Laserfiche WebLink
IV. Disposal of Excess Sooil and Underground Development Waste <br />1. The Division is proposing to approve the use of a disposal area for <br />underground development waste. This waste dump is located east of <br />the creek in an area of previously mined strip pits. The proposed <br />design specified that the pile would move eastward into undisturbed <br />land. Original designs proposed the placement of 30,000 yd3 per <br />year, for a total of 159,000 tons of underground development <br />waste. Ultimately, 50,000 yards were placed at the site. <br />2. The Division has reviewed the design for the fill and proposes to <br />approve it. The design specifications for the underground <br />development waste pile may be found in Appendices B and D of the <br />permit application (4.09.1(2)). <br />3. The Division proposes to approve the use of a straw mulch to <br />control erosion, promote growth, and increase moisture retention on <br />the reclaimed underground development waste pile. (4.09.1(4)). <br />4. The Division proposes to approve the location of the disposal area. <br />(4.09.1(6)). <br />V. Coal Processing Waste Banks <br />1. The applicant submitted a plan for disposal of Hotchkiss Coal Yard <br />waste on July 25, 1984, at the approved underground waste <br />development disposal area within the permit boundary. Grand Mesa <br />accepted 7,000 tons during the summer of 1984, and currently has no <br />plans to accept any additional material from sites outside the <br />permit area. The applicant has demonstrated that disposal of such <br />materials will not adversely affect water quality or flaw, <br />vegetation, public health, or stability of the disposal area based <br />on hydrologic, geotechnical, physical, and chemical analyses. <br />Therefore, the Division approved of disposal of these materials. <br />(4.10.1(2)). <br />2. The Red Canyon underground development waste pile has no <br />sub-drainage system. The lower section of the waste pile was <br />constructed in an abandoned pit. The Division finds that this <br />alternative ensures the applicable static safety factor, stability <br />of the fill, and protection of the surface and ground water. <br />(4.10.3(5)). <br />VI. Backfilling and Grading <br />1. GMCC plans to utilize pre-law spoil material to achieve the <br />post-mining topography and cover the underground development waste <br />pile with four feet of cover. A renewal adequacy issue concerned <br />the validity of the use of two chemical analyses of pre-law spoil <br />samples which had been taken from the top four inches (4") and <br />showed no elevated parameter levels. The operator sampled three <br />-18- <br />