Laserfiche WebLink
Adequacy Review - Bear No: 1 and No. 2 Mine <br />Ponds, Impoundment and Diversions - Rule 2.05.3(9) <br />1. In the Preliminary Adequacy Letter (PAL) of May I5, 1981, the Division <br />stated that although page 62 of the application indicated that no <br />alteration of natural drainageways had occurred at the Bear Mine, the <br />plan referenced a permanent diversion in Figure 2.04.3(2)(a)-1. The <br />Division requested a detailed design for the diversion and noted that the <br />structure would have to be designed for the 100 year, 24 hour event. <br />Responses in the revised application indicate that the ditch diverts <br />runoff from the draw at the inlet end, around the ARCO reve9etation test <br />plot and would not be removed by Bear Coal Company during the reclamation. <br />If the diversion is not to be removed, and natural channel configuration <br />restored, then appropriate channel cross sections and a discussion of <br />measures that will be taken to insure that channel dimensions approximate <br />premining conditions and blend with the undisturbed drainage following <br />reclamation will~be required. It must be clearly stated whether the <br />haul road and culvert are to be retained following cessation of operations, <br />or whether the drainage will be reestablished as a part of reclamation. The <br />construction and stabilization of the permanent diversion should be <br />specifically addressed in the reclamation plan. <br />The application should include a plan for the installation of road <br />riprap or other suitable structural controls to protect the sharp right <br />angled turn in the diversion. <br />2. The Division noted a number of problems in the PAL with regard to <br />sediment and drainage control at the Bear Mine. Most of the concerns <br />were satisfied in the revised application, but certain issues remain. <br />On page 69 of the revised application, the applicant states that "Pond <br />1 will not be in existence shortly after June 30, 1982, and pond 2 will <br />last only until ARCO starts construction of their freshwater pond". <br />However, on page 69a, it is stated that "ponds will not be removed until <br />the requirements of 4.05.6(9) are met". This situation must be <br />clarified in the application. <br />In a meeting on August 29, 1981, involving Bill Bear, leis consultants <br />Paul Storrs and Leroy Black, Bob Somrek of the State Bighway Department, <br />and Dan Mathews of the Division, the prohlems resulting from the !lighway <br />Department's proposed highway and river channel relocation project through <br />the Bear permit area were discussed. It was pointed out at the time <br />that sediment pond k2, south of the river and pond kl, north of the river, <br />would be impacted - both by the river relocation and by construction of <br /> <br />