Laserfiche WebLink
c. Table 72, page 2.05.4-38 should be revised to include the Utah <br />Tract. <br />RESPONSE: Table 72 has been revised to include the Utah Tract. <br />d. The reclamation plans for all areas include the application of <br />mulch. However, no method of securing the mulch is included. The <br />operator should commit to crimping or tacking the mulch wherever it <br />is used. <br />RESPONSE: Page 2.05.4-5, page 3 of Exhibit 24, and page 5 of <br />Exhibit 23 have been revised to address this issue. <br />e. The -proposed spacing of contour furrows, as included in the <br />Williams Fork Pit reclamation plan, should also be included in <br />• reference to the 5A portals. In addition, the operator should <br />commit to maintaining these ditches until the vegetation becomes <br />established. <br />RESPONSE: Page 2.05.4-16 have been revised to address this issue. <br />f. The proposed Williams Fork Pit reclamation plan is substantiall <br />different from the currently approved plan. The operator should <br />provide additional information on how this plan relates to the <br />pre-mine topography and drainage pattern. More detailed <br />information is also needed on the stability of the reconstructed <br />drainage (i.e., protection of the channel). Also, see the comments <br />concerning this plan in the enclosed memo from Jim Pendleton. <br />RESPONSE: Empire Energy Corporation is presently formulating <br />additional information concerning the reclamation plans for the <br />Williams Fork Strip Pit. This additional material will address the <br />39-3 <br />