My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV13448
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV13448
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 1:24:30 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 10:42:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
9/21/1994
Doc Name
MR 128 MID TERM REVIEW WEST ELK MINE PN C-80-007
From
DMG
To
MTN COAL CO
Type & Sequence
MR128
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.
/
9
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
Minor Revision No. 128 Page 5 <br />September 21, 1994 <br />9. Map 58 has been revised to include all disturbed areas of the <br />West Elk Mine. No further response is required with respect <br />to base map coverage. Please see question #8 above, for <br />additional required revisions to Map 58. <br />10. Page 2.05-45 (now 2.05-48) states, "Subsoil, not fully <br />suitable for seedbed material, is also excavated, as <br />necessary, for construction purposes." This statement <br />indicates that some subsoil is suitable for seedbed material. <br />The Division asked MCC to commit to using subsoil only for <br />reclamation; covering the refuse pile with non-toxic cover is <br />considered reclamation. The Division did not ask MCC to <br />utilize the subsoil for use as topsoil. MCC's response <br />indicates that subsoil stockpiled for reclamation at the lower <br />refuse pile will be used only for reclamation at the lower <br />refuse pile. Page 2.05-45 (Table 47) includes only a volume <br />for the subsoil stockpile in Sylvester Gulch, which is the <br />pile MCC should commit to using only for reclamation. <br />If subsoil located in fills will be utilized for final <br />reclamation, as stated on revised page 2.05-45, then the fills <br />should be identified and not contaminated with coal. If the <br />subsoil in these fills is utilized elsewhere, how will the <br />post-mining contours be effected? <br />11. Minor Revision No. 67, approved February 6, 1990, permitted <br />the placement of a buttress at the lower refuse pile. In <br />MCC's application, it was noted that an average of one foot of <br />subsoil will be placed over the gob prior to the placement of <br />rock. The Division approved the revision because they <br />believed that the buttress would increase the overall <br />stability of the facial slope by retaining its toe. In <br />addition, the buttress will provide erosional armorment <br />adjoining Sylvester Gulch. With this approval, presumably, <br />the Division also approved the placement of one foot of <br />subsoil cover. <br />The purpose of the cover is to provide a sufficient seedbed <br />over the refuse pile. As the buttress will not be vegetated, <br />then the amount of cover in this area is sufficient. However, <br />if the buttress were ever to be removed, MCC should place the <br />required amount of topsoil and seed the area. The current <br />page 2 of Exhibit 51 is acceptable, with the added statement <br />"in compliance with the requirement to place 9-12 inches of <br />subsoil over the waste material". The other two sentences <br />added on page 2 and 3 should be withdrawn. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.