My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1994-03-21_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981017
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Coal
>
C1981017
>
1994-03-21_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981017
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/2/2021 9:54:08 AM
Creation date
10/5/2012 8:41:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981017
IBM Index Class Name
GENERAL DOCUMENTS
Doc Date
3/21/1994
Doc Name
Bid Documents (IMP)
Permit Index Doc Type
General Correspondence
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
230
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
16 <br /> topsoil on the site and that it is difficult to find topsoiled <br /> areas at the elevation (about 9, 800 feet) of the operation. <br /> Mr. Applegate said the operator has committed to salvaging as <br /> much of the fines as possible for reclamation, and to conduct <br /> seeding and revegetation work on the site. He said the area <br /> would be restored to a beneficial use which would be better <br /> than its current use. <br /> Regarding the availability of organic soil amendments, e.g. , <br /> sewage sludge, Mr. Applegate said they have discussed <br /> developing a memorandum of understanding with the county, in <br /> order to attempt the use of those types of materials. He said <br /> the county did not have a suggestion about where this type of <br /> material could be obtained. <br /> The Division' s concern with the use of sewage sludge on the <br /> site related to the possibility of heavy metals and nitrates <br /> contaminating the ground water, because the operation would be <br /> situation in an alluvial system and a flood plain. Staff <br /> suggested using material excavated from building sites, when- <br /> the material is adequate. <br /> Mr. Bob Bisgard, representing the operator, stated that they <br /> planned to use material from building sites, when possible. <br /> Staff suggested that if the amount of topsoil is limited, the <br /> operator should develop random pockets of good vegetation, in <br /> order to blend-in with the surrounding cover. <br /> Regarding delineation of the wetlands areas, Staff presented <br /> a September 20, 1993 letter from the Corps of Engineers which <br /> stated that a permit from them would not be required for the <br /> operation and suggested that a portion of the area be <br /> reclaimed to wetlands. <br /> Mr. Bisgard said that the operator has also committed to <br /> reviewing and staking the area periodically, in order to <br /> maintain delineation of wetlands areas during the operation. <br /> He said they would run this mine from July through September. <br /> Mr. Bisgard said they would like to obtain permit approval and <br /> move some material in late October. <br /> The Board approved the operator' s permit application, with the <br /> additional stipulation that the operator attempt to explore <br /> the availability of any kind of soil amendment in the area <br /> that is available on a cost-effective basis and write a letter <br /> to the Division by March 1, 1994 indicating the results of the <br /> research and whether anything was available. (It was <br /> clarified that there would be no requirement to use the <br /> material, if available; the operator had no objection. ) <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.