My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL38764
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL38764
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:58:25 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 9:49:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981020
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
8/28/1995
Doc Name
Midterm Review Findings Document
Permit Index Doc Type
Findings
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />Coal and coaly material will be scraped from the work <br />bench area and placed against the coal outcrop and sealed <br />adits. A portion of the material in the work area will <br />then be brought up to cover the outcrop and will be <br />graded to contours approximating those in existence prior <br />to the startup of mining operations (See Figure 3.1-1). <br />The maximum overall slope within the work area will be <br />approximately lv:3h in the upper portion of the area <br />along the natural cliff area. <br />To summarize the above discussion and excerpts, the Division's <br />Findings indicate that the portal area will not be returned to <br />approximate original contour, and that a steep slope AoC variance <br />will be granted; whereas the permit application package text states <br />that the portal area will be returned to approximate original <br />contour, and makes no mention of a steep slope variance. As a part <br />of this mid-term review process, this conflict between the permit <br />application package and the Findings of Compliance will need to be <br />resolved. To that end, we have the following comments and <br />questions: <br />1. Figure 1.1-2 and 2.2-1 referenced in the permit application <br />text as existing and pre-mining contours could not be located in <br />the Division's copy of the application. These exhibits or <br />equivalents, along with appropriate cross sections as provided in <br />Figure 3.1-1 "Reclamation Plan Map", will need to be provided to <br />allow for a thorough comparison of pre-mining and post-mining <br />topography, and evaluation of approximate original contour and <br />highwall elimination plans. The cross sections depicted as A-A' <br />and B-B' on Figure 3.1-1 should be provided for "existing" and <br />"pre-mining" topography, in addition to the sections on Figure 3.1- <br />1 which depict "proposed mine bench" and "reclaimed mine bench" <br />slopes. A map scale of 1"=100', with 5' contour intervals is <br />requested. <br />2. Although we could not locate a pre-mine topography map, <br />apparent original topography was inferred from existing topography <br />as depicted on Exhibit 2.2-4, and compared with the postmine <br />topography of Figure 3.1-1. A preliminary pre-mine/post-mine <br />comparison based on cross section A-A' appears to indicate that the <br />southern cut slope created by the proposed mine bench expansion <br />would be only partially backfilled, leaving an exposed highwall <br />remnant 40 to 50 feet high, at a grade of approximately 65$. In <br />general, the reclaimed configuration would result in a steeper <br />hillslope crest (the highwall remnant), but backfill slopes would <br />be significantly shallower than pre-mining slopes, and the valley <br />bottom would be elevated by the fill. The upper hillslope landform <br />would shift from convex prior to mining to slightly concave <br />following reclamation. <br />Evidently, the Division made the determination that the proposed <br />reclamation configuration did not represent approximate original <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.