My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2014-08-06_REVISION - C1981044
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1981044
>
2014-08-06_REVISION - C1981044
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 5:46:31 PM
Creation date
8/6/2014 9:32:01 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981044
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
8/6/2014
Doc Name
Adequacy Review No. 2
From
DRMS
To
Moffat County Mining, LLC
Type & Sequence
TR36
Email Name
JLE
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.
/
16
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
Jerry Nettleton, MCM <br />Page 11 <br />August 6, 2014 <br />provides unconnected information and the multiple colors and layers create problems in reading the <br />map. Please update the noxious weed management plan to include more detail regarding how <br />MCM performs their noxious weed mapping and tracking programs at the Williams Fork Mines <br />and the Williams Fork Strip Pit, including whether point or area features are mapped, what <br />constitutes a weed patch for mapping purposes, etc. Please add a commitment to the permit to <br />include a separate weed tracking map in the Annual Reclamation Report. This map should show <br />the weed species encountered, their location, the method of treatment and the initial year they were <br />seen at that location. The weed tracking layers can then he removed from the Reclamation and <br />Building Demolition Map currently included in the ARR (although this map, with the reclamation <br />information, will need to remain). <br />a. MCM Response: The specific Permit text discussion for the Noxious Weed <br />Management Plan has been reviewed and revised, as appropriate to address the <br />CDRMS's expressed concerns. MCM completes an annual noxious weed assessment, <br />and then ties weed control activities during the year to the results of that assessment. <br />Spraying typically takes place during spring and fall, targeting different weed species. <br />Weed mapping has been included on the Reclamation and Building Demolition Map for <br />convenience, and so that all relevant maintenance and reclamation information is <br />provided in a consistent, concise format. MCM will work with the CDRMS to either <br />modify this map to address the CDRMS's concerns or will create a separate map. Copies <br />of the revised Permit discussion accompany these responses for replacement in the PAP. <br />b. DRMS Response: MCM added Houndstongue to the list of species to be treated in the <br />permit. The Division reviewed the 2013 Annual Reclamation Report submitted by MCM <br />and it appears weed species and control methods are discussed in the narrative of the <br />report. The Reclamation and Building Demolition Map submitted with the report <br />delineates areas where specific herbicides were used but does not indicate where specific <br />species are encountered. Revised page 5.05 -32.1 indicates the MCM maintains a <br />working weed program map and records both observed weed occurrences by weed <br />species, location, and extent of infestations; and treatment activities. Since this <br />information exists, it should be added to the Reclamation and Building Demolition Map <br />submitted in the Annual Reclamation Report. <br />c. MCM Response #2: MCM documents weed control activities in both the text and on a <br />map in the Annual Reclamation Report. Generally, the areas delineated may include <br />multiple weed species, therefore specific locations are not delineated for individual <br />species. MCM typically sprays in the spring for whitetop, houndstongue, knapweed, and <br />toadflax (if present), and in the fall for thistle and any of the other species which remain <br />after the spring weed control efforts. The exception to this approach is tamarisk, which <br />only occurs in certain areas and requires a separate, focused control effort. When <br />tamarisk control activities occur, they are delineated separately in the ARR. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.