My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE108704
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
100000
>
PERMFILE108704
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:01:11 PM
Creation date
11/24/2007 5:12:09 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1984076
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
6/19/1984
Doc Name
DDD OPERATIONS FN M-84-076
From
MLRD
To
ROBINSON BRICK CO
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.
/
5
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
Mr. Michael G. Leidich -2- June 20, 1984 <br />Exhibit D <br />1. Given the fact that you plan to post a warranty for only a portion of <br />each of the two Phases, the total disturbance at any one time should be more <br />carefully defined for each Phase. This could be done by describing the <br />phasing of the operation within each of Phases lA and 1B in greater detail <br />and/or illustrating this phasing of mining on the map exhibits. This must be <br />done in order for the permit to be enforceable in the field and for the amount <br />of the financial warranty to be properly set by the Board. <br />2. The drainageway located within Phase 18 should be described in greater <br />detail. Is it an ephemeral drainage? More detail should be given to describe <br />J how overland flow through this drainage will be routed and protected from <br />increased sedimentation due to mining. The location and sizing of your <br />proposed drainage ditches should be given relative to the water carried by the <br />drainageway shown. <br />3. What are the locations of the buffer areas mentioned for each Phase? <br />yi~ Will these be totally undisturbed? <br />Exhibits E and F <br />1. The extent of necessary backfilling in reclamation is not clear. What <br />J is the projected amount of overburden to be backfilled per mined acre? Again, <br />this is needed in order to justify financial warranty calculations. <br />2' 2. Further details should be given concerning the reconstruction of the <br />CG~ drainageway in Phase 18. How will erosion be controlled in final <br />~~5 reclamation? Is this area to be revegetated using the recommended seed <br />~ mixture, or is a stream channel to be constructed? <br />J 3. The specific areas to be reclaimed for wheat growing and the specific <br />areas to be reclaimed for pasture should either be described or (preferably) <br />outlined on the reclamation plan maps in Exhibit F. <br />4. Simply retopsoiling an area will not be sufficient for release on lands <br />to be cropped for wheat. The area will either actually have to be in wheat <br />production or, if wheat production is to be delayed, the area will have to be <br />planted with an interim mixture for stabilization (such as the proposed <br />pasture seeding mixture). Please discuss your plans in this regard further. <br />5. Reference my comments above concerning the maps of Phase lA having one <br />too many contour lines. This is also true for Exhibit F. <br />6. Reclamation of the drainageway (including placement of erosion control <br />devices) may need to be more clearly shown on the reclamation plan map. <br />Exhibit G <br />J 1. Please reference my comments above concerning the drainageway in Phase <br />1B. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.