My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2011-10-31_REVISION - M1976009HR (7)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1976009
>
2011-10-31_REVISION - M1976009HR (7)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/15/2021 5:44:22 PM
Creation date
11/1/2011 10:38:25 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1976009HR
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
10/31/2011
Doc Name
Submittal
From
Schmidt Construction Company
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
AM4
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.
/
46
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
Turkey Creek showing any flow whatsoever in this area. Therefore, no water quality issues arose as a <br />part of the corrective actions. <br />Meanwhile a "reason to believe there is a possible violation" letter was sent to the operator <br />and a hearing set for September 14, 2011. At first it was thought by the Division and the Operator <br />that a simple Technical Revision with a trading of unaffected land elsewhere in the permit with the <br />affected land here would suffice to include this area in the affected land boundary. However, two <br />issues arose. <br />First, there was now a concern that future mining along the edge of the quarry might create <br />additional spillage. Therefore, it was suggested that even more unaffected but permitted land be <br />included in the revision. It was later determined that any additional mining along the edge to the <br />north of the spill would not only create spillage but would also likely go below the approved mining <br />limit stated in the permit. Under those circumstances, the operator decided to forego any additional <br />mining on the edge and prepare to reclaim the edge zone during the next winter. Any further mining <br />would only occur on the quarry side of the edge, after leaving a suitable lip on the edge so a "knife <br />edge" is not created. <br />Second, further examination of the definitions in the rules and regulations showed that the <br />Technical Revision pathway was not viable because affected land was being added. That then shifted <br />the type of administrative action to include the additional affected land in the permit from Technical <br />Revision to Amendment. <br />This, in general, presents the history of the problem and lays the background for the <br />amendment application which follows. Throughout the amendment expansion some of the points <br />brought up in this historical summary will be discussed. <br />Menzer Quarry Corrective Action Amendment INTRO October 2011 Page 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.