Laserfiche WebLink
Preliminary Adequacy Issues for CN-01 13 <br />May Day Idaho Mine Complex <br />4. Figures C-2 and C-7 are difficult to read due to the inappropriate scale of 1 inch = 800 <br />feet. Pursuant to Rule 6.2.1(2)(e), the acceptable range of map scales shall not be larger <br />than 1 inch = 50 feet nor smaller than 1 inch = 660 feet. Please submit new Figures C-2 <br />and C-7, which comply with the basic map requirements of Rule 6.2.1(2)(e). <br />5. Figures C-2 and C-7 indicate eleven man-made structures located nearby affected lands. <br />The owner(s) of structures D, E and F are not identified. The colored circles, intended tc <br />locate each structure, are approximately 200 feet in diameter and obscure other <br />important map details. Figures C-2 and C-7 do not identify County Road 124 as one of <br />the man-made structures located within 200 feet of the boundary of affected lands. <br />Please revise Figures C-2 and C-7 to identify the owner(s) of all structures located within <br />200 feet of the boundary of affected lands. Please delineate and label the appropriate <br />boundary of affected lands. Please indicate the location of each man-made structure in <br />a more precise manner and which does not obscure other map details unnecessarily. <br />6. Exhibit A, Legal Description, indicates the Augmentation Pipeline Corridor is illustrated <br />on Figure C-4. There is no such pipeline or corridor indicated on Figure C-4. Figure C-4 <br />labels two augmentation ponds, one of which is located outside the boundary of <br />affected lands. Figure C-4 inappropriately locates the mill facility at the Idaho rather <br />than at the May Day 1 level. Figure C-4 fails to include all affected lands within the <br />boundary of affected lands. The color and pattern of line used to delineate the affected <br />land boundary and the permit boundary are sufficiently similar to confuse the two <br />boundaries. Please submit a new Figure C-4, which labels and delineates all pipeline <br />locations, shows the location of the single augmentation pond proposed by the <br />application, correctly locates the mill facility at the May Day 1 level, delineates the <br />correct boundary of affected lands, and delineates the different boundaries with unique <br />line pattern and color. <br />7. Figure SWMP-2 delineates and labels two augmentation ponds, one of which is located <br />outside of the affected land boundary. Figure SWMP-2 inappropriately locates the mill <br />facility at the Idaho rather than at the May Day 1 level. The proposed drainage basin <br />boundaries appear random and confusing. Figure SWMP-2 indicates three culverts for <br />the illegal access road, none of which appear to be located at the road and two of which <br />appear to be located beyond the permit boundary. Please revise Figure SWMP-2 to <br />correctly illustrate what is intended. <br />8. The Reclamation Plan maps, Figures F-1 through F-5, utilize an air photo as the base <br />layer, overlain with topographic lines. Affected lands are illustrated as large colored <br />polygons. Roads are delineated with colored lines. <br />The air photos for Figures F-1, F-2, F-3 and F-5, have been digitally enlarged to a scale of <br />1 inch = 50 feet. At this resolution the individual pixels of the image can be measured at <br />16 square feet area. The pixels form a mosaic and confusing pattern, details of the <br />original photos are no longer evident. Please eliminate the air photos as base layers for <br />Figures F-1 through F-5. Alternately, if the Applicant desires to utilize air photos for