GENERAL39961 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~: Mr, Steve Sel f -2- Removal of Rifle Loadout from the Permit Area February 4, 1991 GCA is concerned that, without an approved rail loadout facility the Eastside Mine is not a viable operation. They indicate that East side has plans to build a power plant adjacent to the mine and that operations contemplated during the current permit term and for the life of the mine have not been adequately addressed. We request that you address the question of whether or not a rail loadout or additional facilities associated with transporting coal to market are anticipated during this permit term or during the life of the mine, pursuant to Rules 2.05.2, 2.05,3(2)(b), 2.05,3(3)(c), 2.05.3(7), and 2.06.10. If no rail loadout or associated facilities are anticipated, we ask that you address Eastside's plans for transporting coal to market at the anticipated maximum level of production. Further, we ask that you address the status of any plans to construct a power plant adjacent to the mine. el owing Coal Dust and Potential Hydrologic Impacts GCA indicated that they were concerned with excessive coal dust generation during coal loading artd hauling operations. We have contacted the Department of Health, Air Pollution Control Division (APCD) and requested that they inspect the site upon resumption of operations to verify compliance with the APCD permits and determine if any further control measures are warranted and feasible. The GCA letter also states that some domestic use is made of water from the Farmer's Irrigation Ditch immediately downstream of the mine which could potentially be impacted by the operation. No mention of domestic use or potential impacts to such use is made in the permit application. We contacted the Silt Water Conservancy District and they indicated that there was likely some use of the water in small quantities for domestic uses other than drinking. We ask that you identify the nature and extent of any domestic use and possible impacts to such use in your written response, pursuant to Rules 2.04.7(3) and 2.05.6(3)(b)(iii), (iv) and (v). If there is indeed domestic use of the water which is potential]y affected by the operation, the Probable Hydrologic Consequences section of the permit application will need to be modified accordingly. We request that you respond to the concerns outlined March 1, 1991. Please feel free to contact me if you Since el L J C ~~ Dan athews Reclamation Specialist DTM/ern CC: Mike Savage, MLRD Steve Renner, MLRD in this letter by have any questions. 3191E