My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV98792
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV98792
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 3:22:49 AM
Creation date
11/22/2007 12:21:24 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981014
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
6/27/1995
Doc Name
TR 20 SOUTHFIELD MINE PN C-81-014
From
DMG
To
ENERGY FUELS COAL INC
Type & Sequence
TR20
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.
/
3
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
~:l~ <br />Technical Revision No. 20 Page 2 <br />June 27, 1995 <br />going through the Southfield loadout will remain once the <br />site is reclaimed by EFCI. ATSFR should state that the <br />line serves more than the Southfield loadout; therefore, <br />the tracks will remain. <br />*While the general pre-mining landform morphology has <br />been reconstructed, it must also be designed to ensure <br />that adverse hydrologic impacts are minimized onsite, and <br />prevented offsite. The Division is concerned about the <br />erosion control that will exist once the sediment ponds <br />in the east and west loadout areas are reclaimed. Please <br />provide design information to ensure a stable drainage <br />bottom for the locations where flow will exit the east <br />and west side of the loadout. Please explain and show <br />how the area will be blended to limit erosive velocities. <br />*In review of cross-sections B-B', C-C', and D-D', it <br />appears that there may not be enough material cut from <br />areas to fill other areas during reclamation. The <br />reclamation plan and final topography proposal must <br />include a detailed material balance demonstration which <br />shows that there will be adequate material available to <br />ensure that the proposed topography can be constructed. <br />Please provide more information to justify EFCI's <br />calculation of 7,700 cy for the west loadout and 10,000 <br />cy for east loadout. <br />*In review of cross-sections C-C' and D-D', the pre- <br />mining surface is approximately 15 feet and 12 feet, <br />respectively, lower than the post-mining surface. The <br />Division considers the amount of variation between the <br />pre-mine and post-mine topography to be significant. <br />Please explain why the reclamation plan has been designed <br />as it is. <br />*The post-mining topography must be designed to ensure <br />both erosional and mass stability. The Division believes <br />that the final landform has been designed to provide <br />slope gradients and slope lengths which will not be <br />subject to accelerated surface erosion, (with the <br />exception of the area around the reclaimed sediment <br />ponds). EFCI should provide documentation that the <br />reconstructed landform was designed to a minimum safety <br />factor of 1.3. <br />Revised page 2.05.4-11, Map 29 and Map 32 are acceptable. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.