Laserfiche WebLink
March 17,2016 C-1981-035/King Coal Mine RAR <br /> TR-24 Midterm Review Response <br /> o The Division issued an adequacy review on 14 June 2015. On 14 July the Division received a <br /> response to the June 2015 letter addressing unresolved adequacy items. The Division reviewed <br /> this submittal, sent additional adequacy questions to GCC on 26 October 2015. DRMS is in the <br /> process of reviewing GCC's adequacy response of 30 November 2015. The decision date has <br /> been extended to 31 May 2016. <br /> TR-26 Surface and Groud Water Monitoring <br /> o The division received TR 26 on 22 October 2015, found it complete on 29 October 2015. DRMS <br /> sent adequacy questions to GCC in November of 2015 to which GCC responded 25 March 2016. <br /> The decision date has been extended to 31 May 2016. <br /> INSPECTION.- <br /> SIGNS AND MARKERS Rule 4.02 <br /> o The mine site identification signs inside the entrances to the facilities (King I and King II) from <br /> County Road 120 were intact, displaying all required information: mine name, operator name, <br /> address, phone number and DRMS permit number and contact information. <br /> o As stated in the permit; boundary markers actually indicate the surface disturbance area or <br /> affected area. Markers identified during this inspection were installed as required throughout the <br /> areas visited and appeared in good repair. <br /> o Topsoil stockpiles observed were clearly marked with identifying signs. <br /> ROADS Rule 4.03 <br /> Construction 4.03.1(3), 4.03.2(3);Drainage 4.03.1(4), 4.03.2(4); Surfacing and Maintenance 4.03.1(5) <br /> and(6) 4.03.2(5) and(6). <br /> o Roads in and around the facilities area were clear of snow, and notwithstanding mud appeared <br /> stable, and in good condition. No fugitive dust was being generated. The main haul road at King <br /> II was clear of snow, muddy and appeared in good condition. <br /> o Roads at King I were clear of snow. <br /> SUPPORT FACILITIES-Rule 4.04: <br /> o Volumes of coal at both stack tubes (#1 and#2) appeared to be contained in the designated areas. <br /> o There were haul trucks waiting for loading with coal. <br /> HYDROLOGIC BALANCE-Rule 4.05 <br /> General Requirements 4.05.1; Effluent Standards 4.05.2; Divergence and Conveyance of Overland <br /> Flow 4.05.3; Diversions 4.05.4; Sediment Control Measures 4.05.5, 4.05.6; Discharge Structures <br /> 4.05.7; Impoundments 4.05.9; Ground Water Monitoring4.05.13; Underground Mine Entry 4.05.10; <br /> Surface and Ground Water Monitoring 4.05.13; Stream Buffer Zones 4.05.18: <br /> o The King I and II sediment ponds were holding some water and not discharging. <br /> o The Clear Water Ditches at King I and II were clear of snow and appeared free of debris. Clear <br /> water ditch at King I appeared dry and was not transmitting water at the time of inspection. The <br /> Number of Partial Inspection this Fiscal Year: 6 <br /> Number of Complete Inspections this Fiscal Year: 3 <br /> Page 3 of 10 <br />