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 />6 <br /> <br />RESPONSE: Standard reclamation practice as discussed in CC&V’s previous <br />response to Adequacy Item 36 is to break up construction debris, bury the material in <br />an excavated area, followed by compaction with a tracked dozer. Next, the area is <br />buried with five feet of cover material with a slightly domed surface. Thereafter, re- <br />grading of the land surface is followed by growth media placement, and reseeding. <br /> <br />6.4.8 Exhibit H – Wildlife Information <br /> <br />39. Response to Adequacy Item 39 is inadequate. <br /> <br />Pursuant to Rule 3.1.8(1), please clarify that the High Grade Mill is also considered a <br />process facility and is covered under section “2.2 Active Leaching or Process <br />Facilities” in the Wildlife Protection Plan. <br /> <br />RESPONSE: CC&V agrees the High Grade Mill is also considered a process <br />facility and is covered under section “2.2 Active Leaching or Process Facilities” in <br />the Wildlife Protection Plan. <br /> <br /> 40. Response to Adequacy Item 40 is inadequate. <br /> <br />The response to Adequacy Item 40 removes the statement that access to the tops of <br />highwalls should be restricted. The intent of this statement was to specify how wildlife <br />would be protected and removing it does not address the protection of wildlife. Note, <br />upon the completion of mining and reclamation, the Applicant has committed to <br />installing a 6-foot high (minimum) chain link fence around the crest of the mine areas <br />where highwalls of greater than approximately 100 feet remain. Please update the <br />Wildlife Protection Plan to include these details. In accordance with Rule 3.1.8(1), <br />please provide details on how the Applicant will protect wildlife from encountering the <br />hazard of a highwall during the mining operation. <br /> <br />RESPONSE: CC&V would like the Division to note that to date CC&V has not <br />experienced any wildlife fatalities from animals falling down or over highwall slopes. <br />CC&V will commit to installing a 6-foot high (minimum) chain link fence around <br />areas of the mine such as the north end of the WHEX, south end of the South Cresson <br />Pit, northwest side of the Globe Hill Pit, ADR 1, ADR2, AGVLF, and SGVLF to <br />protect wildlife from mining activities. CC&V requests that the Division issue a <br />conditional approval with a provision that CC&V submits a technical revision fencing <br />plan within 180 days of approval of Amendment 11. <br /> <br />The Wildlife Protection Plan will be revised to include this requirement. <br /> <br />44. Response to Adequacy Item 44 is inadequate. <br /> <br />The Division requests the Applicant commit in writing to route a copy of Wildlife <br />Incident Reports to the Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.