PERMFILE125678 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

EXHIBIT B (Rule 6.3.?( c)): There is nothing in the Exhibit B narrative that addresses the requirements of this Rule, i.e. description of water resources in the area of the proposed operation or even indicates that the IL applicant considered it. ~l The applicant should supply a revised Exhibit B narrative that responds to the requirements of this Rule. If there are no water resources [hat will receive drainage from the affected area, that should be mentioned. EXHIBIT C (Rule 6.3.3): THERE IS NO CORRELATION OF THE ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSED bIIN[NG PLAN PRESENTED IN THIS EXHIBIT WITH ANY EXHIBIT E MAP SUPPLIED WITH THIS APPLICATION. THIS WILL BE MENTIONED, WHERE APPROPRIATE, BOTH 1N THE FOLLOWING REVIEWS OF EXHIBIT C AND EXHIBIT E. EXHIBIT C (Rule 6.3.3(b)): According to the information supplied under Exhibit B, the surface layer of the Curecanti loam is about IS inches [hick. Granted [hat this surface layer may vary in thickness, but the Division cannot accept [he applicant's proposal to salvage as little as I inch of topsoil from this unit at [his site for reclamation use. Furthermore, it appears unlikely to the Division that as little as I inch could be successfully stripped and stockpiled. The applicant should commit to salvage and stockpile a more realistic amount of topsoil, i.e. 3 l0 6 inches. Such an estimate would also agree with the 4 inches of salvaged topsoil included in his reclamation cos[ estimate. t ~1(~•t~ EXHIBIT C (Rule 6.3.3(b)): The applicant has not responded to the requirementr of this Rule in that he has N~ ir~.1(`` not indicated how the salvaged topsoil will be stockpiled and stabilized. The proposed reclamation plan ~~~ I~D~) indicates that reclamation will not commence until mining is completed; so it is obviously not intended to put L~ the stockpiled topsoil [o immediate use in reclamation lF~t~, The applicant should respond completely to the requirementr of this Rule. EXHIBIT C (Rule 6.3.3(c)): The proposed mining plan indicates that there is no overburden present on the site which appears to conflict with the information supplied under Exhibit B where the subsoil (overburden?) below the surface layer of the Curecanti loam is said to be about 23 inches [hick. The proposed mining plan indicates that this subsoil, i.e. material below 6 inch depth and extending to the top of [he gravel, will be stockpiled and used to cover the pit prior to the application of the surface or topsoil which O~ is acceptable. I[ is not stated, however, whether [his subsoil will be stockpiled separately, as required by this Rule. The location of such a subsoil (overburden?)stockpile is also not indicated on any acceptable Exhibit E map supplied for this permit application. The applicant should respond fully to the requirementr of this Rule and indicate that any subsoil salvaged will be stockpiled separately from topsoil. The location of [he subsoil (overburden?) stockpile will have to be indicated on some acceptable map under Exhibit E. EXHIBIT C (Rule 6.3.3(d)): The proposed mining plan does not include an estimate of the thickness of the .J deposit [o be mined. ('" The applicant should respond to this requirement. EXHIBIT C (Rules 6.3.3(e) and (f)): The proposed mining plan does appear to adequately describe the componentr of [he operation, but these are not represented on any acceptable map supplied with Exhibit E ~,( for this permit application. The applicant will have to indicate the location and sizes of [he pit and access road on some acceptable map under Exhibit E. EXHIBIT C (Rule 6.3.3(h)): The proposed mining plan does not respond to the requirements of this Rule, N~- i.e. indicating the amount and source of water to be used in conjunction with the operation. ~~~ The applicant must respond to [he requirementr of this Rule. ~~ EXHIBIT C (Rules 6.3.3(1), Q) and (I)): The proposed mining plan does indicate that mining will no[ be conducted within two (2) feet of [he ground water table which is acceptable. The plan, however, also