PERMFILE63761 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

3. All mine related activities are located west of SH 93, including crushing. SH 93, therefore, represents an appropriate dividing line between areas which should and should not be included in the permit area. Concerning whether the primary function of the processing site is to service the quarry, we point out that the quarry is merely providing the processing with with one of the raw materials. The process itself is a manufacturing process where the raw material's physical and chemical charact=_ristics are converted, similar to the distinction between a clay mine and a c~=_ramics production facility. This relationship is different than the relationship between a mine/mill relationship in which ore is beneficiated and in which case the milling site is typically included within the mining permit boundaries. Run Off Control 5. P'_ease discuss the control measures proposed to minimize erosion of the diversion ditch during operations. RE~sponse - The diversion ditch used during operations is a temporary feature which intercepts and drains water to the quarry bottom. Since all sediments would remain contained, we plan no extraordinary erosion measures. Further, the ditch itself will be either constructed in overburden material which is extremely gravely (more than 607 +3 /4" rock) and, therefore, essentially non-erodible or constructed in shale w}.ich will be mined. Consequently, we see no value can be gained by extraordinary erosion control measures as no adverse environmental consequences will occur. 6. Please contac[ the State Engineer's Office regarding the need for a well permit, as a proposed 10 acre pond is a final reclamation feature. Response - As noted in our permit application a 10 acre pond exists presently. The Hogan family filed for, and received, a water storage right (Case 81 CW074) for the existing pond with the State Engineer's Office. Based on an on-site meeting with a State Engineer's Office representative, a decision was made that no well permit was needed. y d~~l 7 Geology 7. Will the 5 to 10 feet of sand and gravel overlying the shale be screened and used for aggregate or will it be used as backfill material? Response - The overburden material as described in detail in the permit application is a very cobbley material (est 30% more than 2"). Our reference in the application to potential screening of the material to remove rock for sale as aggregate was intended to pertain only to the coerrse rock (+2"), presuming sufficient quantities of -2" material remained available to effect later reclamation. Based on our discussions with Mr. Mount, it was deemed advantageous to remove the coarse material to facilitate the use of a seed drill. WAI does not have any strong feelings concerning the screening and removal of the rock purse. If MLRD staff would prefer the rock remain, we will do so.