My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2011-07-25_REVISION - M1999006
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1999006
>
2011-07-25_REVISION - M1999006
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/16/2021 6:12:51 PM
Creation date
7/26/2011 7:02:35 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1999006
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
7/25/2011
Doc Name
Adequacy Review
From
DRMS
To
Varra Companies, Inc.
Type & Sequence
TR3
Email Name
MAC
AJW
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.
/
3
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
d) Provide a brief explanation of how the pond has historically been used to manage water <br />flows through the area. <br />e) What permits, if any, does the Army Corps of Engineers require for discharging water to <br />the wetlands north of Tract C? <br />f) Will groundwater undergo settling in temporary basins prior to being discharged into the <br />pond? If so, please describe how the temporary basins will be constructed and provide <br />their location on the Mining Plan Map. <br />4. The Applicant has not addressed how dewatering may potentially impact the adjacent <br />wetlands in this Technical Revision or in the original submittal. It may be that this <br />information was omitted in the original Reclamation Permit Application since it was not <br />evident if Tract C would be mined at the time of the submittal. In order for the Division to <br />determine that the potential impacts to the hydrologic balance will be minimized, the <br />Applicant must provide additional information demonstrating what the impacts could be and <br />how they will be mitigated. This will likely involve gathering existing data or obtaining new <br />data in order to construct some modeling that will project the behavior of the surface and <br />groundwater regimes once mining has reached its maximum disturbance. In addition, once <br />these projections have been made, there should be a plan which will quantify the damage <br />threshold that will initiate remedial actions and what those remedial actions will be. <br />5. How many pumps will be used to dewater Tract C? Please provide the location of the <br />pump(s) on the Mining Plan Map. <br />6.4.12 Exhibit L — Reclamation Costs <br />6. The determination of the financial warranty for this site is based on using a specific pump, <br />pumping rates and electrical costs. Please specify the type of pump(s) which will be used to <br />dewater Tract C. <br />7. The Applicant has stated the cost to reclaim Tract C has been offset by reclamation in Tract <br />A. The Division has confirmed that costs associated with grading Tract C have been offset by <br />grading in Tract A. However, dewatering, topsoil replacement and seeding costs will need to <br />be added to the current financial warranty amount of $286,979. Once all of the adequacy <br />issues have been addressed, the Division will recalculate the financial warranty amount. <br />As previously mentioned, if you are unable to provide satisfactory responses to any inadequacies <br />prior to August 5, 2011, it will be your responsibility to request an extension of time to allow <br />for continued review of this application. If there are still unresolved issues when the decision <br />date arrives and no extension has been requested, the application will be denied. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.