PERMFILE118832 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

May 1992 Rockcastle Coal Company • Grassy Creek Mine • 1 • RESPONSES TO 2/10/92 CMLRD ADEQUACY COMMENTS May 1992 I) From field inspection and review of aerial photos, it does not appear that pushing in the embankment on Pond 3 would provide adequate fdl without disturbance of a heavily forested area. Where does Rockcastle propose to get an adequate amount of fill to reclaim the pond? Please provide details, including proposed final zopography cross-sections for the Pond 3 reclamation. Response: In developing reclamation plans for Pond 3, Rockcastle relied on an earlier plan developed from a series of surveyed cross-sections and profiles of the pond basin and adjacent areas. This existing plan documentation, illustrated by Figures R-1 through R-5, Pond 3 Reclamation Plan, indicates that given normal swell, cuts of 8-16 feet on the embankment side will provide sufficient material to backfill the pond basin and establish positive drainage. The proposed cut/fill activities will extend a maximum of 50 feet downslope from the outside embankment crest of Pond 3. While this will impact existing undisturbed forested aeeas, the extent of disturbance will be minimal and all disturbance will be reclaimed consistent with the approved reclamation plan. 2) The Division requesu that, once all issues have been resolved a map be generated that shows all remaining features, structures, roads, drains, ponds, wells, etc. which depict the completed • (or proposed) reclamation features. If this is to be Map R-I, please add: aJ Pit 1 b) Label Ditch 5-3 c) Add Surface, Spoil, and Groundwater Monitoring Sites d) Add California Crossing Locations Response: Rockcastle agrees that there is a need to document as-built or proposed final reclamation components. Map R-1 has been revised to depitt the location and disturbance limits of Pit 1, location and labelling for Ditch 5-3, and locations and designations for all hydrologic monitoring sites. The locations of California crossings will be determined during the course of the upcoming field work and the California crossings, along with any other final reclamation components will be added to the map once locations, configurations and design details are finalized. The completed map, with all appropriate revisions will be provided to the Division prior to completion of scheduled field work for review and final approvals. 3) The Division cannot reproduce the flow depth on Diuh S-2, which appears to be a rrrangular ditch. What are the specifics on this diuh design? Response: Ditch design parameters presented as Figure 1, Permanent Ditch Design Summary, incorrettly show Ditch 5-2 as a "V° ditch. Ditch 5-2 is designed and design flow depth is based on a trapezoidal ditch configuration with a 2 foot bottom width and 3H:1V sideslopes. Figure 1 has been corrected to reflett these design parameters and the . revised figure accompanies these responses. wa..dq,Q ovviaz s,.