|
Requirement
<br />Rules
<br />Permit (PR 6)
<br />Specific Requirement
<br />Information Provided /Source /Details on Requirement
<br />Division comments
<br />17
<br />Annual Reporting, Permit page
<br />Soil Fertility Testing reports and
<br />NH1: Exhibit 2011 -1 shows fertilizer application rates and locations
<br />NH1: ARR states that at NH1, 250 Ibs /ac of fertilizer (50/50 mix of 18 -49 -0 and UREA) were applied on the 6.4 ac field in the NW portion of the NH1 permit
<br />2.05.4(2)(e) -74
<br />fertilizer application details
<br />as well as production and grazing areas at NHl. NH2: Exhibit 2011 -9
<br />area. WFC states in the ARR that they did not apply fertilizer to the 45.65 acres parcel in 2011. THE ACREAGE OF THIS PARCEL IS UNCLEAR - IT IS LISTED AS
<br />shows fertilizer application rates and locations at NH2.
<br />BEING 45.61 AC IN EXHIBIT 2011 -1 AND 45.65 AC IN THE ARR. NH2: Fertilizer was applied on the NH2 property east of 27 road in late March early May, and
<br />included application of fertilizer to the reference area on March 25, 2011 (according to Exhibit 2011 -9). (PLEASE VERIFY IF FERTILIZER IS 18 -46 -0 AS INDICATED
<br />ON EXHIBIT 2011 -9 OR 18 -49 -0 AS INDICATED IN ARR). PLEASE ADD AN ITEM TO THE LEGEND IN EXHIBIT 2011 -9 FOR AREAS WHERE FERTILIZER WAS APPLIED.
<br />PLEASE CORRECT THE ACREAGES SHOWN IN EXHIBIT 2011 -9 FOR AREAS (A) AND (B) - THE AC INDICATED ON THE PARCELS DO NOT MATCH THE AC INDICATED
<br />IN THE TOTAL AC CALCULATIONS, AFFECTING THE TOTAL ACREAGE WHERE FERTILIZER WAS APPLIED. ALSO, THE RATE CALCULATIONS NEED TO BE
<br />CORRECTED ON EXHIBIT 2011 -9 FOR AREAS (D) (E) AND (F) FROM 123AC -40LBS TO 123AC "43LBS AND FROM 123AC'114LBS TO 123AC "117LBS.
<br />18
<br />Annual Reporting, Permit page
<br />Revegetated Land Pasture Yields
<br />NH1: Exhibit 2011 -1 shows production areas at NH1. NH2: Exhibit
<br />NH1: ARR states that at NH1, one cutting was harvested from the 6.4 ac field in the NW portion of the NH1 permit area for 14.4 tons total or 4,500 Ibs /ac of
<br />2.05.4(2)(e) -74
<br />2011 -11 shows production areas at NH2.
<br />grass hay. NOTE THAT THE ARR ALSO STATES THAT NEW HORIZON MINE DID NOT FERTILIZE OR HARVEST IN THE NH1 AREA, CONTRADICTING THE EARLIER
<br />STATEMENT IN THE ARR FOR NH1. PLEASE SPECIFY WHEN THE CUTTING OCCURED. NH2: PLEASE ADD A LEGEND ITEM TO EXHIBIT 2011 -11 FOR PASTURE
<br />AREAS. THE ARR TEXT AND EXHIBIT 2011 -11 SHOW THAT THE WEIGHTED AVERAGE FOR 1 CUTTING PRODUCTION FROM THE NH2 AREA WAS 2,630 LBS /AC -
<br />THIS IS MISCALCULATED - THE WEIGHTED AVERAGE FOR THE 1ST CUTTING SHOULD BE 2,679 LBS /AC. IT DOES NOT APPEAR FROM EXHIBIT 2011 -11 OR THE
<br />ARR REPORT THAT A 2ND CUTTING OCCURED, HOWEVER, THE RECLAMATION MANAGEMENT TRACK +E171NG WORKSHEET- IRRIGATION FOR SEPTEMBER 30,
<br />2011 INDICATES THAT A SECOND CUTTING OCCURRED BETWEEN 8/10/11 AND 8/31/11 WHEN THE IRRIGATION WAS SHUT OFF. Under the grazing section of
<br />the ARR, it states that for the Reference Area, "In place of a second cutting WFC opted to have it grazed."
<br />19
<br />?
<br />Soil and Spoil Scarification
<br />ARR Report indicates that prior to growth media soil replacement
<br />This is consistent with wording/requirements in the Permit PR 6. "Prior to replacement of topsoil the graded spoil will be ripped to reduce compaction." No
<br />the final graded spoil was scarified to a depth of approximately 2 ft
<br />problems noted.
<br />using ripper shank attached behind a dozer.
