REV07287 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

SEP-04-98 12:20 PM SRM LIEN 970 407 8515 P. 02 ~ i 3. The proposed clarklcatlons to tlw mining and roclantatlon ssquertce are accepted sa part of fits revision request We apprectate your acceptance of the mining and redamation sequence as proposed. 4. Extribk C - AtTected Area Boundary Map b aecepbd as par! of this revlsbn request We appreciate your acceptance of the affected txwndary map as prgwsed. 5. Mlninp areas C 6 D as shown on Fshtblt E -Reclamation Plan Map represent More mining dlsWtbartees and are not included in tlw 84.5 acre sRseted land boundary or reclamation coot estlmste. Thsso cress should bs sliminsisd fiom Exhibk E to avow confusion. Please revise tfN Exhlbk E maps accordingly, We apologize if E~ibR E was difficuk to read, but we were trying to submit the reclamation plan for fhe entire mine sequence Inducting atI areas to be disturbed in the future. Please find attached a revised Exhibit E -Reclamation Plan Map showing the redamatlon plans for ony the cement affected acre boundary, which is 114.8 scree, not 84.5 aces. The confuslat vrlltl fhe 84.5 acres is undersfandabte, as it was the number of acres we reported as being currently dishrrbed within that affected boundary. tt does not represent the total sues in the aftsoted boundary map we submltled. The total number of ease in the affected land boundary is epproxlmatey 114.8 seer;. 8. The use of roplaeed or bsckfllled sandstone ovorburtton es a seedbed msterld fs soosptable; however, consldsratlon will roved to bs given ib incorporetlnp various soil anandmortts bo help "build" • ssodbsd that wn support a dawn, etlbctlve, and Iorty4sstirtp vspefattve cover. Without suktcient testing data, k doss not seom reseonabls that tl» use of sandstone overburden alone can achlsvo fhb goal. For bonding purposos, the Divblon will piculats s reclamation coot that includes tlw cost of soil amandnwnts rreuissary m achieve suldbls seedbed for revspotatlon. For clsriflutlon, pleaso comment on the rwulb pathsred from the beat cres(s), M: fsr111tzer, mubh, manure, best dirt, or other treaLnsnb used. Abo, pisses comment on the lowtlon and size of the best sres(a), the number of yssre In use, and iM seed mlx(s) tested. Atfaehed please find our history of reclamation test areas end the rwcoess vNa have had with various tacttnpues and trials. First, let me say that we have spent a good deal of err time over the peat seven years studying the technpues of recamation. In doing so, we have reamed much about what wiN and vrNt not wnrk. Regarding grasses, ova have tested everything from hand scattering to hydrvmukhing to drilling the seed on material that was sandstone overburden with no topsoil or soil enhancement to materiel blends of topsol and various soil enhancements. We have found that the quickest results for grass is to blend beet dirt as a soil enher>cement into our sandstone overburden. However, disregarding the speed of growth and time (actor it does not appear to improve the stand of grass overall. Aktaugh we intend to occasionely baddlaul beet dirt into our quarry as bng as we are eelfirg rock to ttw sugar companies, we do not intend to use the beet dirt on all portions of our reclamation because it is expensive and it does not provxie a good seedbed for shrubs and trees. Regarding woody vegetation, we have tasted everyhing from transpkntlng mature pinyons to planting saplings to sphering seed on the varous materials as seedbed. We have dieoovered that the beat success for the plny0ns IS b scatter seed on sandstone overburden with no topsoil or soil enhancement. None of the pinyons have survived on the soil enhanced areas, including scattered seed. The evergreen pine sapAngs have survived in the areas with sandstone overburden with no topsoN or sal enhartcerrtertts and wM Ong manure spread on the overburden.