1997-03-05_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981018

• Permit No: C1981018
• IBM Index Class Name: General Documents
• Doc Date: 3/5/1997
• Doc Name: Midterm Review Findings Document
• Permit Index Doc Type: Findings
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

... ... .... .. .
The schedule on page IV-25A should be amended to adjust for
the winter work delay, but should reflect the high priority
nature of the project.
In addition, one modification to the proposed treatments is
recommended. One of the scheduled treatments is compactor
slope imprinting. This treatment would likely be effective in
minimizing minor rill erosion and retaining sediment from
overland flow generated by rainfall on the refuse outslopes if
applied on an on-going basis to maintain surface roughness.
However, imprinting would not be effective in controlling
gully erosion resulting from seep areas or concentrated flow
from the large, relatively flat active benches. Areas of
concern have been noted during recent inspections on the north
facing outslopes of Refuse Area 2/3 and Refuse Area 4 , and it
is recommended that temporary erosion control ditches be
specified as interim erosion control measures to be
implemented in conjunction with the slope imprinting, in these
locations.
2.05. 3(8)
7. It is not clearly documented whether sufficient topsoil and
subsoil material has been salvaged from the refuse areas
disturbed to date to replace the required four foot cover
thickness. Applicable stockpile survey data should be
provided to document the quantity of topsoil and cover
material which has been stockpiled, relative to the acreage of
existing refuse area disturbance. If volume is not sufficient
to replace the four foot cover thickness , the permit will need
to be revised to address how the requirement will be met.
Projection of topsoil and cover material quantities available
for refuse• areas to be disturbed in future permit terms should
be summarized, and applicable data should be referenced.
Again, if projected volume is not sufficient to replace a four
foot cover thickness , the permit will need to be revised to
address how the requirement will be met.
The status of the refuse cover depth study as discussed in
Section v of the application should be summarized and updated.
If results of the study are to be used as a basis for a
reduced refuse cover thickness, the rationale will need to be
addressed in the application.
2 .05. 4 (2 ) (e)
8 . On page V-21 , it is stated that "disturbed areas which will
not be redisturbed during the mine operation or final
regrading were backfiIled, regraded and revegetated as part of
the original construction work. " It is assumed that such
areas would consist primarily of various "laydown" areas along
the conveyor route, and in the vicinity of the slot storage