Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Page 6 <br />Keith Kirk, Mike McCarthy <br />January 2, 1980 <br /> <br />25. Section 816.105 (Backfilling 6 Grading: Thick Overburden) - Simply <br />as a point of clarification, from the drill hole data there are points <br />where thick overburden occur. For example, drill holes 26-79-44 and <br />26-79-80 are in areas of thick overburden. <br />26. Section 816.111(a) (Revegetation: General Requirements) - As discussed <br />previously, the proposed rangeland mixture will have to be amended. <br />Perhaps the applicant should give some thought to preparing site specific <br />seed mixtures and not one general one to be used across the entire area. <br />Also, the Division of Wildlife recommends that sage brush be included <br />in the pastureland seed mixture. <br />27. Section 816.111(b)(1) - The applicant indicates that certain areas will <br />be left as water areas. Please indicate the location of these areas <br />and how they tie in with the post-mining land use. The applicant is <br />encouraged to submit the data referred to on page 816-141. Both the <br />data used by the SCS to make their recommendation and that generated at <br />the Fish Creek site. It would be very beneficial if the seed mixture <br />planted at the Fish Creek site were submitted to this office. <br />28. Section 816.112 (Revegetation: Use of Introduced Species) - From the <br />information presented it is not possible to determine which range site <br />the pastureland seed mixture should be compared with. In section 779.19 <br />the pastureland range site refers to the sagebrush range site. Hocaever, <br />there is no table to support the big sagebrush range site. Therefore, <br />it is not clear if the mixture should be compared with the Low Sagebrush <br />Range Site, Treated Sagebrush Range Site or the Silver Sagebrush - Meadow <br />Range Site. Please clarify. On page 816-145 the applicant refers to <br />data generated from trials performed at Energy lll. This office would <br />be most interested in reviewing the methodologies used to obtain the data <br />and the data from the trials. <br />29. Section 816.113 (Revegetation: Timing) - From the information presented <br />in the application it appears that topsoil redistributed during the fall <br />followed by the fall seeding is the best method for re-establishing <br />vegetation. The applicant should design his topsoil redistribution plan <br />to maximize redistribution of topsoil during the fall. k~at criteria <br />will be used to determine if temporary cover crops will be necessary to <br />control erosion? <br />30. Section 816.114 (Revegetation: Mulching and other soil stabilizing <br />practices) - The applicant goes to lengths to describe the effectiveness <br />of stone mulch and the amo~mts of material available to be used as the <br />type of mulch. Hocaever, the applicant is referring to the use of a <br />stone mulch on spoil and not soil. This section refers to mulches applied <br />to regraded and topsoiled surfaces. Thus, this argument can best be put <br />forward in another section of the application. As discussed previously, <br />EFC will submit a new mulching plan which is more demonstrative of the <br />actual reclamation practices undertaken by the company. <br />