My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2002-08-13_PERMIT FILE - M2002004 (2)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Minerals
>
M2002004
>
2002-08-13_PERMIT FILE - M2002004 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 2:18:43 PM
Creation date
11/3/2010 9:46:21 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2002004
IBM Index Class Name
PERMIT FILE
Doc Date
8/13/2002
Doc Name
Recommendation for Approval of a 112 Construction Application
From
DRMS
To
GCC Rio Grande, Inc.
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.
/
15
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
12. Has the applicant provided an adequate description of the presence and estimated <br />populations of threatened and endangered species from the federal and state lists? <br />(Rule 6.4.8(1)(c) <br />In consultation with the US Fish and Wildlife Service, the Colorado Division of <br />Wildlife and the Colorado Natural Heritage Program, the applicant did describe <br />the presence and estimated populations of threatened or endangered species <br />and thus, met the requirements ofRule 6.4.8(1)(c). <br />13. Is re-establishment of wildlife habitat considered in the reclamation plan? (Rule <br />6.4.5(2)) <br />The primary pre- and post-mining land use for this site is rangeland. However, <br />the applicant has taken wildlife habitat into consideration with their <br />reclamation plan. The re-vegetation plan provides for a more ecologically <br />diverse vegetative community than what presently exists on site. Successful <br />establishment of revegetation plan as proposed, should improve the wildlife <br />habitat due to the increased diversity ofplant composition and cover compared <br />to the pre-mining conditions. <br />Soils information <br />14. Has the applicant addressed the soil characteristics in the area of the proposed <br />operation to the extent necessary to demonstrate its' suitability for revegetation? <br />(Rule 3.1.9(6) and (7), and Rule 6.4.9). <br />Soils in the proposed mining area have been sufficiently mapped to determine <br />the amount available for reclamation, and their suitabilityfor reclamation. <br />Based on the pre-mining surveys of these, the applicant has determined that <br />approximately 75% of the area has 18-24 inches of topsoil and subsoil available <br />for use during reclamation. This soil will typically be salvaged in two lifts <br />consisting of the top 6 inches and the underlyingl2-I8 inches, which will be <br />kept separate from the remaining overburden. The remaining 25 % of the area <br />has soils that may be limiting, mostly due to excessive rock fragments. As a <br />result, the average soil replacement depth will range from a minimum of 12 <br />inches to a maximum of 24 inches with an average of 18 inches replaced. <br />15. Does the applicant address what measures will be taken to protect topsoil to avoid <br />deterioration, to protect the topsoil from erosion and to prevent contamination <br />from blasting? (Rule 3.1.9(1) and (3)) <br />The applicant has committed in their submittal of July 8, 2002 to "live handle" <br />topsoil, subsoil, and backfill materials. This technique of materials handling, <br />whereby topsoil is removed from the active stripping location then placed on the <br />active topsoiling location, provides the best protection for the topsoil, in that no <br />deterioration takes place, and the topsoil is exposed to erosive forces for the
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.