My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
APPCOR12274
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Application Correspondence
>
2000
>
APPCOR12274
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 6:32:38 PM
Creation date
11/19/2007 2:28:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981021
IBM Index Class Name
Application Correspondence
Doc Date
11/2/1979
Doc Name
BOURG COAL STRIP OUR FN 79-125
From
MLR
To
FLATIRON PAVING CO
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.
/
9
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
Page 5 <br />Mitch Simmons <br />November 2, 1979 <br />V. Reclamation Plan <br />The proposed reclaimed topography is much closer to meeting the <br />requirements of approxioiate original contour. Additional comments <br />on this topic will be forthcoming. <br />S~rhat is meant by the statement on page lOR that "Gullies on the <br />reclaimed surface will be lined with riprap"? If the applicant v~\ <br />is referring to small reconstructed drainage channels, erosion <br />control must be achieved by means of proper gradients, rather than <br />rip-rap. <br />3. Appropriate grass have been included in the seed mix. However, <br />the proposed seeding rates fail to take into consideration differences <br />in seed size. The applicant should specify the number of seeds per <br />square foot to be planted, as well as lbs. F.i..S./acre. The staff <br />would suggest emphasizing prairie junegrass, western wheatgrass <br />and green needlegrass in the mixture, with blue grama and sandberg <br />bluegrass given lesser importance. <br />4. Specified 2 lb. P.L.S./acre for sagebrush is probably too high. <br />5. The applicant should include additional native fortis in the seed <br />mix, as explained in my memo of September 7th. <br />VI. Hydrology <br />This section has not yet been reviewed by the staff hydrologist, or <br />the Division of [rater Resources. Their conuoents will he forthcoming, <br />on the issues of AVF, the augmentation plan, mining through and recon- <br />structing Pfann Drata, surface and groundwater monitoring, and sediment <br />control. However, my review has revealed a few preliminary concerns: <br />Removal of the compacted clay barriers along the north and west <br />boundaries of the property must be addressed. This caill be required <br />during reclamation. At what stage of the operation caill these <br />structures be removed? <br />~J Similarly, the concrete flood control structures must be removed fi.lb <br />and the area reclaimed. <br />`~ Groundwater and surface water monitoring is required for the life <br />~of~the mine, not the first two years as specified in the application. <br />~ 4. \Surface water monitoring must be iur quality as well as quantity. /~'; <br />Please provide a list, in Exhibit G, of the parameters which <br />1 be analyzed, for both surface and groundwater monitoring. %~ <br />(cont'd) <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.