Laserfiche WebLink
y o.~ieu ivy. u~ aunt - neiueiun.uuu~, ~ ~Fay,C~,; <br />i_-_ _ - __- - -_ _ i <br />provided by the Applicant indicates that sufficient quantities of both <br />overburden and topsoil exist on the site to return it to its approximate <br />natural contours. There are no plans to backfill the site with fill generated <br />from outside the permit area. The proposed reclamation plan was chosen <br />from among other options because it will return the land to viable cropland <br />and will keep the area consistent with surrounding uses. Generally, the <br />Applicant intends to achieve reclamation through the movement of <br />material by trackhoes, backhoes, scrapers and haul trucks. <br />4. The weight of the evidence demonstrates that the Applicant has met the <br />minimum requirements of Construction Materials Rule 6.4.5(2)(a). <br />H. Appropriateness ofTopo~raphy to Final Land Use as Cropland <br />1. Construction Materials Rules 3.1.5 and 6.4.6 require detailed descriptions <br />of grading and backfilling that show the appropriateness of the final <br />topography to the proposed post-mining land use, compaction and stability <br />measures, erosion control, timetables, pollution control, control of <br />unsightliness, slope compatibility, any off-site backfill requirements and <br />maps. <br />2. The Objectors assert that the Applicant has failed to comply with <br />Construction Materials Rules 3.1.5 and 6.4.6. <br />The Applicant's Reclamation Plan and maps show a 2% grade from south <br />to north for all pit floor azeas. A 2% grade is acceptable for croplands and <br />close to the topography currently existing on the site. The Applicant <br />12 <br />