<br />20
<br />Permit (PR 6 MR 79) section
<br />Soil and Spoil Monitoring Data -
<br />Exhibit 2011 -7 depicts backfill spoil sample locations and shows
<br />Evaluated Exhibit 2011 -7, backfill, 4 samples (SS -45, 47, 48 and 49) were located in the 2011 backfilled area in Zone 4 at a rate of one sample per 2.5 ac, which
<br />2.05.4(2)(d)
<br />Morgan Soils - monitor replaced
<br />backfill placement limits.
<br />exceeds the required sample intensity of 1 per 5 acres for spoil in Zone 4 (Table 2.05.4(2)(d) -lA and in Section 2.05.4(2)(d) 2011 -03 MR79). No problems noted.
<br />soil and final graded spoil
<br />21
<br />Permit (PR 6 MR 79) section
<br />Soil and Spoil Monitoring Data -
<br />Exhibit 2011 -7 depicts backfill spoil sample locations and shows
<br />Evaluated Exhibit 2011 -7, backfill, 10 samples (NHSS -242A, 2428, 243A, 2436, 244A, 244B, 245A, 245B, 246A, 2468) were located in the 2011 backfilled area in
<br />2.05.4(2)(d)
<br />Non - Morgan Soils - monitor
<br />backfill placement limits.
<br />Zone 7 at a rate of one sample per 5 ac, correct grid dimensions are shown on the map. No problems noted.
<br />replaced soil and final graded spoil
<br />22
<br />Permit (PR 6 MR 79) section
<br />Spoil Quality - Morgan Soils - New
<br />Attachment 2011 -A consists of required soil samples taken by WFC
<br />Evaluated Attachment 2011 -A sample results in comparison to threshholds in Table 2.05.4(2)(d) -lA and in Section 2.05.4(2)(d) 2011 -03 MR79 (FROM MARCH
<br />2.05.4(2)(d) - Table 2.05.4(2)(d)-
<br />Horizon Mine is required to
<br />personal on Morgan soils.
<br />2011- SAMPLES WERE TESTED IN APRIL 2011) for 4 samples (55 -45, 47, 48 and 49) shown on Exhibit 2011 -7. PLEASE SEND A CLEAN COPY OF THE SOIL TEST
<br />lA Spoil and Soil Suitability
<br />conduct re- graded spoil
<br />RESULTS - CURRENTLY THERE ARE SEVERAL BLACKED OUT AREAS ON THE RESULTS, MAKING IT DIFFICULT TO READ COLUMN HEADERS. ALSO, THE ZONE
<br />Criteria (Morgan Prime
<br />monitoring to determine spoil
<br />INDICATED ON THE SAMPLE RESULTS (page footer "F: \Eng\ DATA\ excel \Topsoil \soilstudy_2011 ") IS ZONE 3, AND THE ZONE INDICATED ON EXHIBIT 2011 -7 IS
<br />Farmland)
<br />suitability.
<br />ZONE 4 (THE CORRECT ZONE). PLEASE VERIFY THAT SOIL SAMPLE RESULTS CORRESPOND TO THE RIGHT SAMPLES. PLEASE EXPLAIN WHY THERE IS SAMPLE
<br />DATA FOR A SECOND TEST OF SAMPLE SS-49. ASSUMING COLUMNS WERE INTERPRETED CORRECTLY BASED ON CURRENT BLACKED OUT VERSION, all samples
<br />tested within threshholds.
<br />23
<br />Permit (PR 6 MR 79) section
<br />Spoil Quality - Non - Morgan Soils -
<br />Attachment 2011 -A consists of required soil samples taken by WFC
<br />Evaluated Attachment 2011 -A sample results in comparison to threshholds in Table 2.05.4(2)(d) -1B and in Section 2.05.4(2)(d) 2011 -03 MR79 for samples
<br />2.05.4(2)(d) - Table 2.05.4(2)(d)-
<br />New Horizon Mine is required to
<br />personal on non - Morgan soils.
<br />(NHSS -242A, 242B, 243A, 2438, 244A, 2448, 245A, 245B, 246A, 246B) shown on Exhibit 2011 -7. PLEASE SEND A CLEAN COPY OF THE SOIL TEST RESULTS -
<br />1B Spoil and Soil Suitability
<br />conduct re- graded spoil
<br />CURRENTLY THERE ARE SEVERAL BLACKED OUT AREAS ON THE RESULTS, MAKING IT DIFFICULT TO READ COLUMN HEADERS. ASSUMING COLUMNS WERE
<br />Criteria (Other Areas)
<br />monitoring to determine spoil
<br />INTERPRETED CORRECTLY BASED ON CURRENT BLACKED OUT VERSION, all samples tested within threshholds.
<br />suitability.
<br />2011 ARR Review
<br />Page 3
<br />
|