My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
APPCOR11463
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Application Correspondence
>
1000
>
APPCOR11463
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 6:31:52 PM
Creation date
11/19/2007 2:20:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1996084
IBM Index Class Name
Application Correspondence
Doc Name
LORENCITO CANYON MINE PERMIT REVISION EXHIBIT 10
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
• Division of Wildlife Issues and Responses <br />for June S, 1997 Letter <br />(continued) <br />reviewed at this time. However, the Division will not require the applicant to contain <br />surface water flows. Discharge limitations will apply at this site, as they do at all coal <br />mines in the state as required by the Clean Water Act and other State and Federal laws. <br />Haul road runoff will be treated by using alternative sediment control practices. (see <br />Reduction of stream crossings above) <br />The Division considers this issue to have been adequately addressed. <br />Response <br />No response is necessary for this comment. <br />Frepuencv of monitorine <br />The DOW requests that the applicant conduct water quality monitoring on a montlily basis <br />at the upstream and downstream sites of the Purgatoire as well as at the mouth of Lorencito <br />• Canyon. The applicant has modified the monitoring plan to conduct monthly flow and <br />field monitoring and quarterly water quality sampling at these sites. The Division <br />considers this response adequate. <br />e e <br />No response is necessary for this comment. <br />Lack of topsoil <br />The applicant predicts that due to steep slopes and areas of bedeck exposure, a deftcit of topsoil <br />will exist at the conclusion of surface mining. The DOW requests that the applicant import topsoil <br />to the site to address this shortage. <br />The Division would like the applicant to further investigate topsoil replacement options. The <br />Division is concerned that valuable topsoil is proposed not to be salvaged in certain areas. Topsoil <br />is defined by Rule 4.06.2(2)(b) as soil horizons oR the surface prior to mining that will support <br />plant life. The reclamation plan calls for .7 feet of topsoil to be distributed over 901 acres of the <br />surface mine. However, the Division is confused by permit text on page 2.05-35 which states <br />"reapplication may be limited to south-facing slopes where revegetation conditions will be more <br />difficult". If .7 feet is to be re-applied over 901 acres, why does the permit text indicate <br />. approximately 1/2 of the surface mine area will be reclaimed without topsoil? Information needs <br />to be consistent between what is represented in the various tables and calculations and what is in <br />the permit text. <br />9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.