My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL32613
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL32613
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:55:04 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 7:21:31 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981025
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
7/14/1983
Doc Name
PROPOSED DECISION AND FINDINGS OF COMPLIANCE
Permit Index Doc Type
FINDINGS
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.
/
63
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 />-36- <br />' Since the volume of available topsoil is insufficient to cover the entire <br />disposal site to an adequate depth, sultable replacement topsoil will <br />need to be imported. The operator has committed to lmportiny enough <br />sultable topsoll from a local topsoil dealer to reclaim the entlre site. <br />C The soil will be analyzed prior to placement to be certain of Its <br />suitability. Calculations were submitted to show that 86,000 cubic yards <br />of non-toxic fill material and 10,000 cubic yards of soil cover will be <br />needed at the site. The cost of this material is reflected in the bond <br />amount for the operation. <br />Only one concern was noted with the refuse site that has not been <br />resolved. A small "pocket" of colluvial material exists in the bottom of <br />the refuse site valley north-northwest of the pile. This material will <br />be removed in the future as the refuse pile expands. Since the operator <br />did not analyze the full depth of this material, only the first few feet, <br />the Divislon is concerned that the material may nut be sultable for use <br />as cover for reclamation of the pile. As a precaution, the Divislon <br />imposes the following stlpuiation: <br />Stipulation No. 2 <br />ALL COLLUVIAL MATERIAL AT THE RUFUSE PILE USED AS TOPSOIL OR <br />NON-TOXIC, NON-COMBUSTIBLE COVER FOR THE REFUSE PILE HUST 8E <br />ANALYZED AND APPROVED BY THE DIVISION AS MEETING THE ESTABLISHED <br />CRITERIA FOR SUITABILITY FOR TOPSOIL AND/OR SUBSOIL. <br />The mine loadout facility was constructed in 1980-82. No additional <br />disturbances are ant lcipated for this site. Nearly all of the soils <br />disturbed by the loadout were agricultural soils and, as such, are an <br />excellent resource for vegetative reclamation. Prior to disturbance, <br />samples were taken at 11 locations to characterize the soils. The <br />following soil types were identified that were disturbed at the loadout: <br />Aquolls, sandy-skeletal, 1-12 percent slopes <br />Atencto-Azeltine complex, 3-6 percent slopes <br />Armells loam, 12-25 percent slopes <br />Armells load, 6-12 percent slopes <br />Armells loam, 1-6 percent slopes <br />Groubutte stony loam, 25-65 percent siopes <br />Unnamed loam, 1-6 percent slopes <br />Almy loam, 1-6 percent slopes <br />Almy loam, 6-12 percent slopes <br />Cushool-Rentsac complex, 15-65 percent slopes <br />Disturbances from construction of the loadout did not involve area-wide <br />excavations or total destruttion of the soil profile, as would occur at a <br />strip mine. Except for specific areas under sediment ponds or conveyor <br />and tipple foundations, loadout construction has involved little <br />significant excavation of subsoils. Nith the exception of Grobutte stony <br />loam, all of the above soils were salvaged and stockpiled to be reapplied <br />during final reclamation. The only disturbance area that was not <br />stripped at the loadout was at the truck dump site. Here, available <br />topsoll did nut exist due to the steep slope and barren conditions. <br />!~ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.