Laserfiche WebLink
r <br />1 <br />v/ ~~ <br />Page 3 <br />Adequacy Review d78-252 <br /> accurate characterization of the depths of overburden, depth eo the coal <br /> scams and thickness of the coal seams. This Information can be marked <br /> confidential. <br /> (7) Hlne Plan Map - Map D-1 ~:. <br />• The Mlne Plan Hap should clearly delinlate by legend reference which line <br /> shows the permit bnund9ry and wlilch line shows the extent of proposed <br />i~ ptt workings. Also, the numbers shown on the map should be related <br />7 <br />~. back to a mining timetable narrative so that the staff has a clear idea <br />_~~ of when and what areas will be disturbed at any one time. <br />'•~, #8) A chart showing phase number, yeaerooaeburden stripped, year area <br />,~- m~ied, year area regraded and year area feeded would be most helpful. <br /> . In addition to hetp(n9 us clarify the mining timetable, tfie staff could <br /> ' determine how reclamation will proceed In conJunctlon with mining so as <br />i to keep areas distrrbed at any one time to those figures cited In the <br /> application. ,. <br />';' (9) The mine maps also Indicate that mining and dldlvsteiodltllEch are <br /> planned to be within 100 feet of Stollstelmer Creek. mining within <br /> 100 feet of on lntermlttent or perrenlal creek Is prohibited In 30 CFR <br /> ' 713.17(d) (3) unless approved by the regulatory authority. .Before we <br /> could approve such a plan, the effect on water quantity or quality on <br /> Stollstelner Creek must be evaluated. This should be addressed in <br /> Exhibit G. <br />IV Exhlblt E - Reclamation Plan <br />The reclamation plan, as currently presented, is fragmented and does not <br />easily allow for a comprehensive evaluation. It is suggested that the <br />reclamation plan be rewritten to specifically address the mayor categories <br />of the Rule 6 performance standards. Staff comments o+ill be addressed <br />along those lines. , <br />(1) Backfllling and Groding <br />(I) The plan should describe how overburden will be replaced in <br />mined out areas and how this material will he adequately compacted. <br />(11) How will final graded slppesccmmpare with the .pre-mining <br />topography? <br />(111) If highwalls do remain, how will they be stablizedl, Also, <br />the applicant should provide an alternate grading plan In the event <br />that underground mining will not be conducted. <br />(Iv) A plan for d[sposal of I~rgn rocks and of .acid-firming~or toxic <br />prodcuing materials shall be provfdnd. The Group Planning Report <br />shows a pH for the slack coal. end spoil bank of 3.7, certainly en <br />acidity problem. •. <br />(v) A plan far the regrading of all sediment pounds aed ditches should <br />be''prov(ded once the area 16 .reclaimed and post-mining sediment yields t <br />is as low as pre-mining sediment yields. <br />(vl) A plan for building removal should be provided ; <br />(2) To{{ltolling <br />(1) How much topsoil will be spread over regraded areas? ~ .. <br />(It) What will happen to a~eeeefofowhich excess topsoil is not <br />available? <br />(3) Revegetatlon <br />(f) The three species grass mixture'recommended by the SCS does <br />nOt satisfy the requirement for a diverse seed mixture emphasising native <br />species. .. <br />(il) 1F:n Initial planting with en annual crop may be suitable, but a <br />