|
offices) I would request a minimum of four copies anyway. Beyond that amount, I will leave it up to you whether
<br />you wish to provide additional copies for the other permit files.
<br />The scale for this map is appropriate, and the inclusion of the details of all possible sites (most considered as
<br />"affected" but some probably "pre-law") does not clutter it due to the color and symbols used.
<br />There is a general issue of ensuring that al] items shown on the maps as pre-law or otherwise not liable to be
<br />reclaimed, that an adequate (but brief) description is made for each, so that if appropriate to do so, they may be
<br />clearly eliminated from the list of reclaimable disturbances. This type of description should be provided for each
<br />vent hole or other underground opening, above-ground structwe or road segment, for which this office has no other
<br />information or conflicting information. Descriptions of vent holes and underground openings must be adequate to
<br />determine if hazazds exist.
<br />6. West Sundav Mine
<br />There are numerous vent holes, their related above-ground support structures, and other remote features associated
<br />with this permit. These remote sites are not included on the map for this site, due to a question you stated in your
<br />submitted packet of maps. The sites I speak of were labeled as vent holes WS-1, WS-2, and WS-3, plus a few other
<br />items associated with that group. These were discussed in my 10/7!02 letter to you concerning the Sunday Mine
<br />permit (no. M-1977-285). I will discuss them here also.
<br />The vent holes, etc., were approved to be added to the permitted operations under technical revisions TR-01 and
<br />TR-02, however our files do not contain any detailed information about these additional facilities. Because they
<br />were formally made part of the approved operation, they must be also included on maps for this permit. It would be
<br />appropriate to modify the general location map to include proper Labeling of these sites, and to generate a separate
<br />map of this permit showing them as part of the permit. (It would be proper to delete these features from the map
<br />for the Sunday Mine permit.) Please ensure that all newly disturbed or redisturbed areas, associated with these
<br />permitted facilities, aze delineated and labeled. This would include electric supply structures, access roads, service
<br />holes, and compressor. One question came to mind concerning the electric supply structures, which was why there
<br />were no lines leading up to this group of features from one of the portal areas. Please explain.
<br />Given that we must begin discussion about numerous remote sites and they are not to my knowledge each "named"
<br />per se, I wondered if IUSA has an internal identification scheme (as you had identified WS-1, WS-2, etc.). Is there
<br />any merit to "naming" each feature so that we may refer to them by means other than its NAD coordinates?
<br />Regarding the affected roads to the individual vent holes and other remote features of the permit, if the features
<br />existed in the area simply because they were pre-law roads which are still there, it is still appropriate to show them
<br />on the map. If they were used in the permitted operation, whether they were pre-law roads or constructed under
<br />this permit, they must be included in the affected acreage. As such, if they have not been reclaimed, and the roads
<br />will not be used in the future, they should be reclaimed. If the roads, through years of non-use, have also become
<br />reclaimed (i.e., impassable but stable) they should be assessed to verify if there is any further reclamation necessary
<br />on them. However, please be reminded that until the removal or reclamation of certain features has been
<br />documented, the roads, etc., remain as reclamation liabilities and within the 40-acre limitation ofthe permit. All
<br />roads should be shown, but different symbols should be used to differentiate the pre-law, permitted but
<br />umeclaimed, and the pernitted and now reclaimed roads.
<br />It is assumed that all areas shown in brown with hachures denote waste rock dumps, which are to be graded to 2:1
<br />slopes or less as part of final reclamation. ,
<br />I agree that the new surface detail superimposed on the map base must be tied back in to the topography, for both
<br />the final mining and reclamation maps. Please be reminded that reclamation maps should depict only those features
<br />which will remain onsite after reclamation is finished. All roads, buildings, berms, etc., that are to be removed
<br />
|