My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2010-07-09_REVISION - C1981019 (4)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1981019
>
2010-07-09_REVISION - C1981019 (4)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:15:29 PM
Creation date
7/12/2010 10:20:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981019
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
7/9/2010
Doc Name
Response to Mid-term Permit Review
From
Colowyo Coal Company
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
MT6
Email Name
JRS
SB1
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.
/
13
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
currently in the permit text continue to be appropriate. Colowyo is open however, to <br />adding text to its Annual Hydrology Report as requested in the 22 June 2010 letter from <br />the Division reviewing the 2007-2009 Annual Hydrology Reports. This text will <br />specifically state that a limited number of low impact spoil springs are expected to develop <br />occasionally but that their aerial extent and low level or non-existent surface flow will <br />have a very minor impact on surface (and shallow groundwater/perched aquifer) water <br />quality and quantity in the future. <br />Rule 3.02.2 -- Determination of Bond Amount <br />8. Pursuant to Rule 3.02.2(4), Colowyo may provide the Division with a midterm <br />reclamation cost estimate for review and approval. The Division completed a reclamation <br />cost estimate with Permit Renewal 05 (approved 15 September 2009) and determined that <br />the amount of bond held was sufficient to cover the remaining reclamation in the event of <br />pen-nit revocation and bond forfeiture. Since equipment costs have not been updated since <br />that time, the RN-05 estimate is still valid. Colowyo did submit a reclamation cost <br />estimate under the cover of Technical Revision 85 but the Division deemed that revision <br />incomplete on 1 March 2010. The Colowyo estimate included changes to the mining and <br />reclamation plans that were proposed in Technical Revision 81 that have not yet been <br />approved. If Colowyo chooses to include a midterm review reclamation cost estimate it <br />should be for the currently approved reclamation plan. <br />Colowyo's Response: <br />Upon the approval of TR-81, Colowyo will proceed with TR-85, which will update the <br />bond post-mining topography and incorporate the most recent cost estimates for <br />Colowyo's bond. <br />Rule 4.05 - Hydrologic Balance <br />9. The Division and Colowyo have had many discussions over the last five plus years <br />regarding the long-term hydrologic stability of the Prospect watershed. While these <br />discussions have been mainly focused on the Prospect watershed, they are equally <br />applicable to the East Taylor and West Pit watersheds (for the West Pit) and the Section <br />28 and West Taylor watersheds (for the South Taylor Pit). These discussions have <br />centered on controlling and slowing the runoff from the long, steep reclaimed slopes at the <br />Colowyo Mine. While Colowyo did implement some of the ideas during the 2009 <br />reclamation season (contour ditches and ripping the topsoil prior to seeding), the Division <br />is requesting a comprehensive and detailed plan for controlling the runoff from the <br />reclaimed slopes, including, but not limited to, contour ditches, ripping, straw bales, <br />reconstructed drainage channels, stock ponds and the possible addition of non-NPDES <br />sediment ponds within the reclaimed area. This plan needs to be specific enough for each <br />of the pits/watersheds to address their unique characteristics. The plan must be prepared <br />by Colowyo and approved by the Division ahead of reclamation and with sufficient detail <br />to ensure proper implementation in the field. The locations of runoff control measures, <br />such as contour ditches and stock ponds, need to be planned prior to reclamation to ensure <br />they function as designed and have the desired effect of controlling and slowing the runoff <br />and providing adequate sediment control. While a minor amount of "field fitting" may be <br />necessary, the location should be well thought out based on the topography and other <br />characteristics of the watershed. Sediment and runoff control features should be located <br />on a map, to ensure that they are properly located and in the necessary area(s). This plan
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.