Laserfiche WebLink
Climax Mine Permit Amendment <br /> November 14, 1980 <br /> Page Three <br /> 1 . The information requested pertains to the existing <br /> permit rather than the Amendment. <br /> 2. The information requested has been thoroughly <br /> analyzed by the Reclamation Division or other <br /> reviewing agency. <br /> 3. The information requested was adequately covered in <br /> the application. <br /> Consequently, we have made no attempt to respond to the <br /> DOW questions in writing . We will , however , continue to meet <br /> with the DOW in an attempt to resolve any of their concerns <br /> and we will continue to work with the DOW on existing <br /> important, practical wildlife programs such as stream habitat <br /> improvement and mitigation of impacts on native varieties . <br /> Question F. 2 stated , regarding cut-fill reclamation, <br /> that the operator should not dozer cut the crest but increase <br /> the amount of backfilling at the toe to increase slope <br /> stability, still allowing for a thirty foot roadway. <br /> We agree to this request, as stipulated , for the haul <br /> road to the top of Bartlett Mountain. We feel that <br /> visibility of the road up bartlett Mountain warrants this <br /> action. We cannot commit to implementing this procedure on <br /> all of our haul roads because of the excessive cost involved . <br /> S1r3rely, - <br /> __Ir <br /> Ronald H. Zuck <br /> Environmental Control Engineer <br /> RHZ :hmn <br />