My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2012-01-06_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1982057
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Coal
>
C1982057
>
2012-01-06_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1982057
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:47:12 PM
Creation date
1/9/2012 12:27:14 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982057
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
1/6/2012
Doc Name
Proposed Decision & Findings (PR6)
From
DRMS
To
Seneca Coal Company, LLC
Type & Sequence
PR6
Permit Index Doc Type
Findings
Email Name
SLB
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.
/
62
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
original application were completed prior to submittal in 1982. Subsequently, in <br />connection with operations at the existing Seneca II Mine, the applicant has completed <br />topographic observations of reclaimed land. These aerial observations have determined <br />that the actual bulking factor slightly exceeded the original projection (19.8% in the <br />operator's terminology, versus 15.3 % projection). <br />In completing its review of the amended application, the Division converted the <br />applicant's analytical projections into an analytical format more familiar to the Division. <br />The applicant projected an average overburden swell factor (loose swollen overburden <br />volume divided by bank overburden volume) of 1.32. <br />Further, the applicant projected a bulking factor (swollen backfilled volume divided by <br />excavated pit volume) of 0.91. Considering the average mined depth and extracted seam <br />thickness, this suggests an average post- mining topographic deflation of 4.6 feet. <br />Adjusted for the possible 4.5 percent discrepancy in observed versus original projected <br />bulking discussed above, the post- mining topography might rise by an additional 1.8 feet, <br />resulting in an average post- mining topographic deflation of 2.8 feet. In either case, the <br />projected post- mining topographic configuration is considered by the Division to <br />constitute an acceptable approximate original contour configuration. <br />In the first permit term, the Division approved a reclamation plan allowing a delay in <br />contemporaneous reclamation under Rule 4.14. l(1)(c). The approval was granted due to <br />the nature of the operation plan, which involved concurrent mining of two separate <br />mining areas (north and south) with a single dragline, in the original permit area. Pit <br />development in both the north and south blocks began with an initial box cut. <br />Development progressed from each box cut in opposite directions at different times <br />during the operations plan. The sequence of pit development did not allow for <br />backfilling and grading to be completed within 180 days of coal removal. At the point of <br />maximum disturbance, there were projected to be two open pits within each mining <br />block. <br />Pursuant to Rule 4.14.1(1)(c), the Division approved a variance from the requirement <br />that rough backfilling and grading be conducted within 180 days following coal removal. <br />This variance applied to the entire original permit area. In addition, a variance from the <br />requirement that there be no more than 4 spoil ridges behind the pit currently being work <br />was approved for a 25.5 acre area of the north block and a 41.8 acre area of the south <br />block, within the original permit area. Rough backfilling and grading had been <br />completed throughout the original permit area as of October 2004, with the exception of a <br />300 foot segment of the Wadge "ridgeline pit" along the eastern ridgeline, at the extreme <br />southern end of the original permit area. Most of this pit is within the south extension <br />area, and it was subject to a separate variance approval and backfilling deadline, <br />addressed below. <br />Seneca II -W Findings Document 45 C- 1982 -057 <br />Permit Revision No. 6 January 6, 2012 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.