Laserfiche WebLink
Section V -Decision to Require Revisions <br />As a result of this midterm review, the Division will require revision(s) of the permit application <br />package to address the following concerns with the currently approved Seneca II Mine permit. The <br />revision will be due to be received by the Division on or before October 18, 1994. <br />1. The Executive Summary in Tab 1 of the approved permit application package is comprised <br />of a substantial amount of information that is no longer curzent. Please update the <br />summary. <br />2. Please update the list of owners (Tab 3) of surface and mineral rights within and adjacent <br />to the Seneca II Mine permit boundary. Please also, if necessary, update the accompanying <br />maps in Tab 3. <br />3. ~On page 7-25, in the section on the Wadge Coal Aquifer, PWCC states that, "higher levels <br />of barium may be attributable to the presence of barite (Hem, 1970) and low levels of <br />sulfate (Skougstad, 1963), although barite has not been identified in coal or overburden <br />materials. Subsequent chemical analyses from this well will determine the presence and <br />persistence of these constituents." <br />a) Have subsequent analyses been performed? <br />b) What have the analyses shown with reference to barium and sulfate wncentrations? <br />4. Page 7-279, in the discussion of alluvial valley floors, refers to Sections VII.B.2.c and <br />VII.B.l.c. Section V1IB.2.c is also referenced on page 7-262. This section does not appear <br />to exist. It would seem that the prober reference is to Section VII.A.l.c. If this is the case, <br />please make the appropriate corrections to the text. <br />5. Table 7-97, on page 7-334, "Sediment Pond Survey Results", does not appear to be curzent. <br />Please update the page with the results of the most recent sediment level surveys. <br />6. Please update Exhibit 7-7, "Surface Hydrology Map", to indicate which stock tanks have <br />been constructed and/or eliminated. <br />7. As was discussed during the review of Technical Revision No. 27, the reclamation cost <br />estimate update, the Division is concerned that there does not appear to be enough <br />available topsoil to reclaim the mine site with the required topsoil replacement depth. The <br />required replacement depth is 1.0 feet. The most recent topsoil balance, included in the <br />1993 Annual Reclamation Report (ARR), indicates that available topsoil will provide a <br />replacement depth of only .8 feet. This decreased redistribution thickness estimate is <br />attributed to high density stockpiles, and previous stockpile volume survey errors. PWCC <br />speculates that when the topsoil stockpiles are redistributed, the soil will swell. We are <br />Scnera 11 Mine (C~0-005) August 19, 1999 <br />Midterm Review 8 Third Permit Term <br />