My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV92163
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV92163
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 3:13:37 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 11:18:41 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981010
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
12/5/1995
Doc Name
DRAFT QUESTION ON TOPSOIL TR-66 1994 ANNUAL REPORT TRAPPER MINE PN C-81-010 TRAPPER MINING INC
From
DMG
To
JANET BINNS, TONY WALDRON
Type & Sequence
TR66
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
<br /> <br /> <br />to be imported. However, the amount of excess topsoil at <br />Trapper is too large to ignore. <br />Second, the Division believes that the existence of such a <br />large amount of surplus topsoil demonstrates that the <br />assumptions that had been used in formulating the various <br />replacement depths may be in error. These assumptions should <br />be reexamined. <br />Third, Trapper has stated, on page 4-263 of the permit <br />application, that excess topsoil can be blended in with the <br />surrounding topography. This is an appropriate plan if a small <br />to moderate amount of topsoil is involved. However, with such <br />a large amount of surplus topsoil, problems with AOC may <br />arise. The Division believes that this much surplus topsoil <br />should be used for redistribution on regraded areas. <br />Based on the above three points, the Division believes that <br />Trapper must submit a plan that addresses the redistribution <br />of surplus topsoil on regraded areas. <br />The Division wishes to make several additional comments. <br />First, Trapper has not applied for phase 2 bond release yet. <br />Therefore, because the Division has not approved the topsoil <br />depths for the areas already reclaimed, the Division can not <br />call all of this topsoil surplus. The Division requests that <br />Trapper provide a discussion of how Trapper has verified the <br />topsoil replacement depths on those areas already reclaimed. <br />Second, it would not be appropriate to reduce the amount of <br />surplus topsoil by reducing the topsoil salvage depth. Any <br />reduction in the topsoil salvage depth, that would leave <br />topsoil in place, would result in the loss of that topsoil. <br />Such a loss would be inconsistent with the regulations. All <br />topsoil must be salvaged. <br />Third, the Division is concerned about how tight a control <br />Trapper has on the quantity of topsoil that has been <br />stockpiled or will be stockpiled. In the 1994 Annual Report, <br />on page 4-262 of Section 5.0, it is stated in footnote (3) <br />that the topsoil replacement yardage could vary by plus or <br />minus 480,800 BCY's. Out of the surplus volume of 1,097,241 <br />BCY'S at the end of 1994, this amount could vary by plus or <br />minus 44$. Even if some of the inaccuracy comes from the plus <br />or minus 2 inches replacement depth, this would account for <br />only a small percentage of the 12 inch topsoil depth for <br />rangeland and 18 inch topsoil depth for cropland. Please <br />advise the Division as to why Trapper can not obtain a more <br />accurate approximation of the topsoil amounts. <br />CC: DAVE BERRY <br />C:\WP51\DRAFT66 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.