_REVISION - M1981302 (121) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page I 1 contradicts reestablishing a permanent vegetative cover similar to what was present prior to mining (Construction Materials Rule (CMR) 3.1.10)." Response: An examination of the 1989 Reclamation Map shows a drainage channel in almost the same location as the channel proposed in Amendment 02. In neither case is the channel referred to by the applicant as a dewatering ditch. The Division also believes that a positive drainage should be maintained through the permit area to prevent the build-up of alkaline materials in the soil which could occur in this area, because of the underlying shale layer. Without drainage, an alkaline "sump" would be created which would not be desirable for wildlife habitat or agricultural uses. This comment also references Rule 3.1.10 to support the reestablishment of a permanent vegetative cover similar to what was present prior to mining. Rule 3.1.10 actually states that reestablished cover must be "...at least equal in extent of cover to the natural vegetation of the surrounding area". The reclamation plan proposed by the operator is adequate to provide for vegetation reestablishment. In addition, the condition recommended to be attached to the recommended application approval will ensure the availability of a suitable plant growth material. In the unlikely event that revegetation problems develop, it is the operator's responsibility to correct the problem, since the performance standards must be satisfied for financial warranty release. Comment: "The land grade changes and the hydrologic changes proposed in the Amendment may negatively impact an endangered species and a species proposed for listed[sic] under the Endangered Species Act. 16 U.S.C. Sections 1531-1544(1988). in violation of that Act and of Construction Materials Rule 3.1.8." "There are two Federally listed rare species that are known from adjacent lands, Ute ladies tresses, Spiranthes diluvialis, and Prebles' jumping mouse, Zepus hudsonius preblei. One species has been reported from the permit area. Both depend upon moist habitats, and are likely to be negatively impacted by dewatering." Response: The land grade changes between the current (1989) permit reclamation map and the proposed amendment map show very little difference over the majority of the site. Overall, the topography as shown by the new plan may be a few feet lower than the current plan. The main hydrologic change is the elimination of lake surface which does not provide habitat for either species. The applicant has not identified a dewatering plan in the proposed amendment. The Division believes that by reclaiming and revegetating the site, a much better habitat