My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE58063
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
600000
>
PERMFILE58063
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:00:23 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 5:40:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980005
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/11/2001
Section_Exhibit Name
TAB 15 PERMIT RENEWAL, 1986
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.
/
122
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
C period. The longest active pit shown on Exhibit 12-1 occurs in 1987, • <br />and totals: 2830 feet for the 770 Wadge pit; 5950 feet for the 650 <br />lJolf Creek pit. These figures are used to generate quantities for the <br />four spoil reclamation estimate. Additionally, 1760 feet of 'rJadge open <br />pit (see Table 13-2) are costed for highwall reduction in 1987. No box <br />pit spoil reduction calculations have been included in this cost <br />estimate since all box pit spoils which were necessary to the execution <br />of this mine plan have already been excavated and graded. After <br />grading, box pit spoil costs would not be different from other costs <br />already contained in the reclamation cost estimate. <br />P. 14 2.05.4(c) - Paragraph 4 <br />In response to comments on Page 10-2.05.4(A) „ #4, highwall reduction <br />quantities have been calculated as shown on revised Table 13-1 and will <br />be included in the reclamation cost estimate. <br />2.05.4 Reclamation Costs <br />D. Equipment Costs <br />RESPONSE: <br />The hourly machine costs found on Pages 13-41 through 13-50 have been <br />adjusted as requested by CMLRD in the permit renewal adequacy coir~ments <br />(May 29, 1986, Pages 14-15). • <br />E. Reclamation Tasks <br />1. Backfilling and grading four spoil ridges - Gozer <br />RESPONSE: <br />Revised Page 13-51 uses a D-9L model dozer with a net correction factor <br />of 0.68. - <br />2. Haul Road Embankment Removal <br />RESPONSE: <br />Page 13-55 has been revised to show an adverse grade factor of 0.60 and <br />a conservative 1.25 swell factor. In addition, production for a D-10 <br />dozer (IOU) is estimated at 1,000 cubic yards/hour (Cat. Handbook, p. <br />51). <br />3. Sediment Pond Reclamation <br />RESPONSE: <br />Peabody has decided that hauling excess material away from sediment <br />ponds is not a cost effective means of reclamation. As a result, • <br />Peabody's new procedure for reclamation grading of sediment ponds will <br />bE to blend the embankment and any other material resulting from <br />sediment pond reclamation into the area immediately around the pond. <br />Accordingly, the reclamation cost estimate is revised to show only <br />42 Revised 8/27/36 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.