Laserfiche WebLink
<br />r~ The Division has no further concerns. As long as the rock <br />l underdrain is constructed with the proper rock size gradation, <br />the operator believes no filter blanket is needed as a filter. <br />60. The Division has no further concerns. The coal waste pile <br />/ topsoil pile and the coverfill stockpile have been added to <br />revised Map 20, Sedimentation Control Plan, and revised Map <br />21-1, Drainage Plans. <br />~. The Division questioned whether subsidence could impact <br />surface water flow in Terror Creek and Hubbard Creek. BRL <br />responded by stating that both creeks are outside the zone of <br />subsidence. BRL states that revised pages 2.04-36 through <br />2.04-40i were provided. However, it appears that only pages <br />2.04-38 through 2.04-40i were provided. Please submit revised <br />pages 2.04-36 and 37. Also, the Division still believes that <br />subsidence can create a drawdown of ground water, creating a <br />cone of depression. This drawdown could, conceivably, affect <br />water flow in Terror Creek and Hubbard Creek, if that flow has <br />a ground water contribution. Please comment on this. <br />62. The Division requested flow data for Terror Creek. BRL <br />responded by stating that the hydrologic monitoring program, <br />approved by the Division at the April 7, 1996 meeting, did not <br />include the monitoring of flow in Terror Creek. <br />~63. The Division requested that BRL provide surface water quality <br />data for Terror Creek and Hubbard Creek. BRL responded by <br />stating that the hydrologic monitoring program, approved by <br />the Division on April 7, 1995, and summarized in the April 11, <br />1995 letter, did not include any hydrologic monitoring of <br />Terror Creek and Hubbard Creek. <br />(/66. The Division has no further concerns. BRL pointed out that <br />Maps 95266-01 and 02 show the full extent of the coverfill <br />stockpile. <br />/ 72. The Division has no further concerns. Revised pages 2.05-23 <br />.!~ and 2.05-23i have been added to the permit application. As <br />stated on the original page 2.05-23, the haul road leading <br />from Highway 133 to the portal will be parially reclaimed. It <br />will remain as a light use road, including the road culverts <br />in the ephemeral drainages. Revised pages 2.05-23 and 2.05-23i <br />have been added, stating that the remaining light use road and <br />road culverts are compatible with the postmining land use of <br />rangeland and wildlife habitat. Also, it is stated that the <br />landowner is the operator and that the landowner approves the <br />keeping of the light use road and road culverts after <br />reclamation. <br />6 <br />