Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Jim Dillie <br />Mr. Sob Oswald <br />August 2, 1994 <br />Page 3 <br />With these criteria in mind, the Division should be aware <br />that the base reclamation discussed by Castle in the Amendments <br />is no different from that which was established in 1977 for <br />Pikeview and in 1977 and 1989 for Snyder. Castle suggests in the <br />Amendments that the base reclamation requirements should not be <br />changed. The Committee suggests that the Divisicn take a hard <br />look at the base reclamation. Tl~e 24LRF, has changed little during <br />this time, but the Division's interpretation of the Act and the <br />public's expectations have increased substantially. Assuming <br />that these Amendments are approved, the reclamation plans will be <br />locked in for the remaining life of the quarries. The Division <br />therefore must carefully evaluate the proposed base reclamation <br />plan without regard to its historical evolution. More simply <br />stated, just because the base reclamation was approved in 1977 <br />(or even in 1989) does not imply that it is adequate in 1994. <br />SPECIFIC COMMENTS: <br />SNYDER <br />Tree and Shrubs: The Amendment does not explain or identify <br />where trees and shrubs are to be planted and how they will be <br />distributed. Random pattern, clusters, rows, etc.? The <br />Amendment should explain why (other than historical reasons) the <br />level of planned revegetation is different for different areas <br />(phases) of the quarry. This comment raises the issue of whether <br />the proposed revegetation (based on a 1977 permit and a 1989 <br />amendment) is acceptable in 1994 and for the future. <br />Access to benches: The Amendment needs to discuss how men <br />and equipment will access the benches for tree planting after the <br />second growing season. The Amendment needs to identify which, <br />if any, benches will be inaccessible after initial reclamation. <br />The Amendment also needs to explain how any inaccessible benches <br />will be planted with trees and how the benches will be replanted <br />and maintained if the initial revegetation is unsuccessful. <br />Bondincx: The five year phasing makes sense so long as the <br />bond in any one phase is sufficient to finish the base <br />reclamation for all affected areas. The current five year plan <br />does not contemplate mining the North wall but the bonding <br />• DCC\~9\98610.1 <br />