My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2019-12-11_REVISION - M1977211
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1977211
>
2019-12-11_REVISION - M1977211
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/6/2025 7:51:47 AM
Creation date
12/12/2019 1:46:46 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977211
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
12/11/2019
Doc Name
Adequacy Review Response
From
Castle Aggregate
To
DRMS
Email Name
TC1
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.
/
96
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
Response: Castle has been backfilling the quarry for several years as part of its reclamation <br /> commitment, and this will continue. Castle intends to accelerate the backfilling and grading to reclaim <br /> the site in the timeline specified in Exhibit D. <br /> The new disturbance areas vary from Amendment 3 to Amendment 4. <br /> Response:The two amendments have different designs, and the reduced excavation of granite at the <br /> western extent of the quarry reduces the area of new disturbance. This also reduces the extent of <br /> highwalls that will remain. <br /> There is not enough topsoil onsite, and there are limited details on importing topsoil. <br /> Response:The permit application has been revised to include details on topsoil volumes available <br /> onsite,topsoil importing, and generating growth medium for use as topsoil.The costs for generating <br /> growth medium have been included in Exhibit L. Castle will be required to mitigate weeds throughout <br /> the reclamation process. <br /> There are no trees below 7250' and the plan does not match the surrounding terrain. <br /> Response: The exasting vegetation, mapped by USDA, is included on Exhibit C-5.The revegetation plan <br /> mimics the existing vegetation with trees at the higher elevations, shrubs in the middle and lower <br /> elevations. <br /> There reclamation costs are undetailed and appear incomplete. <br /> Response:The calculations in Exhibit L have been revised with updated quantities.The calculations are <br /> based on multiple publications for worker and equipment costs and equipment production rates. These <br /> sources and methods are standard for calculating construction costs in the mining industry. <br /> The water information is difficult to understand. <br /> Response:The maps included in Exhibit G have been revised to be more legible. <br /> Mount Comments <br /> 1. Commitments to demonstrate fill is placed in a verifiable manner. <br /> Response:The permit application has been revised to include material specifications and testing <br /> requirements. <br /> 2. There should be a commitment to site monitoring. <br /> Response:The permit application has been revised to include geotechnical monitoring details. <br /> Pikeview Quarry Amendment 4, Response to Adequacy <br /> December 11,2019 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.