My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2009-10-30_REVISION - C1981019
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1981019
>
2009-10-30_REVISION - C1981019
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:56:37 PM
Creation date
11/2/2009 2:56:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981019
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
10/30/2009
Doc Name
Review Memo
From
Dan Mathews
To
Jim Stark
Type & Sequence
TR82
Email Name
JRS
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.
/
2
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
"shallow thickness?one'f by at least ??inches? Arrerae replacementthic?r?essfor <br />?'thic? sail" zone gill exceed average thickness of r`mediu thickness" gone by at Fast <br />18 inches Thick sail replacerr?ent?aneswill include locationswhereslope expos?ro <br />and moisture conditions would potentially be ?ava?rable for establishment ?? aspen, <br />chokecherry, and associated species <br />If the operator would incorporate these comr?ltments into the section 2.5.4 narrati?re, I think <br />we could allow for further specific details to be addressed within the Annual ?eclarr?ation <br />deports ?? proposed. The approach I have recommended would ensure meaningful ?ari,ation in <br />sail replacementthickness,whereastheTl???1 cernmitmentto ?`...dernanstratevariabletopsoil <br />depths from shallow to deep one moves from the tap ?? the reclamation unit or slope to the <br />bottam'° besthe questions "what is variable?, what is shallaw?, what is deep?'. TheTR- <br />proposed narrative commits to provide plans fortopsail thickness ranges within the Annual <br />Reclamation ?epor?s, but provides na minimum criteria reardin? the proposed thickness <br />ranges, IVIy concern is that if we were to approve TR??? as proposed,, the plan ?olowyo subrr?its <br />in theirnetAnnual feclarr?ation Report rniht be considerably moreeneralthanwhatwe <br />would envision as beinappropriate. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.