My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
APPCOR12255
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Application Correspondence
>
2000
>
APPCOR12255
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 6:32:36 PM
Creation date
11/19/2007 2:28:08 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1996084
IBM Index Class Name
Application Correspondence
Doc Name
LORENCITO CANYON MINE PERMIT REVISION EXHIBIT 11
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.
/
15
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
Jerry Koblitz <br />Page 6 <br />July 22, 1997 <br />2.05-13 (6/30/97) refers to a single transformer pad. Please identify the locations of all <br />planned substations on Map 2.05.3-1, and revise the permit text if more than one pad is <br />planned. <br />76. The Division initially requested for engineering plans and drawings for the railroad spur. <br />b~ The applicant responded that these were located in Exhibit 19. The Division reviewed <br />Exhibit 19, and subsequently asked how disturbed azea drainage from the loadout areas <br />on the northwest side of the spur would be routed for treatment to the sediment pond to <br />the southeast of the pond, as no culverts under the spur in the azea of the loadout were <br />indicated. The applicant responded that it was in the process of designing 25-yeaz, 24- <br />hour temporary impoundments on the west side of the spur near the loadout to address <br />this matter. As there designs have yet to be submitted, the response to this question is <br />still inadequate. <br />• 78. The applicant has adequately addressed this question; however, there appears to be a <br />discrepancy in the text of page 2.05-13 (revised 6/30/97). In the fourth sentence, it is <br />indicated that a bath house will be located at each of the three figures (this is supported <br />by Figure 2.05.3-5 through 2.05.3-7). However, the sixth sentence states "LCC proposes <br />not to have bath house facilities...". Will LCC use bath houses or not? <br />84(b). The elevation of the lowest set of holes still disagrees with the sedimentation pond <br />summary table (EX 15-14). <br />84(P3 a. and b.) The response indicates this question is forthcoming in a future submittal. <br />85. Resolution of this issue will come through the stipulation for the fills and the MSHA size <br />ponds. <br />90. This question remains outstanding, awaiting a future submittal. <br />• <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.