My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV02293
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV02293
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 12:59:54 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 8:59:38 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
11/17/1995
Doc Name
PERMIT REVISION 6 VEG. SOILS & WILDLIFE REVIEW W. ELK MINE
From
DMG
To
CHRISTINE JOHNSTON
Type & Sequence
PR6
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.
/
3
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
. ~. <br /> <br />140 or 2.04-141). <br />Fish and Wildlife-Rule 2.04.11 <br />As we have discussed, I believe that the deleted information should <br />be retained as an exhibit since this information was used during <br />the initial permitting process and to make the initial findings on <br />the impacts to fish and wildlife. It does appear that information <br />pertaining to critical habitat and the like has been updated and <br />will likely be updated in the future as animal habits change in <br />response to various activities, manmade or not. Most applicants <br />add to the various sections as new activities are proposed. <br />However, MCC is completely rewriting this section as a result of <br />this permitting action when it really should be updated with <br />respect to the new mining activities that are being proposed. <br />Since this is the case, I believe that the old information should <br />be retained as part of the permit application via the exhibit route <br />and not just archived as if it no longer applies. <br />Rule 2.03.3 <br />I have no additional comments about this section. <br />So to summarize, Exhibit 27 should include a brief discussion and <br />a cross-reference similar to Table 22 since it appears that the new <br />information is going to be added to the existing information. <br />Pages 2.04-105 through 2.04-109 should be added to Exhibit 27 and <br />Exhibit 29 should be referenced in section 2.04.9 as to what it <br />contains. <br />Section 2.04.10 should contain additional narrative, similar to the <br />PAR response, explaining what community designations were dropped <br />and why, and what communities were recombined with others and why. <br />The current wildlife information should be retained as an exhibit. <br />I also conducted a cursory review of maps 45, 46 and 47 per your <br />request. It would be my understanding that these maps would be <br />deleted along with the other information in section 2.04.11 that is <br />being revised. If that is the case then they should also be <br />included with the new exhibit for the "old" fish and wildlife <br />information. <br />This concludes the review. If you have any questions, please see <br />me. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.