My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ENFORCE20333
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Enforcement
>
ENFORCE20333
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:24:33 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 9:46:20 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980006
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
12/28/1994
Doc Name
PREDECSIONAL DRAFT KERR COAL CO MARR STRIP
Violation No.
TD1994020352002TV1
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.
/
8
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
Predecisional Draft <br />Kerr Coal Company - Marr Strip <br />n~ 2/28/94 <br />backfilled for up to three years. However; due`to the nature of the operations <br />that are indicated for this environmental setting, and the coal lease and <br />economics (see Section 816.59, Coal Recovery for an explanation), this span <br />of time between initial overburden removal and final backfilling and grading is <br />justifiable." <br />Of importance to the development of an alternative reclamation plan for the site are the <br />following factors: <br />The plan was followed by Kerr Coal up to the point where the coal contract was cancelled. <br />The plan called for the reclamation of the pre-law pit known as the Marr Pit. This <br />reclamation was accomplished. <br />The reclamation plan was based upon completion of the overall mining plan for the entire <br />coalfield. The plan maximized coal recovery and minimized double handling of overburden <br />by utilizing material from the succeeding pits to backfill the previous pit. This process <br />provided the material to reclaim the pre-law area. The ability to reclaim all areas (including <br />the pre-law azea) to the approximate original contour resulted from an excess of overburden <br />in Pits 2 and 3. <br />The material to backfill Pit 1 was to be obtained from Pit 2. Pit 2 was never opened because <br />of the contract cancellation. Therefore, there was no available material to backfill Pit 1 <br />without disturbing prior reclamation or other non-disturbed areas. <br />Pre-mining Condition <br />The area under study is a flat-top ridge running between a reclaimed pre-law area, not at <br />original contour, and an original valley feature. In the area of mining, the ridge ran in a <br />northeasterly direction. In the immediate area where Kerr Pi[ No. I intercepted the ridge, <br />there existed asteep-sloped, valley-type feature extending into the ridge (see Photo No. 1). <br />The approximate location of the ridge line adjacent to the undisturbed side of the ridge (west <br />side) is shown on Photo No. 2. In 1977, the disturbed area adjacent to the other side of the <br />ridge (east side) consisted of an unreclaimed, open pit (see Photos No. 1 and 2). At the time <br />of initial disturbance for Kerr Pit No. 1, the area next to the ridge on the west was a <br />reclaimed area with an elevation that appeared to be somewhat higher than that which may <br />have existed prior to the pre-1977 disturbance. <br />The Engineering Decision to Be Made <br />4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.