Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />e) The revegetation plan for the refuse disposal area should be amended <br />as necessary to reflect the changes required in Stipulations 10, 11 <br />and 12. <br />f) In reviewing the permit, it was found that the operation and <br />reclamation plans for the Wilson/Loudy loadout were not adequately <br />discussed. Most of the information on the loadout appears to be <br />contained in permit correspondence and subsequent revisions. This <br />material all must be incorporated into the permit. Based on the <br />current transfer of ownership proceedings, it is suggested that all <br />material concerning the loadout be assembled into one (properly <br />referenced) chapter or binder. This would facilitate the removal of <br />this information into a separate permit upon completion of the <br />tranfer. You may wish to coordinate with Dale Thompson of Axial <br />Basin Ranch in this effort. <br />g) The adequacy responses in Appendices K and L should be incorporated <br />into the narratives of this chapter. <br />5. Chapter G - Hydrology <br />a) Page G-1 refers the reader to Appendix F for the revised hydrology <br />monitoring program. This program should be further updated to <br />indicate that hydrology monitoring was deleted via technical <br />revision in 1986. In addition, the operator may wish to consolidate <br />all monitoring discussions (hydrology, subsidence, diversion ditch) <br />into one section and change the reference on this page to that <br />section. <br />b) Original design calculations for the Rienau No. 2 diversion ditch <br />must be included in the permit. <br />c) Exhibit G-6 contains an approved augmentation plan. The operator <br />should explain how this relates to the instigation and subsequent <br />removal of Stipulation No. 8, and revise the permit accordingly. <br />6. Chapter M -Reclamation Plan <br />a) The introduction on page M-1 should be updated to discuss the actual <br />reclamation which occurred in 1986. Any specific items or changes <br />from the approved plan could be referenced to changes in the text. <br />b) The backfilling discussion in Section 2.3 should be updated to <br />reference the as-built topography. As-built maps should be inserted <br />as exhibits. <br />c) The commitment to 95% Proctor values should be changed to 90%, as <br />approved by the Division. <br />d) The revegetation plan must be revised to include all commitments <br />contained in Stipulation Nos. 10, 11, and 12. <br />3 <br />