My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REP27297
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Report
>
REP27297
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:58:15 PM
Creation date
11/27/2007 4:43:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981022
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Date
12/6/1995
Doc Name
1995 ANNUAL RECLAMATION REPORT
From
PACIFIC BASIN RESOURCES
To
DMG
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.
/
11
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
<br />Anthony J. Waldron December 1, 1995 <br />Re: 1995 Annual Reclamation Report <br />is not applicable." The application further reinforced <br />the demonstration of compliance with the provisions of <br />Rule 2.06.5(2) for permits incorporating variances from <br />approximate original contour restoration requirements <br />for steep slope mining. <br />After completing it's initial adequacy review, the <br />Division stated in a February 28, 1995 letter: <br />"Overall, the Division agrees with Somerset's position <br />that a highwall will not exist after reclamation is <br />completed and therefore, rule 2.06.5(2) for variance <br />from approximate original contour is the underpinning <br />rule that will dictate the final reclaimed <br />configuration of the Bear Canyon site." <br />"The Division agrees that leaving an access road is <br />beneficial and desirable for public access through this <br />area. Along this vein, it would seem necessary to <br />leave a certain amount of fill below the road for <br />support and stability. With a couple of exceptions <br />mentioned later in this review, the proposed <br />reclamation plan appears to utilize the necessary <br />material to complete backfilling while retaining an <br />adequate foundation to support an access road." <br />"Also, we believe that more material can be used (see <br />below) to complete the backfilling which will result in <br />slightly different final contours and slopes." "The <br />safety factor may have to be re-calculated based on the <br />additional material and final contour configuration." <br />"From reviewing map C8-1226R (post-mining topography <br />map) it is apparent that a small terrace or bench type <br />structure is being left between the 6350 and the 6375 <br />contour levels. The Division feels that this bench <br />should be backfilled and graded out to blend in with <br />the fall line for the rest of the slope. Please revise <br />the plan and map C8-1226R to illustrate the post-mining <br />topography without this bench." <br />On March 16, a letter was drafted with Somerset's <br />responses to the Division's concerns. Somerset's <br />position on moving additional material up the slope was <br />stated, and a request to reconsider a revision to the <br />post-mining topography was made. <br />"Somerset is reluctant to move additional material up <br />the slope to reclaim the terrace because of slope <br />stability concerns. If more material is moved up the <br />5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.