My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2017-08-18_REVISION - C1981010
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1981010
>
2017-08-18_REVISION - C1981010
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/21/2017 6:49:42 AM
Creation date
8/21/2017 6:44:14 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981010
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
8/18/2017
Doc Name
Adequacy Review - Preliminary
From
Trapper Mining Inc
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
PR8
Email Name
RAR
DIH
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.
/
10
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
18. As per Rule 4.05.9 9(d), if these ponds are expected to be permanent, please <br />demonstrate that no diminution of water quality or quantity to water right holders <br />will ensue. <br />Trapper Response to Comment 18: See above comment. The water rights demonstration would be made <br />at the time it were decided to retain ponds as permanent. <br />19. Without a mine plan DRMS finds it problematic to adequately assess the models <br />provided for the additional sediment ponds. Please provide subwatershed <br />delineations for expected disturbed and undisturbed areas. <br />Trapper Response to Comment 19: An enclosed map that delineates subwatershed characteristics is <br />included with the enclosed Appendix Q SEDCAD runs for Deacon, Deal and Jeffway sediment ponds. In <br />the absence of a definitive mine plan for the PR -7 Expansion Area, this map illustrates the engineering <br />assumption that all the lands within the current coal lease area will be disturbed at the same time. This <br />assumption insures that all ponds will be overdesigned relative to future needed pond capacities since this <br />amount of watershed disturbance would never occur at any one point in time. <br />20. Modelling for the Deal channel lacks a freeboard value. This value is required as <br />per Rule 4.05.3(7)(b) <br />Trapper Response to Comment 20: This information has been included in the enclosed revised SEDCAD <br />model information. <br />21. Modeling for Deacon Ponds does not differentiate between pond 1 and pond 2. <br />Trapper Response to Comment 21: This information has been included in the enclosed revised SEDCAD <br />model information. <br />Rule 2.05.3(5) Topsoil <br />This aspect of the Rules is adequately addressed. <br />Rule 2.05.4 Reclamation Plan <br />This aspect of the Rules is adequately addressed. <br />Rule 2.05.4(2)(b) — The Division has yet to compile a reclamation cost estimate (RCE) <br />associated with the new sedimentation ponds. This RCE will be completed once all <br />adequacy items that may include any changes to the proposed ponds are addressed. <br />Rule 2.05.5 Post Mining Land Use <br />This aspect of the Rules is adequately addressed in the permit. <br />Rule 2.05.6 Mitigation of Impacts <br />This aspect of the rules is adequately addressed. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.