REV99304 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Daniel A9athews Division of ~tllineraG and Geokgy SeptemGer t, 2004 Page 6 • 21 b. The Division bad raised a question regarding final grading deadline far non-variance buffer area along the southern perimeter of the lower 'A"Pit area. Operator provided an appropriate response in the subminal rover letter, and indicated that the barkfr/l andgrading schedule for the area is indicated on Exhibit 19-1A. However, the area in question (with backfilling andgrading .rthedule delineated) is not depicted on the amended Exhibit 19- 7A. Please provide an amended Exhibit 19-IA, which includes the lower `A"Pit southern perimeter buffer zone (including the inactive segment of Haul Road "A") and apph'cab/e Fnal grading deadline for the buffer and road segment. Response: Exhibit 19-1A has been revised to include the referenced "A" Pit area. However, the portion of Haul Road "A" that you are referring to as inactive will in fact become a part of the permanent Ridgeline Access Road. This design is forthcoming as part of TR-49. The design has not been previously submitted due to Landowner issues and concerns. SCC respectfully requests that the portion of Haul Road "A" between the "A" Pit southern perimeter buffer zone and the intersection with Haul Road H not be required to be reclaimed at this time. 21t. This item pertained to variance area deadliner revised via TR-46, and as such the substantive issues have been resolved However the areas subject to the 2003 and 2004 variance deadb'ner that are depicted on current Exbibit 19-1A (as revised by TR46J, are not depicted on the amended Exbibit 19-1A. Please protdde an amended Exhibit 19-1A, which includes the subject "A" and "B" Pit van'ance areas and deadlines as approved by TR-46. Response: Exhibit 19-1A has been revised to address the request. • 21d. Item Resolved 21e/f. Item Resolved 22. Item Resolved 23. The Division mquested that Exhibit 20-1A Year 2001-2005 Disturbance Map II-W South be cert fed by a gual~ed registered profertional engineer or profeuional geologirt. Rule 2.10.3(1 HtJ requires that the applitat/are include a map thawing the boundaries of all areal proposed to be affected over the estimated total I fe of the operation, which it the information provided on Map Exhibitr 20-1 (certifredJ and ZO-lA (not certified). For the same reasons dereribed in Item 2, above, the Division has concluded that cert~cation of the map is required. In addition, we have noted that certain areas that have been disturbed or have the potential to be disturbed by mining relnted activities have not been delineated an proposed Exhibit 20-1 A. Specific areal include the slide disturbance on the creep slope east of the ridgeline pit, in the Pond 015 watershed, and the road that aaesser Topsoil Stockpile AAA. In addition, ephemera! drainages wbi~h will rnnvey concentrated dirturbed runoff from areas of active mining or reclamation in the Pond 15 and Pond 17 watersheds should be delineated as disturbed ar potentially disturbed, due to the potential for sediment deposition or erosion and associated need far stabilization or maintenance. The approach used on Exhibit 20- 1, in which various levels or types of disturbance were separately delineated would appear to be appropriate. Nate that, on Exhibit 20-1, the entire ephemera! drainage segment between the "D" Pit disturbance area and Pond 005 is inducted within a 'potential mine disturbance" or 'potential facilities disturbance" area. Please proride a properly amended and certified map Exhibit ZO-IA. Response: This request requires an evaluation of all changes to be made in the PAP including the map update. Therefore, SCC respectfully requests that this issue be stipulated for submittal at a later • date.