My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL30336
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL30336
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:47:54 PM
Creation date
11/22/2007 10:11:59 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980004
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
5/13/2002
Doc Name
MINE PLAN DECISION LETTER TO NEPA COMPLIANCE DOC
Permit Index Doc Type
Other Permits
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.
/
39
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 />Soils <br />- 10 - <br />No topsoil was stockpiled prior to the existing disturbance at the P1cClane <br />Canyon site. Future planned disturbances that will occur after permit issu- <br />ance will be the sediment pond and topsoil storage area. Topsoil will be <br />stripped from the area of the proposed sediment pond. Analyses indicated that <br />these soils are good sources for topsoil for use in reclamation of the mine. <br />The applicant proposes to strip the Nihill Loam soil to a depth of 12 inches <br />and the Rivra Variant to a depth of 18 inches. This will yield a volume of <br />900 BCY of topsoil from the disturbed area. Part of this topsoil will be re- <br />spread over one acre of the mine bench and the rest will be spread over the <br />disturbed area of the sediment pond. These soils will be respread at a mini- <br />mum depth of 4". <br />A portion of the bench and outslopes along the reclaimed road will not be top- <br />soiled. These areas consist of fill which was used for grading the road and <br />original ground. The applicant has supplied a few analyses from grab samples <br />of this material. Although these analyses indicated that the material is <br />suitable for reclamation, it is insufficient for the determination.ef reclama- <br />Lion feasibility. - <br />The information provided with respect to the fill is too limited in depth and <br />extent of sampling. The daterial will be mixed and rearranged during the re- <br />grading process. For this. reason it Ss important that it be sufficiently <br />demonstrated that any material which may be exposed during the regrading pro- <br />cess is suitable for use as a plant growth medium and this stipulation is the <br />. - preferred alternative to assure compliance. ' <br />The applicant proposes to test the soil and add the appropriate fertilizers <br />;''~'- ' one year after seeding and planting. The applicant's justification for this <br />- is that fertilization prior to seeding will encourage undesirable weedy spe- <br />- cies to invade the reclaimed site. However, because phosphorous is relatively <br />immobile and does not readily leach into the soil, it is best to incorporate <br />it into the soil prior to seeding and consequently stipulated in the preferred <br />alternative section. I <br />The McClane Canyon site is located in an area that normally receives less than <br />10 inches of rainfall annually. This may be detrimental to revegetation. For <br />this reason the surface manipulation of the soils is needed prior to seeding. <br />Contour furrowing would protect the soil from erosion as well as enhance water <br />holding capacity and availability to vegetation. Salt Creek Mining Company <br />plans to rough the surface in areas to be broadcast seeded but intends to <br />grade other areas. See required stipulation regarding this in preferred al- <br />ternative, <br />Ve~eta[Son <br />The ;tunher Canyon project contains the same vegetation types and is located <br />contiguously to the tlcClane Canyon site. Ablotic factors affecting the occur- <br />.- rence of vegetation communities are similar. For [his reason, data from the <br />two sites for productivity of the above communities were compared to determine <br />if the conmunities of McClane and 'lunger Canyon were from differing popula- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.