Laserfiche WebLink
ii <br />:' Ms. Christine Johnston <br />Mountain Coal Company <br />Page 2 <br />August 13, 1997 <br />The SEDCAD run, since it shows drainage from the bench going to CSLY-11 B, does not <br />include a design for DSLY-18. Please provide the design. <br />6a. DMG will approve MCC's proposal to treat runoff from the shaft site with straw bales <br />and silt fences. It should be noted, however, that the Division is not confident that straw <br />bales and silt fences will be effective in treating runoff from the azea given the steep <br />slopes and considerable size of the area. MCC should be aware that the actual <br />performance of these structures will be monitored for compliance, and, if performance is <br />not achieved, enforcement actions may be pursued. <br />b. It should be noted that MCC's diagram of a typical straw bale installation does not <br />indicate that the bales aze keyed into the ground. Proper installation of a straw bale <br />includes excavation of a trench to set the bales below grade. <br />c. MCC states that a silt fence or berm will be used to treat runoff from the topsoil <br />stockpile. MCC needs to specify which will be used. <br />7. Since pertinent issues have not been resolved, the Division still cannot generate a <br />reclamation cost estimate. <br />The Division cannot approve this revision application unless the above adequacy concerns aze <br />addressed. In the absence of adequate responses, the Division must deny approval of the minor <br />revision application, effective August 13, 1997, unless a iequest to continue the decision date is <br />received. <br />Sincerely, <br />M' ae P. Boulay <br />nvironmental Protection Specialist <br />cc: David Berry, DMG <br />Susan Burgmaier, DMG <br />