My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV04545
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV04545
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 1:02:42 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 9:18:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981026
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
9/6/1991
Doc Name
APPEAL TO PHASE II DECISION CANADIAN STRIP MINE PN C-81-026
From
SLURCO CORP
To
MLRD
Type & Sequence
SL1
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.
/
2
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
Mr. Steve Renner <br />September 4, 1991 <br />Page 2 <br />4. It seems that the primary intent of Phase II is to control erosion. However, with the 1987 reclaim <br />area at Canadian Strip, eventhough this demonstration was successful and the Division approved <br />reclamation of sedimentation control structures, Phase II could not be granted because of the 90/90 <br />statistical revegetative cover requirement. This seems to be impractical to utilize a vegetative cover <br />standard in the SedCad modeling and a second set of cover criteria for Phase II which is also utilized <br />in the Phase III standards. The 90/90 cover standard for Phase II seems [o be redundant. Because <br />Phaze II haz not been granted, another field analyses for revegetation cover will need to be conducted <br />and another application will need to be submitted to achieve Phase II. This represents a significant <br />cost to the operator to conduct these activities and significant tracking of these various stages of <br />liability release by the operator and the Division. <br />5. In terms of bonding, the Division haz ruled that no phase of bond will be released until all portions <br />of the requirements for that phase have been completed. In the case of Canadian Strip, the erosion <br />control requirements of Phase 11 have been met, the sediment control structures have been removed, <br />and still no bond release is granted for achieving these standards. Calculation of the remaining bond <br />is less than half of that which is being currently held. If the 90/90 vegetative cover requirement is <br />maintained for Phase II, than incremental bond release for reclamation activities accomplished should <br />be considered. Again, this is an unnecessary cost for the operator to have the site over-bonded. <br />Should you have questions or need additional information concerning this request for an adjudicatory <br />hearing, please do not hesitate to call Mr. Jerry Koblitz or let me know. <br />Sincerely, <br />~~.~~~ e~ <br />Lawren J. Corte <br />Attorney <br />Attachments <br />cr Jerry Koblitz - Greystone <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.