My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REP19821
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Report
>
REP19821
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:48:27 PM
Creation date
11/27/2007 2:44:59 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982057
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Date
12/11/1995
Doc Name
SENECA II W 1994 ANNUAL RECLAMATION REPORT RESPONSE TO DIVISION OF MINERALS & GEOLOGY 4/19/95 ADEQUA
Permit Index Doc Type
ANNUAL RECLAMATION REPORT
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.
/
10
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
- III IIIIIIIIIIIII III <br />s99 <br />SENECA II-W 1994 ANNUAL RECLAMATION REPORT <br />RESPONSE TO DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />04/19/95 ADEQUACY LETTER <br />December 11, 1995 <br />1. The 1994 topsoil balance, as explained on pages 3-6 of the <br />1994 2-w Annual Reclamation Report, contains errors due to <br />surveying, rounding and calculating of volumes. The accuracy <br />of the 1993 and 1994 topsoil volumes has suffered from changes <br />in software and surveying practices. Durinq June 1995, the <br />Seneca survey crew remeasured those piles which had topsoil <br />added to them in 1994. The results are as follows: <br />a, Stockpile GG has 38.6 acre-ft (AF), II has 81.6 AF, and JJ has <br />45.9 AF. No topsoil has been added to or removed from these <br />piles since December 1994. Because different software packages <br />were utilized to calculate the volumes each year, it appears <br />that the 1993 volumes were overestimated. The current program <br />being used to generate these calculations was written by our <br />surveying equipment manufacturer, Sokkia. By matching their <br />software with our surveying instrument Seneca feels a higher <br />degree of accuracy will be achieved from now on. <br />b. An additional 62 disturbed acres had topsoil salvaged during <br />1994, which was placed into piles GG, II and JJ, and 3.9 <br />reclaimed acres were covered with live handled topsoil to a <br />depth of 1.6 feet. From .the response provided in part a, pile <br />volumes for GG and II were overestimated in 1993. Therefore, <br />these piles should not show a loss of 6.9 and 7.7 AF, <br />respectively. Also, stockpile N should have shown a reduction <br />of only 57.8 AF and not 75.0, refer to response c. The table <br />below shows the net changes for the piles affected in 1994: <br />Stockpile Net chancre <br />N -57.8 <br />GG 0.0* <br />II 0.0* Topsoil Replaced = 83.2 <br />JJ +27.3 Stockpile Adjusted = -30.5 <br />Total -30.5 Topsoil Removed = 52.7 ** <br />* Assumed 0.0 AF, because we can not calculate the amount <br />added to these piles. <br />** On the 62 acres disturbed, approximately 52.7 AF of topsoil <br />was removed or an average salvage depth of 0.85 feet. <br />c. Stockpile N was partially redistributed to final graded areas <br />in 1994. 36.1 acres were covered with this soil at an average <br />depth of 1.6 feet. Therefore, 90$ of the 40 acres replaced on <br />Pits A and B in 1994 came from stockpile N, and the remaining <br />10'k was direct hauled. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.