My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2017-12-20_REVISION - M1977219
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1977219
>
2017-12-20_REVISION - M1977219
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/15/2021 5:40:54 PM
Creation date
12/20/2017 12:31:05 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977219
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
12/20/2017
Doc Name
Adequacy Review Response #2
From
Environment, Inc.
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
AM3
Email Name
ERR
WHE
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
68
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
Summit Brick and Tile Company Fox No 1 Clay Pit <br /> M-1977-219-Adequacy Response#2 Page 5 <br /> being provided all necessary information. The Applicant shall provide a new and updated <br /> Blasting Plan in accordance with Rule 6.4.4(h) and demonstrate that offsite areas will not <br /> be adversely affected by blasting. The Division has enclosed Attachment A - Key <br /> Elements of a Blasting Plan which provides information the Division needs to review and <br /> approve a Blasting Plan. Please note, some of the necessary updates needed from the <br /> 2002 Blasting Plan include but not limited to the following: the proposed mining plan <br /> states flint clay and not just the sandstone may need to be blasted, '/z mile pre-blast <br /> structure survey, map to identify areas where blasting will occur, and Siloam Road <br /> characterization. <br /> Please find attached a revised and updated Blasting Plan for the <br /> Fox No 1 Clay Pit prepared by Buckley Powder and Michale G. <br /> Leidich, P.E. . It was prepared using Attachment A as a guideline <br /> along with the requirement in rule 6 . 5 (4) . <br /> EXHIBIT E Reclamation Plan (Rule 6.4.5): <br /> 46. In response to Adequacy Item#20, the Applicant submitted a new and complete Exhibit <br /> E in accordance with Rule 6.4.5. The Division has reviewed the new submittal and <br /> provides the following inadequacies. <br /> I have added these noted inadequacies to the revised reclamation <br /> plan and attached a copy to this response . <br /> 46.1 As required by Rule 6.4.5(2)(f)(v), please specify the anticipated minimum depth or <br /> range of depths of replaced topsoil. <br /> Review of the soils report provided we find the soils vary from 0 <br /> to 2 inches to 0 to 7 inches depending on what the soil type is <br /> for the 7 soil types found on the site . The amount to be <br /> replaced will really depend on what area is being stripped and <br /> mined at any given time. Some of the soil is vary stony loam to <br /> stony loam (covers 59 . 4% of the mine area) and remaining areas <br /> are Silt, Clay and sandy loams (covers 40 . 6% of the mine) . The <br /> over all average is 2 . 7 inches of available topsoil available for <br /> use when reclaiming the disturbed areas . I added text on page <br /> 9 (revised 11/13/17) addressing this and have supplied a copy for the <br /> file . <br /> 46.2 The Applicant proposes to use the reclamation recommendations from the Soil <br /> Conservation Service, dated November 6, 1990. Please verify and provide documentation <br /> from the NRCS that these recommendations are still appropriate and adequate for the <br /> proposed AM-03 expansion. The Applicant may also provide new recommendations <br /> from the NRCS to replace the 1990 recommendations. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.