REV99304 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Dnniel Mathews Divi.rian of Mineratr and Geology September 7, 2009 Poge 2 • Please provide properly certified original map Exhibits 3-1, 3 2, 3-3, and 3-4. Response: SCC reduests that this issue be stipulated at this time for later submittal. SCC is in the process of updating the Ownership Maps for II-W: several landowners have changed---Mr.)ohn Ricks is recently deceased; a new agreement is being negotiated with Cross Mountain Ranch; an easement change for the permanent access road is being finalized, etc. These changes need to be finalized and incorporated into the PAP and maps revised before they can be submitted. Many of the landowners are out-of-state and the logistics for obtaining signatures are time consuming. 2 04 9 Soils Recourse Information and 2.05.4(21(dl 3. The original comment requested that Map Exhibit 9-3 Soil Survey Map be certified by a qualified registered profesrional engineer orprofessional8eologist, as required by Rule 2.10.3(2). Rule 2.04.9(1)(c) requires that the application include a roi/r map or enlarged aerial photo with specific soilr information. Far the same reasons described in Item 2, above, the Division has concluded that certifcalion of the map is required. Please provide aproper/y certiFed original map Exhibit 9-3. Response: The map has been certified and is attached. 4. Topsoil Table pages were properly amended to include correct revision dates. In the response package, new Table 21-4A Topsoil Salvage and Replacement Schedule---II-W South Extension Area was rubmitted, to replace current Table 21-4A---II-W South Extension Area (Wadge Mining Area) and Table 21-4B---11-W South • Extension Area (Sage Creek/Wolf Creek Mining Area). SCC explains in the rover letter that the tables were combined to reduce the potential error, r~ct actual conditions as documented in Annual Redamat:on Reports since 1999, and to r~ct current projections for future salvage and replacement options. Amended Tables 21-2A and 21-2B, which present soil salvage arneager and volumes by rpecific soil type, by year, were ako included ire the response submittal. We have reviewed the amended table, and we have the following questions and requests: a) Tables 21-2A and 21-2B red pre-salvage arnel volume projections by sot! type. As ruck, the data listed an Table 21-2A for previaur yearn doer not correspond to salvage acreages and volumes indicated m the annual reclamation reports. This explains apparent discrepancies behveen these two tables and Table 21- 4A, foryears prior to 2004. The information on the tables might Ge clarified by labeling Table 21-2A 'Seneca 71-W South Historic Projections" and Table 21-2B 'Seneca II-W South Current Projections". Year 2003 data (which is exactly the same on both tables) rhould be included only on the 'Flirtorir Pr jectionr" table. Under thin approach, the "Current Pr jedions" table would be updated in association with mid-terms renewals, and major revisions to rejZect projections far the remainingyearr of mine life. Out- dated pr jections for prioryears should periodically be removed from the "Current Projectionr" table and added to the '7listoric Projections" table. Please consider these amendments to the tables £or clari£cation. Response: The tables have been renamed/revised as suggested. b) Salvage acreage projections for 2004, 2005, and 2006-2010 are also different on Table 2111A than on • Table 21-2B, and the reason far this is not clear, please explain this apparent discrepancy, and amend the tables as appropriate.