Laserfiche WebLink
G94-062: PAR : 5. Burmnaier 3 <br />then factor by 3. The Division considers this proposal adequate but wants to remind <br />SCC that this cover will still have to meet the requirement of being adequate to <br />control erosion as per Rule 4.15.1(2)(b). <br />5) Vegetation map exhibit 10-1 legend appears to contain a typo: Mountain Brush is <br />designated as "MD" yet the mapping unit on the map shows "MB" and Mesic <br />Drainage is designated as "MC" while on the map it is labelled as "MD". Please have <br />SCC correct the map legend. <br />6) DMG recognizes SCC has made efforts at re-establishment of aspen in other mine <br />permit areas with discouraging results. Tab 22 page 21 discusses SCC's reasons for <br />not including aspen in the reclaimed area. Due to the significant extent of aspen <br />community proposed to be affected during the first permit term, 54.3 acres <br />(approximately 12% of potential disturbed area), DMG considers attempts to re- <br />establish some aspen within the reclaimed area are warranted. Although aspen are <br />included in Table 22-8 Planting List 2 as "substitute" species and Tab 22 page 21 <br />states aspen may be used "if available", DMG requests that Seneca Coal Company <br />commit to inclusion of this species in the planting list or provide additional <br />information justifying its exclusion. <br />Overall, Seneca Coal Company has anticipated many of the Division's concerns and <br />addressed them in the permit application. If you have further questions regarding the listed <br />items, please come talk with me. <br />m:\coal\jhb\C94082.par <br />cc: Public File <br />Larry Routten <br />