GENERAL38587

• Permit No: C1981013
• IBM Index Class Name: General Documents
• Doc Date: 7/15/1986
• Doc Name: Midterm Review Findings Document
• Permit Index Doc Type: Findings
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

-3-
c) WFC does not have a permanent refuse disposal site approved
for the Golden Eagle Mine. The current storage site was
approved for temporary use only. The Division feels that
it is necessary to resolve this situation during the
mid-term process. Deficiencies in the original plan are
discussed in the findings document and permit review
correspondence. WFC should submit a technical revision for
refuse disposal which addresses all Division concerns and
fulfills the requirements of Stipulation 9. Failure to
obtain approval of a permanent plan may result in the
Division requiring WFC to remove all existing refuse from
the site.
d) It is the Division's understanding from review of the
Golden Eagle permit that no longwall or shortwall mining is
approved for this permit term. If this is not the case,
amendments to the documents' narrative, and a more detailed
discussion of subsidence will be necessary.
e) On page 2.05 - 25 it is stated that the relatively gentle
2:1 slopes on the refuse pile will enhance erosion
control. It is the Division's experience that 2:1 slopes
are neither relatively gentle, nor do they enhance erosion
control. WFC should either substantiate these statements
or delete them from the narrative.
f) It is stated in the permit that the sediment ponds will
remain after reclamation. WFC must demonstrate that these
ponds can meet the requirements for permanent impoundments
as set forth in Rule 4.05.9.
g) The reclamation plan for the refuse pile should reference
the coversoil depth study which will be used as a
reclamation guideline. In addition, a contingency plan
should be included in case the study shows that additional
material is needed.
h) The backfilling and grading plan should be revised to
reflect the backfilling of the portal depression which was
agreed to during the permitting process. The appropriate
maps and discussion from the draft findings responses
should be inserted into the permit.
i) The re vegetation plan should include the specific
recommendations of the CSU study in the narrative. In
addition the revegetation methodology (i.e., seeding and
mulching techniques) should be included in the plan. A
commitment to ripping compacted areas to a depth of 18"
should also be included.