Laserfiche WebLink
<br />contour, and. granted a steep slope AoC variance as described in the <br />March 10, 1993 Renewal Findings Document. <br />The variance approval does not appear to comply with various <br />requirements of Rule 2.06.5 and 4.27.4, including demonstration <br />that the purpose of the variance is to allow for an alternative <br />land use, that the watershed will be improved, and that the surface <br />owner has knowingly requested the variance in writing. The AOC <br />determination will be re-evaluated upon submittal of the requested <br />maps and profiles. <br />3. The proposed non-backfilled highwall remnant indicated by <br />cross-section profile A-A' appears to conflict with Rule 4.27.4(1), <br />which states: <br />Unless retention of a highwall remnant is specifically <br />authorized pursuant to 4.14.1(2)(f) or 4.14.1(2)(g), the <br />highwall shall be completely backfilled with spoil <br />material, in a manner which results in a static factor of <br />safety of at least 1.3 using standard geotechnical <br />analyses. <br />Rules 4.14.1(2)(f) and (g) allow for conditional variances from <br />complete highwall elimination, under specific circumstances. The <br />former rule applies to underground mine highwalls demonstrated to <br />have been in place prior to August 3, 1977. The latter applies to <br />re-mining operations which were abandoned prior to August 3, 1977. <br />Neither rule would apply to the proposed highwall resulting from <br />future portal bench expansion, although (f) may apply to the <br />existing highwall if it can be documented that construction was <br />completed prior to August 3, 1977. Unless we have incorrectly <br />interpreted the referenced maps and cross sections, significant <br />alteration of the reclamation plan may be necessary prior to <br />resumption of operations. <br />III. SUMMARY OF REVISIONS AND STIPULATIONS <br />Stipulations <br />10 stipulations were attached to the April 10, 1993 renewal permit <br />(1, 3, 5, 7, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, and 20). No additional <br />stipulations have been placed on the permit since that time. One <br />additional stipulation (No. 21) had been included in the March 10, <br />1993 proposed decision document. The stipulation related to <br />documentation of final resolution of five audit appeals filed with <br />the Office of Surface Mining by Grand Valley Coal Company's parent <br />company, Adobe Mining. Required documentation was provided prior <br />to issuance of the renewal permit to Grand Valley Coal Company. <br />All of the stipulations attached to the permit apply to future <br />activities and remain in effect as set forth in the permit <br />document. <br />