Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />12/20/79 Memo, p. 3, #8 <br />"8. Clarify that temporary culverts <br />drainage of Class III roads will be <br />year, 6 hour design. (pg. 816-224) <br />along with an operation plan should <br />their construction." <br />See p. 816-224(a) <br />12/20/79 Memo, p. 3, #1 <br /> <br />laid down for the <br />according to the 1 <br />Culvert design <br />be submitted before <br />"1. The applicant has not demonstrated the overburden <br />used to create the proposed permanent stockpiles is <br />indeed excess. Is the company mining thick overburden? <br />Can one or both piles be eliminated and acceptable post <br />mining topography still be produced? The applicant <br />should provide new maps showing the topography without <br />the excess spoil piles and that material incorporated <br />into the reclaimed surface." <br />See response to 12/18/79 letter, p. 2, #5, above. <br />See also, pp. 816-127(a)-(r), Maps 48(a), 49(a) <br />12/20/79 Memo, p. 4, #2 <br />"2. The applicant proposes to leave the final cut in <br />front of the shop facility to use as a portal entry for <br />future underground mining. However, this future mining <br />is not yet approved, is not a part of this application, <br />and, at present, the applicant has not committed to <br />underground mining at this site. Therefore, this <br />application should contain a contingency plan for <br />completely backfilling the cut and full reclamation. <br />Should the Division set a time frame under which the <br />cut will be filled unless an underground mining application <br />is approved?" <br />See response to 12/18/79 letter, p. 2, #6 and p. <br />785-5(a) <br />