Laserfiche WebLink
There remain some problems in this section with regard to the information presented <br />and the organization. The monitoring plan is now presented under the correct Rule <br />citation. However, the full suite parameter list should be included as a table so that it is <br />clear exactly which constituents will be analyzed for. On page 5132a, after the ground <br />water parameter table, the Rule citation is still incorrect [(e)(b)(iv)]. The next Rule <br />citation should be (3)(b)(v) which speaks to the hydrologic reclamation plan, followed by <br />(3)(b)(vi) which should give the location of each water diversion, collection, conveyance, <br />treatment, storage, and discharge facility located in the permit area. The existing text <br />with regard to the recharge capacity should be listed under (3)(b)(vii). <br />9. Section 205 3(4) Pond; Impound-nents , mrd Divasivns <br />ss• x_06 Hydrologic Plan presented by the operator appears to covers most issues with the <br />exception of two specific areas. First, it is not clear how drainage from the refuse pile <br />surface will be handled on the west side of the pile. There is currently a haul road <br />skirting this side of the pile. Will this drainage enter a 100-year ditch and be directed to <br />sediment pond #2? Rule 4.09.2(7) requires drainage from above, as well as from the fill <br />surface, to be diverted into ditches designed to safely pass the 100-year event. Also, the <br />refuse pile needs to have specific designs, which, among other things, shows the drainage <br />plan for the pile itself in its final configuration. At the present time, there appears to be <br />no specific design for this pile. Anew technical revision will need to be submitted for <br />the final configuration of this pile. <br />10. Section 205 4 Redmnation Plmr, page 5-35, Tamce Reclmnation <br />•*• The results of the stability analysis were reviewed by the Division and we concur that the <br />current plan to reclaim the sandstone face is unfeasible. Therefore, OEI needs to submit <br />under a new technical revision, a new reclamation plan, with corresponding topographic <br />maps, that includes the reclamation of the sandstone face (both if mining continues, or if <br />mining does not proceed any further), and the final reclamation maps to include the <br />results of the gravel pit operations. <br />ll.a) The Division identified seeding rate errors in the reclamation "Grass and Shrub <br />Seed Mix", Permit Table 5-6, during the mid-term review. The Division requested <br />that OEI adjust the seed mix in Table 5-6 to provide for a range of 20-40 PIS/ <br />square foot. <br />OEI's response was to revise the seeding rate in Table 5-6 to an appropriate seed <br />rate of 37 PIS/acre. However, OEI has also chosen to substantially alter the <br />makeup of the mix. The Division had r v a seedmix composed of: <br />six (6) cool season perennial grasses <br />three (3) warm season perennial grasses <br />three (3) perennialforbs <br />two (2) perennial legumes <br />five (5) shrub species strip seeded separately from the grass /forb mix. <br />