Laserfiche WebLink
Preliminary Adequacy Review / January 20, 2011 <br />M-1980-041 / Rock Gulch Pit <br />Per Rule 1.6.2(e) the Division requires proof of notice to all adjacent landowners <br />identified in the amendment application. DRMS has not received proof of notice to the <br />adjacent landowners. <br />Per Rule 6.4, Specific requirements for a 112 Reclamation Operation: <br />6.4.1 - Exhibit A, Legal Description is adequate. <br />6.4.2 - Exhibit B, Index Map is adequate. <br />6.4.3 - Exhibit C, Pre-Mining and Mining Maps. <br />(a) addressed, <br />(b), addressed <br />(c), addressed <br />(d) Please note that in the Mine Plan an exact acreage for "affected lands" is <br />requested. <br />(e), addressed, <br />(f), addressed in Exhibit G <br />(g) appears to be addressed <br />(h) addressed on map and in exhibit I <br />6.4.4 - Exhibit D, Mining Plan <br />(a) addressed <br />(b) addressed <br />(c) no diversions are noted and general flow is to the northeast <br />(d) please clarify how much acreage will be disturbed prior to concurrent <br />reclamation beginning. <br />(e) see (d) above. <br />(f) addressed <br />(g) addressed <br />(h) none noted <br />(i) please specify whether any explosives will or will not be used in the course <br />of mining operations. <br />General issues: <br />(1) Mine Plan Map notes the power poles crossing Area 1. The Reclamation <br />Map notes the lines to be relocated but shown in same location. Please <br />Clarify. <br />(2) Damage waiver with Excel notes a twenty five foot setback from mining <br />around 4 poles. Please clarify how operator will protect the exclusion <br />zone. The set back should be clearly shown on the Mining and <br />Reclamation May unless relocation is to be done prior to mining.