Laserfiche WebLink
Gorham, Kent <br />From: Gorham, Kent <br />Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 4:48 PM <br />To: Ron Thompson (E-mail) <br />Subject: 2005 New Elk ARR Review <br />Ron, <br />Please consider this email correspondence the Division's review of the 2005 Annual Reclamation Report for the New Elk <br />Mine. <br />A minimal amount of reclamation was completed site-wide prior to 2003. During 2003, a modest amount of reclamation <br />work was completed. No additional work was conducted in 2004. In 2005, again a significant amount of work was <br />completed. Review of the DMG files indicates no response to our 2003 ARR review. Also, during that time, the Division <br />introduced a new ARR reporting form to meet the requirements of Rule 2.04.13 and the Government Results and <br />Reporting Act, for the Division and for the Office of Surtace Mining, respectively. <br />Our narrative from that review is as follows, in bold; <br />To assist in proper identification of reclaimed areas, in future reports, please footnote the meaning of the <br />notations "EP" and "WP" in Table 1, Annual Reclamation Acreage. <br />Also, for future submittals, please ensure the surface disturbance boundary and the permit boundary are shown <br />as necessary on the West Portal ARR map. <br />2003 ARR Review <br />1. Review of the reported categories A-H. <br />A) Name, address, and permit number was accurate as reported. <br />B) Acreage disturbed during the calendar year was reported as zero. However, the narrative in the ARR <br />reporting form indicates 1.5 acres were disturbed in 2003. Please identify these acres on the map(s) and <br />correct the report. <br />C) Total acres reported as backfilled and graded in 2003 was 21.4. The Division digitized the areas shown <br />on the East portal reclamation map. For area 1, reported as 9.0 acres, the Division calculated 9.83 acres. <br />Please check and correct as necessary. Also, the Division would not concur that 2.8 acres of the topsoil <br />borrow area has been backfilled and graded. Topsoil remains stockpiled in this area final grading had not <br />been completed in this area as late as early 2004. Furthermore, these areas are not shown on the West <br />Portal reclamation map. Please ensure that all acres reported under each category are shown on the <br />reclamation map(s). <br />D) 12.9 acres were reported topsoiled in 2003. Please change acres under 1) as necessary. Also, the <br />Division notes that for this mine site, areas disturbed areas are not required to receive topsoil. This may <br />require special notation on the map to avoid confusion as areas are reclaimed and seeded. <br />E) 12.0 acres were reported seeded in 2003. Please change acres under 1) as necessary. <br />F) Please identify the number of acres for each area as identified on the East Portal reclamation map. <br />Values were not provided for "adjacent hwy 12 south", "RDA road disturbance", and "Areas along river". <br />G) Please explain what is meant by this text. Maps were provided with this report. <br />H) Please indicate specific areas or patches of weeds that were sprayed in 2003. This will assist in <br />identifying future areas for inspection and follow-up over the bond liability period. <br />2. Please submit seed tags or a bulk seed purchase invoice that identifies the specific seed mix used for <br />areas seeded in 2003. <br />3. If 1.5 additional acres were disturbed in 2003, an increase in acres reported under "acreage in active <br />