Laserfiche WebLink
a, <br />,; ~.- <br />As previously discussed in Section II -Hydrologic Balance, worst-case potential effects <br />to the hydrologic balance of middle Creek were insignificant relative to the flotiv of the <br />stream. Although the Middle Creek AVF is down dip of the mine, the amount of water <br />contributed to the AVF from the permit azea is less than 1% of the total flow of the <br />stream. Furthermore, the AVF is 4000 feet away from the area to be mined. Therefore, <br />the Division concludes that the Middle Creek AVF will not be affected. <br />Information pertaining to alluvial valley floors (AVF) is presented on pages 65-65.05 of <br />the permit application. <br />XVIII. Operations on Prime Farmland <br />Sunland Mining Corp. requested a negative determination as to the presence of prime <br />farmland at the Apex No. 2 Mine. The Division made such a negative determination for <br />the initial five-year permit and no information has been submitted to change this <br />determination. Therefore, the Division reaffirms a negative determination on the <br />existence of prime farmland at this site (4.25.2(3)). Information pertaining to prime <br />farmland is presented on page 123 of the permit application. <br />XIX. Mountaintop Removal <br />The Apex No. 2 mine did not perform mountaintop removal; specific findings are not <br />required for this section (2.06.3(3) and 4.26.2.9) <br />XX. In Situ Processing <br />The Apex No. 2 mine did not perform in situ processing; specific findings are not <br />required for this section. <br />Apex No. 2 Mine, C-81-O1 l 20 April 17, 1998 <br />