My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2016-12-19_REVISION - M1980244 (5)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1980244
>
2016-12-19_REVISION - M1980244 (5)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/10/2017 11:53:25 AM
Creation date
12/22/2016 11:09:37 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1980244
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
12/19/2016
Doc Name
Reponses to DRMS Follow-up Adequacy Review Comments on Reclamation Plan 10/18/2016
From
Newmont / CC&V
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
AM11
Email Name
TC1
AME
ERR
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
<br />5 <br /> <br />please explain how the Squaw Gulch Overburden Storage Area footprint will not be <br />increased by grading the outslopes to a flatter slope of 2.5H:1V. Note, the height of the <br />Squaw Gulch Overburden Storage Area cannot be increased as approved. <br /> <br />RESPONSE: Cut and fill of Squaw Gulch Overburden Storage Area material will be <br />used to maintain its existing approved footprint and acreage disturbance. <br /> <br />25. Response to Adequacy Item 25 is inadequate. <br /> <br />See Follow-up Adequacy Item 14 above. <br /> <br />RESPONSE: Prior to final reclamation, CC&V will submit an updated plan of <br />locations where rock plating will occur. <br /> <br />26. Response to Adequacy Item 26 is inadequate. <br /> <br />The response to Adequacy Item 26, as well as the Surface Mine Backfill Areas section <br />of the Project Description (Volume I), addresses the variance of steepness within the <br />overall 2.5H:1V slope of the Main Cresson backfill. However, these do not address the <br />other backfilled portions of the mining operation. Please specify the proposed steepest <br />section of the overall 2.5H:1V slope of each of the backfilled mine areas or clarify that <br />the statement regarding the Main Cresson backfilled area is the same for all backfilled <br />mine areas. <br /> <br />RESPONSE: CC&V will remain at an overall slope of 2:5H:1V for all reclaimed <br />areas. If future plans indicate a steeper slope is required in some areas, we will <br />submit an updated plan. <br /> <br />31. Response to Adequacy Item 31 is inadequate. <br /> <br />Please provide details why culverts, which will require inspection and maintenance, are <br />proposed to remain on reclaimed affected lands. Based on the response to Adequacy <br />Item 33, the Division understands that the Applicant my revise the Reclamation Plan to <br />allow certain road corridors to remain after reclamation (most-likely including any <br />associated culverts). The Division suggests the Applicant remove all culverts on the <br />reclaimed lands and if necessary, construct appropriate drainages to convey <br />stromwater OR explain who, besides the mine, will be responsible for culvert <br />maintenance after closure. <br /> <br />RESPONSE: CC&V will remove all culverts on reclaimed haul roads. <br /> <br />36. Response to Adequacy Item 36 is inadequate. <br /> <br />Please provide the standard reclamation practices as discussed in the applicant response <br />to Adequacy Item 36. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.