My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL38581
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL38581
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:58:18 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 9:45:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981037
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
5/30/2000
Doc Name
Letter Clarifying Info on Citizen Complaint
From
CORLEY CO
To
OSM
Permit Index Doc Type
GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE
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.
/
2
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
• `7M III IIIIIIIIIIIII III <br />The Corley Company <br />Pnone692~5050 P.O BOa 1BP1 <br />May 30, 2000 COLORADO SPRINGS, COLORADO 80901 <br />Mt. James Fulton <br />Chief, Denver Field Office <br />Office of Surface Mining <br />1999 Broadway, Suite 3320 <br />Denver CO 80202-5733 <br />Dear Mr. Fulton: <br />We would like to add clarification to our citizen's complaint concerning the GEC <br />reclamation site. <br />In the eazly 1980s, the Colorado Mined Land Division now know as the Division of <br />Minerals and Geology (DMG) directed Harrison Western as permittee of the Newlin <br />Creek Mine to remove burning gob from their property to another location. Harrison <br />Western made an agreement with GEC to place the burning gob in GEC's unreclaimed <br />strip pits, and DMG approved this agreement. No attempt was made to cover the <br />exposed coal at the toe of the highwall. The burning gob was transported offsite to our <br />property without our consent, and according to the District Court of Fremont County, <br />Colorado in its judgment in GEC vs. Harrison Western, found that the burning gob started <br />the undergrotmd coal fire that continues today. <br />This part ofour complaint has two factors. GEC was awarded damages and paid over <br />$300,000 shortly after their reclamation bond was forfeited in 1987. We notified DMG <br />about the judgment, but somehow the $300,000 was never attached or recovered from <br />GEC. The other complaint is that DMG approved the transportation of burning gob from <br />Newlin Creek to our property and the offsite impact has been tremendous. Were either of <br />these two DMG actions correct? <br />We have walked the drainages from the GEC east pit and Magpie Creek, and we have <br />found considerable deposition of material further downstream than where your inspection <br />of Feb., 2000, went. We have taken several pictures and have identified their location <br />with GPS latitude and longitude coordinates. There is some debris from the GEC site <br />shown in the pictures, especially the fabric underlayment used in the reclamation efforts. <br />There are many dead trees in the deposit areas, and these deposit areas are readily <br />identified by a lazge amount of coal intermingling with the shale and sand deposits. There <br />are no exposed coal outcrops to yield this coal, and the coal is not oxidized and <br />decomposed; this coal is from a recent mine event such as GEC. We stopped walking just <br />before the Magpie and Newlin Creek confluens, but the tree deaths and sediment <br />deposition continue to that point. <br />We are posting the pictures on our web page of the interne[ at: <br />http://www. geocit ies.com/gecmine <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.