My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE108994
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
100000
>
PERMFILE108994
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:01:28 PM
Creation date
11/24/2007 5:37:25 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1997054
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Section_Exhibit Name
EXHIBIT L RECLAMATION COSTS
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.
/
8
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
Exhibit L CMLRB 112 Permit Application <br />Agile Stone Systems. Inc. <br />• Three scenarios were established for review recognizing the expected concurrent <br />reclamation and time required to achieve complete reclamation after an azea has been <br />mined. Scenario I identifies the acres requiring reclamation during or at the end of Phase <br />I mining. Scenario II identifies the acres requiring reclamation at the end of Phase II <br />mining. Scenario II does not subtract any acreage reclaimed from Phase I mining. Phase <br />I reclaimed acreage is assumed to take 3-6 years to satisfy state reclamation standards. <br />While the time is excessive, it was assumed to present a conservative estimate of acres <br />for Scenario II. Scenario III allows the release of acreage reclaimed only during Phase I <br />and none from Phase III -another conservative scenario considering the concurrent <br />reclamation plan. <br />Table 2 identifies the operating activities and assumed costs and chazacteristics. <br />Assumptions result in $/acre or $/cubic yazd for each activity. Most costs were obtained <br />from past related work involving a recent WY state valuation hearing, the twenty sixth <br />edition of the Cat handbook and other permit activities. <br />Tables 3, 4 and 5 portray the expected reclamation costs for scenarios I, II and III. All <br />azeas aze evaluated for <br />1) surface prepazation with Rip & Grade, <br />2) top soil loading, hauling and dumping, <br />3) seed grading of dumped top soil <br />4) top soil disking <br />5) hydromulching, fertilizing and seeding <br />6) rubble-izing limited portions of granite and sandstone quarry highwalls <br />No drainage control is included because all azeas aze already controlled with drainage <br />control structures noted and discussed. The gravel azea continues to be surrounded to the <br />west, north and east by the 100' wide unmined buffer. To the south aze visual <br />impairment permanent berms and the perimeter road. Since the gravel and plant azeas <br />developed will be lower than the surrounding topography in highly permeable coarse <br />gravel, there will be no real drainage as demonstrated by the lack of any erosion on the <br />existing gravel baz surface topography. Each quarry has an engineered storm <br />retention diversion berm, associated retention pond and emergency overflow azeas <br />capable of handling 100 year storm events. <br />When finished, each total for each scenario has the concrete removal costs and 20% <br />administration costs calculated and added. <br />• 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.