My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE127279
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
300000
>
PERMFILE127279
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:24:23 PM
Creation date
11/25/2007 4:28:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1983106
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
8/15/1983
Doc Name
CHEYENNE CNTY PIT 1 FN 83-105 CHEYENNE CNTY PIT 2 FN 83-106
From
MLRD
To
NORM ARENDS
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.
/
6
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
Norm Arends -5- August 15, 1983 <br />Exn;h;t n <br />1. The drainageway to the east of the pit should be protected from <br />sediment generated by the mining operation. The S.C.S. mentions.a <br />sediment control structure that now exists but they feel is presently <br />inadequate. Cheyenne County should describe the interaction of the <br />mining plan with the drainageway, show the relationship on the maps, and <br />describe and commit to an adequate sediment control plan for the <br />operation. <br />2. Please reference my questions 3,4,5,6 and,? under this exhioit <br />X concerning Pit No. 1 and answer them for this operation. <br />3. if a drainageway is to be part of the affected land, the interaction <br />~of the mining operation and the drainageway should be described in detail. <br />Exhibit E <br />1. If the mininy operation affects the drainageway mentioned by the <br />S.C.S., the reclamation of the drainageway should be described in <br />detail. .The comments yiven under Exhibit E, questions 1 and 2 for Pit <br />No. 1 would also apply to this operation, depending upon the extent to <br />which the drainayeway is mined. <br />~. Please reference any questions 3 and 4 under this exhibit concerning <br />Pit No. 1 and answer them for this operation. <br />Exhibit G <br />1. The characteristics of the drainageway that is adjacent to (or part <br />~ of) the mining operation should be described. The characteristics of the <br />I~ drainageway should be considered in light .of the questions asked earlier <br />'\ relating to its potential mining and reclamation, and protection from <br />sedimentation. <br />Exhibit I <br />`' 1. The permit area should be precisely outlined on the soils snap in <br />~( Order to show that all soils in the permit area have been described. <br />ntil this has been done, we cannot evaluate the adequacy of the soils <br />infonnation. <br />r~ <br />2. To what depth is topsoil available for use in reclamation? Ihis <br />decision should be made considering the depths of all topsoil types on <br />the affected land.• This soils information is not yet adequate to <br />detennine this (no map for soils). <br />Exhibit J <br />1. Rule 2.12(10) requires more information concerning vegetation than <br />you have provided. I have enclosed a copy of this rule for your <br />N U reference. Please respond under all parts of this rule. The S.C.S. may <br />or may not be able to provide this level of site-specific data on <br />vegetation. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.