Laserfiche WebLink
i <br />• • <br />F. A portion of the application references gravel washing <br />activities, however it is not clear whether this operation <br />~v will involve the discharge of process water from the site. <br />Please provide basic details regarding this activity and show <br />\ the location of the settling pond, feeder ditch and discharge <br />'~~) ditch, if any, on the mine plan map. <br />G. Please describe any specific atormwater control structures <br />that ere proposed to be installed during active mining <br />operations to control atormwater runoff from the site. This <br />would include such items as diversion and/or collection <br />ditches, berms, hay bale dikes, end settling ponds. <br />\ ' H: Please describe what measures will be taken to control <br />v fugitive dust emissions during active mining operations. The <br />written objection received by the Division for this proposed <br />operation referenced possible dust problems at the existing <br />Noland Pit located a few miles south of the Cedar Point Pit. <br />4. RECLAMATION PLAN <br />A. It is unclear from the information provided whether the <br />\ process water pond, any stormwater control structures <br />\\V\ installed during active mining, and the mine access road will <br />be reclaimed at the end of the life of the mine, or left on <br />site to support the proposed post-mining land use of irrigated <br />pasture. Please clarify. <br />B. Please provide details on reclamation tasks that will be <br />involved in reclaiming the facilities area, including any <br />regrading, backfilling, ripping (to alleviate compaction), and <br />topsoil replacement activities. <br />C. The scale of the reclamation map should be similar to that <br />~~,~°J~ of the mine plan map in order to allow accurate comparisons of <br />~~~ pre-mining and post-mining configurations and to determine <br />earthwork quantities and associated reclamation costs. Also, <br />the anticipated topography of the mine are a,after_all mining <br />i_s completed should be depicted in some appropriate fashion on <br />the map. <br />\ D. The application proposes to return the highwall portion of <br />the mined area to a 2:1 slope. Rowever, this may be too steep <br />to adequately support the proposed post-mining land use of <br />irrigated pasture. It may be difficult to install an adequate <br />irrigation system for an pasture containing such slopes, and <br />there would also appear to be a high potential for erosion <br />down such slopes depending on the type of irrigation system <br />utilized. Rule ~3.4(T)-(b)~ requires that whenever final <br />slopes steeper than 3:1 are proposed, the applicant must <br />include a justification that supports steeper slopes for the <br />3 <br />