Laserfiche WebLink
Name of Addressee <br />Page 2 <br />November 4, 2016 <br />the extended liability period and have the same reclamation standard as sediment control structures <br />outlined in Rule 3.03.1(5). Please clarify this statement. <br />3. Please provide a letter from the landowner stating that they concur with the proposed reclamation plan <br />for this hydrological repair (Rule 2.05.5(1)(b)). <br />Questions and Comments relating to the packet of information dated October 27, 2016 that was submitted by <br />James A. Beckwith, Attorney & Counselor at Law on behalf of his clients Mr. Rudolph Fontanari, Jr. and Ethel <br />Carol Fontanari. <br />Based upon comments submitted to the Division on October 27, 2016 by Mr. James A. Beckwith attorney <br />for Rudolph and Ethel Fontanari, some confusion exists on our part as to the terminology and location of <br />certain surface features that exist in the vicinity of areas proposed under TR69 for hydrologic repairs. <br />Figure 2 (dated April 18, 2006) of the April 28, 2016 report prepared by Fugro Consultants Inc. for <br />Huddleston -Berry Engineering and Testing, LLC (HBET) denotes with a yellow symbol a feature labeled <br />as "Air Shaft Location per Snowcap". This feature appears to lie approximately 150 feet east from the <br />corner of the ditch recently dug by Mr. Fontanari. On the same Figure 2, a red symbol exists to the <br />southeast of this yellow symbol. This red symbol is one of four on Figure 2 labeled "Sinkhole Surface <br />Expressions". Please confirm that these two features are the same two features identified on Figure 14- <br />17 (entitled "Shaft and NSA Repair Plan") of TR69 as "Air Shaft" and "Rock Pile/Sinkhole Surface <br />Expression. <br />In the comments submitted to the Division by Mr. Beckwith in October of 2016 is an aerial photo labeled <br />"Fontanari Appendix J". Three features are identified in this photo. One is labeled "Sink Hole", and is <br />apparently located within the ditch recently dug by Mr. Fontanari. A second is labeled "Air Shaft", which <br />is located east of the feature labeled "Sink Hole" on Appendix J. A third is labeled "Rock Pile", and <br />appears to be located directly south and a bit to the east of the feature labeled on Appendix J as the "Air <br />Shaft". Please confirm whether the "Air Shaft" identified on Figure 14-17 of TR69 is the same feature <br />as the "Air Shaft" identified in Appendix J of Mr. Beckwith's comments (we believe it is). Please also <br />confirm whether the "Rock Pile/Sinkhole Surface Expression" identified on Figure 14-17 of TR69 is the <br />same feature identified as the "Rock Pile" on Appendix J of Mr. Beckwith's comments (we believe it is <br />not). <br />2. It is stated on "Page 3 of 7" of the August 23, 2016 report by Fugro to HBET that "Per a mine <br />representative, approximately 10,500 gallons of water was poured into depressions within the ground. <br />This was done to increase the electrical conductivity of groundwater pathways and increase their <br />detectability by the electrical survey. Approximately 8,500 gallons were poured into the main <br />depressions (sinkholes) within the trench where it turns to the west. Another 2,000 gallons went into the <br />rock pile feature below". "Below" refers to Figure 3 on "Page 3 of 7". Figure 3 is a photograph with a <br />caption that reads "Figure 3 shows a backfilled sinkhole immediately west of the buried 8 inch non- <br />metallic water line. A metal marker post for the water line can be seen in the upper left side of the photo". <br />