My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2011-06-22_REVISION - C1981014
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1981014
>
2011-06-22_REVISION - C1981014
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:34:48 PM
Creation date
5/14/2013 11:01:03 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981014
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
6/22/2011
Doc Name
Landowner Concerns
Type & Sequence
TR39
Email Name
JHB
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.
Page 1 of 1
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
K2T response to Division of MiningC <br />We are in receipt of your letter notifying us that Energy Fuels requested a revision to change the portal <br />reference plot. <br />Before we can determine if any changes should be made in the Portal Reference Plot, we need a copy of <br />the latest revegetation survey and its location and results when Linda was on site at the mine last year. <br />Please send it immediately through the mail to Paula Coulter, Linda Saunders and Tena Gallagher. <br />We have the following questions: <br />1. For clarification, we need to confirm that the portal reference plot mentioned in your email of <br />6/11/11 is the reference plot "B" on the 11/10/89 vegetation survey map. <br />2. When have vegetation surveys been done on this property and can we have copies of those <br />reports and the results? <br />3. Why should a reference plot area that was designated 30 years ago (1980), be changed with <br />only two years left in the revegetation period? <br />4. Why is the current reference plot not representative to what existed then? All of the reference <br />plots noted in the 1980 survey have about the same total average vegetation which is 19.1 %. <br />The basal tree area is 2.08% where the railroad load out area is higher at 3.03 %. Yet the basal <br />forb cover is 1.68% and the total basal grass cover is 5.3% which is lower than the railroad load <br />out area. <br />5. Why is the size of the portal reference plot "B" smaller than the other reference plot "A "? <br />6. Since the portal area was disturbed with new construction after 1980 how can a new reference <br />plot be established after the fact and where? <br />7. According to the 11/10/1989 vegetation map, the predominate tree species is Ponderosa pine in <br />reference plot "B ". What was the original number of Ponderosa pine planted during the <br />revegetation period and how many are still surviving currently? <br />8. The area was originally forested, especially the north facing slopes, with several Juniper <br />together and then several Pinion pines together. It seems that when the planting was done, the <br />plugs were randomly placed, not mimicking the original groupings. <br />We need to know the repercussions if we agree to changing the reference plot area and if we do not <br />agree to this action. If we do not agree, do we need to request a hearing before the Board? <br />In the future please send any notices, revisions, additional reports, water monitoring reports to Paula <br />Coulter, Linda Saunders and Tena Gallagher. Since we do not subscribe to the Canon Record, we are <br />seldom aware of your notices. We would like to be informed property owners. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.