My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2013-06-12_PERMIT FILE - C1994082 (5)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Coal
>
C1994082
>
2013-06-12_PERMIT FILE - C1994082 (5)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 5:21:22 PM
Creation date
6/27/2013 9:28:40 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1994082
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
6/12/2013
Section_Exhibit Name
Tab 25 Bonding
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.
/
8
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
been missed during the rough grading process (when bulk earth movement, in the <br />quickest manner possible, is the goal). As with the other motor grader tasks above, this <br />was traditionally a dozer task. In fact, at one point SCC included an additional 10% of all <br />rough grading hours for final grading. Again, based on negotiations with SCC several <br />years ago, this was changed to a motor grader task. <br />Drainage Control System Removal /Construction <br />Removal includes all of the ditches on the site, including those that report to a sediment <br />pond and those that carry sediment pond discharge to a receiving stream. Again, this was <br />traditionally a much more detailed dozer task group that was changed to a motor grader <br />task based on negations with SCC several years ago. Also included is the removal of all <br />sediment ponds. This is a dozer task that removes the pond embankment and forms the <br />final drainage. <br />The construction portion consists of the time and materials cost to install/construct the <br />remaining postmine drainage channels not in place as of August 25, 2004. The steps <br />required are excavation of the channel, installation of a geo- textile and then placing riprap <br />of a determined size over the geo - textile. <br />Topsoil Replacement. <br />Topsoil replacement volumes were based on the maximum volume of material placed in <br />stockpiles over the life of the permit. The estimated volume in each stockpile was based <br />on surveys and/or the average topsoil salvage depth per soil type over a particular area <br />(acres). The Division used topsoil volumes that were in the Yoast Permit document. The <br />correct topsoil volumes (the ones that the Division used in recalculating the reclamation <br />cost estimate) are a hybrid based on the 1999, 2001 and 2002 Annual Reclamation <br />Reports. This will result in an increase in topsoil replacement volumes from 777.9 acre - <br />feet (used in the RN -02 estimate) to 826.8 acre -feet (used in the recalculation). This is <br />necessary because the Division must keep costs associated with ALL topsoil replacement <br />until a phased bond release application is submitted and approved. With the floating <br />bond concept, the only liability costs that "float" are for the backfilling and grading of the <br />pits. All of the other costs are cumulative (including topsoil replacement and <br />revegetation). While the 826.8 acre -feet is a greater volume than currently used, it does <br />not take into account the maximum pile volume for each stockpile for the life -of -mine. <br />The maximum pile volume for the life of mine is 949.8 acre -feet of stockpiled topsoil. <br />The volume used by the Division represents hybrid of the topsoil replacement based on <br />the 1999, 2001 and 2002 Annual Reclamation Reports. The following chart shows <br />topsoil volumes at the Yoast Mine. <br />TR -53 4 Revised 05/13 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.