mr. Carl Mount NI^JtCI LA :- <br />Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Division RECLAMATION ~~< < <br />1313 Sherman Street, Rm. 215 Dig •.:in,~, <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />RE: Technical Revision No. 4, Permit C-82-057, Response to <br />Stipulation No. 6 <br />Dear Mr. Mount: <br />Stipulation No. 6 to the Seneca II-W permit states: <br />"Peabody Coal Company must provide a detailed <br />description of the measures to be taken during and <br />after mining to ensure protection or mitigation of the <br />rights of water users which may be adversely affected <br />by mining. This should be submitted within 60 days of <br />permit issuance or prior to any disturbance within the <br />• mine permit boundary. At the same time as submittal to <br />the Division, Peabody must send copies to each of the <br />water right holders of record for comment." <br />As the Division is aware, Peabody had applied for a ground <br />water right for the production well at II-W with the State <br />Engineer which was subsequently denied due to <br />over-appropriation on Dry Creek and Sage Creek, and the <br />ground water from the Trout Creek aquifer being determined <br />to be tributary to these streams. Peabody, therefore, was <br />required to prepare an augmentation plan for the State <br />Engineer in order to obtain the ground water right for the <br />production well. <br />Attached, for incorporation into the Seneca II-W permit, is <br />a copy of the Augmentation Plan and Application for <br />Underground Water Right as prepared for Peabody by the law <br />firm of Musick and Cope (Boulder, Colorado) and submitted to <br />Water Division No. 6 on June 13, 1989. This plan is to be <br />inserted as new Appendix 7-10 (Tab 7, Volume IIIj. <br />The findings document for the II-W permit stated that the <br />Olson Spring and the Temple Well No. 1 could be affected by <br />the proposed mining operation. It further stated that <br />Peabody needs to show that the parties owning the water <br />rights which may be affected are aware of the possible <br />effect and are satisfied with Peabody's proposed plan. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.