GENERAL36786 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

of 1,700,000 tons per yeaz (which is more than double the projected maximum annual production during the permit term). Because the projected annual depletion is less than 100 acre feet, the referenced depletion fee waiver remains applicable. 16. The Division has contacted the Office of Surface Mining, Reclamation Fees Branch. As of this time, the operator is current in the payment of reclamation fees required by 30 CFR Chapter VII, subchapter R (2.07.6(2)(0)). Current payment was verified through AVS checks on July 3, 2003 and January 4, 2005. SF.t'TTON R - Rnle 4 I. ROADS -Rule 4.03 Road design and construction narrative is found in Section 2.2.2 of the permit application package (PAP). Road reclamation is discussed in Section 3 of the PAP. Road plan and profile maps, and cross sections aze provided on Exhibits 2.2-4 and 2.2-5. Permitted roads aze an existing access/haul road extending from State Highway 139 to the portal facilities area which was constructed in the spring of 1977, and light use roads in the sediment pond/soil stockpiles vicinity. The operator has committed to reclaim all roads to approximate original contour (AOC), with no road segments to be retained for the post mining land use. An original haul road certification dated June 7, 1998, and a Road Compliance Statement in Lieu of Certification dated September 18, 1997, is included in Appendix O of the PAP. Rule 4.03.1(I)(d)(ii), which became effective in 1996, allows for a relevant showing of compliance with performance standazds in lieu of certification. The compliance statement was submitted to address compliance with regulatory requirements that became effective subsequent to road construction and subsequent to the original certification. The Division proposes to approve the following specific variances A. Haul Roads 1. The Division proposes to approve cut slopes steeper than 1v:0.25h in rock. Figure 2.2-5 of the application indicates a section of the road which had to be cut into the canyon wall where the cut slopes are approximately 1v:0.13 horizontal (cross section C-C'). A safety hazard posed by the steep upper portion of the cliff in this location was mitigated by the operator by grading the crest of the slope to a lesser grade, in the spring of 1988. Possible slides from this cut slope do not present a potential for serious environmental harm. Any small debris from the cut slope or cliff above is contained by the roadside ditch system that is regulazly maintained and directs drainage to the sedimentation pond. In the event of a slope failure at this location, slide material would likely block the drainage ditch and accumulate on the road. Any such blockage of the drainage system would be temporary and would not result in significant environmental damage. Neither the road cut slope nor the upper cliff slope above the cut have demonstrated instability since the crest slope reduction was performed. For these reasons, the Division finds that the cut slope steeper than 1v:0.25 in rock will not result in significant environmental harm or harm to the public health and safety (4.03.1(3)(d)(i)). 12