REP13326 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Dan Mathews Division ofMineraGAnd Geology Page 4 Aide 2.04.13(2) additional monitoring information nquired approved nemrit 8. Permit Tab 20 commits to submittal of fznalgraded topographic maps on an annual bans, along with evaluation of consistency with the proposed pastmiming topography. A November2004 topographic map encompassing the regarded areas war provide but the map lacked certain detail inducting Contour elevations and contour intervals. Also, the photo date it listed as 11 /6/05, which obviously is erroneous. Please provide an amended map with the mquested correction and detail. Response: A revised map is attached. 9. Response prtvio,Rrly submitted ar specified in the July 29a CammentLetter. f 0. Response previously submitted ar specified in the July 29~ Comment Letter. 11. Rude 4.06.4 (2J(aJ requires that topsoil be replaced in a manner that achieves an approximate uniform, stable thickness consfrtent with approved portmining Gtnd uses... and requirements of the vegetation proposed to be established". Narrative on page 32 of Permit Tab 21 stater that topsoil replacement thickness will be documented and recorded for each reclamation block. IP/ithin the original permit area boundary, the permit spe~iftes a mean replacement depth of 1.3 feet, Topsoil replacement thickness is to be sampled with an intensity of 1 hale per 5 acres, and the results are to be submitted in the annual reclamation report. Thu requirement has been somewhat inconsistently addressed in recentyears. In 2002, there wen no sampler reported for the 20 acre parcel toproikd In 2003, infarniation war limited to a narmlive rummay indicating that mean replacrntent depth war 1.5 feet, over 61 acres topsoiled, bared on 10 samples. A similar summary was provided in the 2004 report, indicating `an average rtplacement depth of 26"over 28 sampler"in the `fi "Pit area. In addition, the 2004 report included the results of 25 mndomly distributed auger sampler form locations ire the `D"Pit and `A"Pit that bad been tapsoiled in 2003, and analyzed for standard roil fertility and quality parameters. The analyser document that the replaced rails an a high quality clay loam growth medium, with no inhibitory characterirticr. One roil pit was excavated fn the `A"Pit area and a roil profile description provided, along with complete analyser for two depth increments (total thickness 22 inches). Sample sites are platted on a map, and the report indicates that sample depths ranged from 18 to 24 inches. Soil depths fnrindividual sample locations as not parented To allow for meaningful assessment of replaced topsoil thickness, individual sample hole depths need to be reported, with the sample locations plotted on an appropn'ate map. Such information would document the variation among sample locations, allowing for a more quantitative estimate of the mean, and the mapping would pmvide an indication of arty large areas when then may be rign~cant departure from the approved replacement thickness. Please provide a comprehensive table ptesendng the soil replacement depth sample results obtained to dare at Seneca II- [~ Ireyed to a reclamation map with parcels delineated and identified by year seeded or ropsoaled. Please ensure thatluture soil depth verlficadon data are presented m the same format. Response: This information and key wiU be provided in the 2005 ARR. However, attached is a table/graph indicating the topsoIl depths obtained as a result of the sampling effort through June 2005. 12. Page 32 of Permit Tab 21 contains a rommitment to romplete an annual topsoil balance report to be submitted eachyear within the Annual Reclamation repost. For the original permit area, the nquired mean replacement depth it 1.3 feet (15.6 inches). For the South Extension of the permit area, the permit specifier multiple loner of differing mean replacement thickneu (1 foot, >.7 feet, 2.5 feet, and 4 feet). The overall mean replacement thickness specified for the South Extension area it 1.7 • feet (20.4 inches).