My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2016-01-21_PERMIT FILE - M1982121
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Minerals
>
M1982121
>
2016-01-21_PERMIT FILE - M1982121
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 6:14:49 PM
Creation date
1/22/2016 9:04:59 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1982121
IBM Index Class Name
PERMIT FILE
Doc Date
1/21/2016
Doc Name
Objection to Surety Increase Request
From
CalX Materials
To
DRMS
Email Name
ACY
GRM
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.
/
5
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
Objection to DRMS' Surety Increase Request <br />January 14, 2016 <br />Page 2 of 5 <br />It is noteworthy that the first two documents that comprise the Reclamation Plan for the <br />Ca1X Quarry are lengthy, and detailed, and are entirely qualitative — not quantitative — in <br />the recitations of the several subparts of the "Reclamation Plan". <br />In the first identified document, the five principal tenets of the MLRD-approved <br />Reclamation Plan for the Mid -Continent Quarry were summarized as follows: <br />"Postmining backfilling of crusher, screen and product stockpile areas ... will insure <br />[sic] adequate compaction for stability." <br />"All highwalls will be scaled and stabilized." <br />"All backfilling and grading will be completed as soon as feasible after ... mining .. . <br />"Topsoil will be removed, segregated, stockpiled and protects [sic] from ... erosion." <br />"When topsoil is replaced it will be done in as even a manner as possible." <br />It is also noteworthy that the first three tasks under the Reclamation Plan are ongoing <br />activities — and, indeed, if Ca1X did not attend to these obligations continuously, it is <br />predictable that either or both of MSHA or DRMS would order us to cease and desist. <br />Nowhere in the 1983 document does it specify what quantity of topsoil was removed, as <br />overburden, from any of the Mid -Continent Quarry production benches. <br />In the 1989 Amendment to the Reclamation Plan, there were several, more -detailed <br />observations about the five principal tenets of reclamation at the Mid -Continent Quarry: <br />"Scaling of the highwalls will be accomplished to remove any materials that might fall <br />and endanger people or animals that might be on one of the [downslope] benches. This <br />should not be an extensive operation since it is accomplished continuously during mining <br />to insure [sic] the safety of the miners." <br />"The benches and highwalls are excavated in solid rock, so the only backfilling and <br />grading that can be accomplished will consist of pushing any loose materials on the <br />benches up against the highwall." [This, too, was described as a continuous operation.] <br />"With minimal topsoil available, the most practical revegetation program within the <br />actual quarry area will be to establish individual ecosystems on the benches that will <br />support native grasses and shrubs." [Emphasis supplied.] <br />As was the case with the 1983 instrument, the MLRD-approved 1989 Amendment did <br />not specify what quantity of topsoil might be available for the establishment of individual <br />ecosystems on the various production benches within the Mid -Continent Quarry. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.