Laserfiche WebLink
Mid-Term Permit Review - 4 - March 25, 1986 <br />Section 2.03.10 - This section should be updated to include the <br />recently issued NPDES permit. Also, the current status of the <br />other permits in this section should be included in the <br />narratives. <br />Section 2.04.6 - The discussion of acid forming strata should be <br />updated to include the post-grading overburden sampling and <br />findings. As mentioned in Section II(d) of this report, the <br />addendum to this section should be incorporated into the body <br />of this section. <br />Section 2.05.2 - a) The legal description on the first page of this <br />section should be changed to include Sections 14, 25, 26, T6N, <br />R87W. The operations plan should be amended pursuant to the <br />withdrawal of the Trout Creek No. 2 permit. <br />b) Discussions of the haul road should indicate that the <br />conditions mentioned existed during the mining operations. The <br />haul road decommission plan (Technical Revision) Should then be <br />incorporated into this section. Any commitments required by <br />stipulation to the revision should be included. <br />c) The Division has noted that the Haul Road Technical Revision <br />called for a ditch to be built from the explosives area <br />sediment pond to an adjacent meadow. Sun Coal needs to discuss <br />the rationale for not installing this ditch. In addition any <br />design changes that would be needed if this ditch is not <br />installed at a future date should be addressed. <br />d) The Division has noted that calculations for rolling dips <br />included in the revision specify dips to be 5 feet wide and 0.5 <br />ft. deep. Final specifications for the dips were 15 feet wide <br />and 1 ft. deep. The operator should explain and revise as <br />necessary. <br />e) The statement which says that all culverts on the haul road <br />discharge below the toe of the fill should be deleted, or <br />changed to specifically discuss each culvert; as they do not <br />all discharge below the toe. <br />f> The discussions of the sediment pond at the loadout appears <br />to be referencing the "old" pond. This discussion should be <br />updated to include the new pond location, dimensions, etc. <br />g) A more exact pond inspection schedule should be included in <br />this section. This may be referenced to the "Meadows <br />Monitoring Plan", which dill be discussed later in this report. <br />h) The certification for the sediment ponds on the backfilled <br />area should be incorporated. The Division has not received the <br />original copies of this certification ~.vhich the operator states <br />were mailed January 9, 1985. Therefore, one copy of the <br />original certification should be included in the revised permit <br />document. <br />