Laserfiche WebLink
footprint. <br />This statement appears to be in error; based on the location described in Table 16-1A legal <br />description and delineated on Exhibit 16-1, "Friederich #1" appears to have been located within the <br />immediate mine pit area, and if it does correspond to Spring S-49 as appears likely, it was in fact <br />"mined out in 2001". Also, the location given for "Friederich Spring #2" on Table 16-1A and map <br />Exhibit 16-1 appears questionable, given that the source of the spring is described on Table 16-1A <br />as Hubberson Gulch. The site location listed for Friederich #2 is actually on a tributary to Sage <br />Creek, not Hubberson Gulch. <br />Please confirm whether or not S-49 and "Friederich Spring #1" are the same feature, revise <br />the apparently inaccurate statement on page 16-11, and confirm or amend the site <br />location/drainage source for Friederich Spring #2 on Table 16-1A and Exhibit 16-1, as <br />appropriate. Please further address, in appropriate sections of the permit text, how <br />compliance with the provisions of 4.05.15 "Water Rights and Replacement" has been (or will <br />be) achieved with respect to the adjudicated spring (or springs) impacted by mining on the <br />Friederich property in the South Mine area. <br />4. On August 4, 2008, the Division received a July 29, 2008 addendum to the 2008 Rill and Gully <br />Survey, which described the scope of work for geotechnical investigations to be performed in <br />association with the "Shrub Plot Slide" and "Pond 016 Slide"; slope failures that occurred in the <br />spring of 2008. Please provide an additional Rill and Gully Survey addendum upon <br />completion of the geotechnical investigations, for Division review and acceptance, prior to <br />initiation of repair work. The further addendum should contain the NWCC final geotechnical <br />report and the selected remedial plan for each slide. <br />5. Certain updates to the revegetation plan are warranted. Specifically, the woody plant density <br />standard for aspen planting areas needs to be defined, and the Appendix 22-3 "Aspen Study Plan" <br />needs to be updated to incorporate the final study report for the original study plots, and to describe <br />the on-going aspen/serviceberry establishment studies being conducted in cooperation with the <br />Forest Service Rocky Mountain Research Station. Because the aspen planting areas include <br />seeding and planting with woody shrubs in addition to aspen, it would seem reasonable that the <br />concentrated aspen planting areas include both a total woody plant stem density standard and an <br />aspen stem density standard. A total woody plant density of 1000 stems per acre, with at least 150 <br />aspen stems per acre may be an appropriate standard for these concentrated planting sites. Please <br />address these issues and amend the appropriate sections of Tab 22 as warranted. <br />6