My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2009-03-11_REVISION - M1999098 (6)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1999098
>
2009-03-11_REVISION - M1999098 (6)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/15/2021 2:18:31 PM
Creation date
3/12/2009 8:24:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1999098
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
3/11/2009
Doc Name
Preliminary Adequacy Review Response
From
Rcp
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
AM1
Email Name
ECS
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.
/
70
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
Mr. Eric Scott <br />March 10, 2009 <br />Page 6 of 9 <br />It is our understanding that Gravel Mining operations can be permitted by the DRMS with <br />the commitment that no ground water will be exposed until an approved Temporary <br />Substitute Supply Plan (TSSP) is in place for the site. The existing activities are covered <br />by the existing, approved TSSP. A copy of the approved TSSP for the site is attached. <br />Prior to release of the bonding on the site, the applicant will provide proof of a SEO and <br />Court approved Augmentation plan for any evaporative losses from unlined ground water <br />ponds within the permit area. <br />6.4.8 EXHIBIT H - Wildlife Information <br />This section is adequate as submitted. <br />6.4.9 EXHIBIT I - Soils Information <br />This section is adequate as submitted. <br />6 4 10 EXHIBIT 3 - Vegetation Information <br />This section is adequate as submitted. <br />6.4.11 EXHIBIT K - Climate Information <br />This section is adequate as submitted. <br />6.4.12 EXHIBIT L - Reclamation Costs <br />The reclamation plan costs provided in this application are incomplete and a bit confusing. <br />The biggest omission is that no actual breakdown of specific tasks or costs has been <br />provided. Also the text of this section states that the area is within the existing permit <br />area, is currently bonded, and no additional bonding would be required. This statement <br />seems to be a bit contradictory with the amendment application. Perhaps what is being <br />implied here is a phased bonding approach with a total on-site disturbance of no more <br />than 53 acres? Please clarify. <br />Aggregate Industries needs to prepare a bond estimate broken down by task and cost for <br />each task of reclamation at the projected time of the maximum disturbance of the site. <br />This estimate will be reviewed by DRMS once the remaining adequacy issues such as <br />maximum amount of backfill to be placed; total acres requiring topsoil replacement and <br />seeding, and all other tasks for the projected maximum disturbance have been clarified. <br />Also, it appears that no costs for several listed features, such as the proposed underpass to <br />Cell 4, or for removal of the conveyors, etc., have been included in the list of tasks <br />submitted. DRMS will review the reclamation cost estimate provided, and if necessary <br />prepare an estimate itself, if the provided estimate appears to be incomplete or <br />inadequate. <br />We anticipate that the area of maximum disturbance within the amended mining area will <br />occur at the beginning of mining of Cell 4. Cell 5 will be stripped and operating as the <br />r 0" <br />r610%
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.