REV100490

• Permit No: C1980007
• IBM Index Class Name: Revision
• Doc Date: 7/6/1993
• Doc Name: THIRD ADEQUACY REVIEW TR 63 LOWER REFUSE PILE RECONFIGURATION WEST ELK MINE FN C-80-007
• From: DMG
• To: MOUNTAIN COAL CO
• Type & Sequence: TR63
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
999
STATE OF COLORADO
DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY -
oF' ~~
Department of Natural Resources ~ roy
~~.b
1313 Sherman St., Room 215 . 'a'~"rye o
Denver, CO 80203 ~e,~o~
Phone: [phone] ' ~'a'+e
FgX:[phone]
Rny Romer
Governor
July 6, 1 9 9 3 M1LChaeIB.Long
Drv niun Duecinr
Ms. Kathleen Welt
Mountain Coal Company
West Elk Mine
P.O. Box 591
Somerset, CO 81434
RE: Third Adequacy Review; Technical Revision No. 63 (Lower Refuse
Pile Reconfiguration); West Elk Mine; File No. C-80-007
Dear Ms. Welt;
The Division has reviewed MCC's submittal dated July 1, 1993, which
is in response to the Division's second adequacy review. The
following transmits the Division's remaining concerns and
summarizes issues that have been resolved.
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PILE CONFIGURATION AND PHASING
1. The replacement of Figures 2.1 to 2.5 with Tables 1 and 2, is
acceptable to the Division; therefore, no further response is
required.
2. The utilization of 85 pcf is acceptable in Table 2, as this is
the average density in all refuse compaction tests performed
to date. No further response is required.
3. Because a variance to Rule 4.10.4(5), which requires refuse
piles to be covered with four feet of non-toxic material, has
been approved for the Mountain Coal Company refuse pile, the
calculation of subsoil and topsoil volumes based on 18-24" of
cover in Table 3 is appropriate. This variance was processed
in Technical Revision No. 53. No further response is
required.
4. A. See response to question #3 above.
B. See response to question #3 above.
C. Does the amount of subsoil stockpiled in Phase IV, 38,072
cubic yards, include the amount used for road fills and
other mine site fills? Or is this number the true amount
contained in the stockpile?