My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL48922
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL48922
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:26:35 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 4:42:36 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980001
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
10/29/1981
Doc Name
Proposed Decision and Findings of Compliance
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.
/
42
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 />Within the permit area 8,998,850 tons of coal will be recovered by the proposed oper- <br />ation. Approximately 711,650 tons will be unrecoverable by this mining operation in <br />areas identified in Chapter 11, Part D. <br />XV. EXPLOSIVES (2.05.3(6)) <br />The applicant has submitted a blasting plan, Volume 6, Section 3.2, detailing the <br />types and approximate amounts of explosives to he used, control of maximum peak parti- <br />cle velocity, the blasting wa ming and site access control procedure, and the unavoid- <br />able hazardous conditions for which de viationS for the blasting schedule will be needed. <br />The applicant has submitted a plan for recording the required information for each <br />blast, and for submitting any pre-blast surveys to the Division. A copy of the blasting <br />schedule has been published in the local ne::spaper. <br />This section is in compliance with Rules 2.05.3(6) (~) and 9.08. <br />XVZ. BACK FILLING AND GRADING (2.05.3(b), 2.05.3(9), 2.OS.9(2)(a) 2.05.4(2)(c), <br />9.09, 9.13, 4.19) <br />Back filling and grading can be divided into two primary situations: The pits and <br />other disturbed areas. [dhen overburden is removed from a pit by dragline or backhoe, <br />back filling is accomplished by casting material into the adjacent, previously mined <br />pit. Handling of the box-cut material and final cut represent special-handling situa- <br />tions. In the Moffat Area, the hox-cut material will be spoiled down-hill, towards <br />Trout Creek, where there is sufficient area and up-hill, away from Trout Creek, where <br />the mining operation is close to Trout Creek. Valley. This will create an increase <br />in the ground elevation in the area of the box-cut of up to 45 feet, and the slope <br />towards the creek will be both increased and lengthened, but will not exceed Iv:3h <br />(Exhibits 3.3-3 and 3.J-4). Rule 4.19.1(2)(4) of the Colorado Permanent Regulatory <br />Program prohibits the permanent disposal of box-cut spoil outside of the mined area <br />unless the material is not required to achieve approximate original contours. Zn <br />addition, box-cut material :,•hich is not placed within the mined area is considered <br />excess spoil and specific design and construction criteria are required by Rule 4.09.1 <br />of the Colorado permanent regulatory program. These were not addressed by the applicant, <br />but are applicable in those areas :;here the spoil is cast towards Trout Creek. Mining <br />in the box-cut area of [~iest airlye has already been completed. <br />9. PRIOR TO DIu'TURB AiJCE I:V TlIF. FiOFFAT AREA, TFIE APPLICANT SFIALL SUB!dIT AND RECEIVE <br />hFPROI%AL OF A PROPOSED PLAA! COPlCERNIIJG THE DGPtiSIT *~hV OF EXCESS SFOIL OUTSIDE <br />OF TFFE MINED AREA. ADEn[J.ITE ANALYSES [JILh DE SnBMITTED TO DETERPIINE COMPLIANCE <br />WITH PART 4.09 OF TFIE COLORADO PERMANENT REGULATORY PROGRA7-0, INCLUL ING, BUT NOT <br />LIhfZTED TO, STADILIT1' APFA LYSES, CONSTRIJCTION DE'CAZCS' A7JD IIYDROLOGIC ASSESSMENT. <br />within the final cut aceas of the Moffat Area the final pi.t will occur where the coal <br />seam outcrops or in an area where up to 20 feet of overburden exists. 'C he final pit <br />will be filled by grading tho spoil towards the final cut, and in the case where a <br />highwall exists, the highwall will also be grdder] towards the final cut. The applicant <br />analyzed the worst-case for each of these situations. Where the final pit daylights <br />at the outcrop, the ground elevation will be decreased up to JO feet at the ridge top. <br />However, due to the slope of the hi 11 side, positive drainage will still occur. (Exhibits <br />3.4-3 and 3.4-4). In the other situation, the yround elevation will be reduced approxi- <br />mately 15 feet and large flat area approximately 100 feet along the slope in some areas <br />will be created. Because this is Located at the ridge top, drainage will not: be a pro- <br />blem. In the West Ridge Area, the applicant suhmit.ted a volumetric analysis For the <br />final cut to determine if sufficient material was available to fill the c•ut. The <br />Division concurs with the company's estimation that the material available is sufficient. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.