My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2009-09-04_PERMIT FILE - M1987049
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Minerals
>
M1987049
>
2009-09-04_PERMIT FILE - M1987049
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:55:16 PM
Creation date
2/17/2016 12:20:24 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1987049
IBM Index Class Name
PERMIT FILE
Doc Date
9/4/2009
Doc Name
Adequacy Review Comments and Applicants Response
From
Bromley Lakes
To
DRMS
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.
/
33
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
Applicant's Response: <br />Based on the Divisions interpretation of the mining plan the ARA amendment area can <br />be divided into the following levels of disturbance: <br />1) At point of maximum disturbance it is estimated that approximately 20 acres will <br />need to be completely backfilled; <br />2) 20 acres will need to be partially backfilled and, <br />3) 40 acres will need to be topsoiled and seeded. <br />22. "How many acre feet of water is contained in Cell # 3 currently?" <br />Applicant's Response: <br />Approximately 1,430 acre feet of water are currently in Cell 3. <br />23. "What is the width of the conveyor housing and the height of the conveyor? Are there <br />concrete supports for the conveyor? If so, what are their dimensions and how many of <br />them will there be on average?" <br />Applicant's Response: <br />The field conveyor used at Bromley Lakes is un -housed. The dimensions of the <br />conveyor are as follows: W = 45", H = 3.5 feet and L = 5,280 feet. There are no <br />concrete supports for this conveyor. <br />EXHIBIT S <br />24) "Enclosed with this letter is a Memo from Allen Sorenson of the Division concerning <br />setbacks from mining to permanent man-made structures at the site. Please review the <br />enclosed Memo. In essence, in regard to item # 32 and your proposal to use a <br />minimum mining setback formula of 3:1 (horizontal to vertical), this commitment need <br />(sic) to be more concise. Please commit to the following: <br />The crest of all mined pit slopes will be maintained at all times at a horizontal <br />distance from permanent man-made structures not owned or controlled by the <br />permittee or for which compensation agreements in Rule 6.4.19 have not been <br />executed equal to at least three times the vertical height of the mined slope proximal to <br />the structure. " <br />10/2/2009 10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.