HomeMy WebLinkAbout041-080-027 (6)APPE11DIX F
f •ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
(Tobe completed by Lead Agency)
I. BACKGROUND.'
.ERD Log, 81-10-28-03
AP N 41-08-27
1. -Nama of Proponent RonaH R. Logan.
2. Address and Phone Number of.Froponent:
409S Dry Creek Road c/o Russell R. Logan
Oroville, CA 9S96S- LU181 Lott -RoacT_
Durham, CA 95938
-3. Datee-of Checklist Submitted
4. Agency Requiring Checklist
5. Name o f Proposal, i f a p p I i c aFf _eNTWt7n -9 -P-e-r—M -1f --a-nU—:
-Reclama.tion.Plan for gold mining
II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanations . . of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required
on attached sheets.)
V4.
YES MAYBE ..NO
l.' Earth-. 1•]i11.. the. proposal. result in significant
a.. Unstable earth conditions or in r
changes in geologic substructures? W
b. Disruptions, displacements,.com-
paction..or.overcoverin'g of the soil?
c. Change'in topography or ground sur-
face relief features or removal of
topsoil?
d. -Destruction,covering o-r-modifica-_
-tion of any unique geologic or
physical features?
e Increase in wind or water erosion AMii
of soils, either on or off the site?
f. �-`hanges i"n...,deppsitio.n. or erosion
0. '-in.silta-
bda&h sands,. or.change$
tion:; -3 t iod or erosion:..which: _-'
: epO,S.
may ..podif .. , 1 Y the channel of a rive! -.or
stream or the bed of the ocean or.
any bay, inlet or lake?
g. Loss of prime;agriculturally jagriculturally 'pro-
ductive-soils.outside designated,-:
urban areas?
Appendix F - page 1 of 9
YES
MAYBE NO
h.
Exposure of people or property.to
•
geologic hazards such as earthquakes,
landslides, mudslides, ground failure,
or similAr hazards?
2. Ai.r. Will'the proposal result in:
a.
Substantial deterioration of
ambient or local air quality?
b.
The creation 01. objectionable
odors, smoke or fu,nes?
c.
Significant alter tion of air
movement, moisture -or temperature,
or any change in climate, either
locally or regionally?
3: Water.. Will the proposal result ih substantial:
a.'
Changes in currents, or the course
or direction of water movements?
--
b.
Changes in absorption rates, drainage
patterns, or the rate and amount of
surface water runoff?
c.
Peed for off-site surface drainage
improvements, including vegetation
removal, channelization or. culvert
installation?
;i.
Alterations to the course or flow
of flood waters?
e'.
Change in -the amount of surface
�.
water. in any water body?
f.
Discharge into surface waters, or'
in any alteration of surface
''water. quality, including but not
limited.-:to.temperature, dissolved
oxygei.or,turbidity?
g.
Alteration of the direction or
rate of flow of ground waters?
h.
Change in the quantity or -quality
of ground waters, either through
�..
direct additions or withdrawals,
interception of an
or through
•
aquifer by cuts or excavations?
40
A ----A,,, T.
-41
Appendix F - page 3 of 9
YES
MAYBE NO
•
i.
Reduction in the amount of water
otherwise available for pudic
water supplies?
j.
Exposure of people or property
to.water related hazards such as
flooding?
C
4.
Plant":'Life. Will the proposal result
in
sii tantial:
a.
Loss of veetation or change in the
diversity of species or number.
of any species of plants (including
trees,. shrubs, grass, crops,
microflora and aquatic plants)?.
b.
Reduction of the numbers of any .
unique, _-are or endangered species
of plants?
C.
Introduction of new species of
plants into an area,. or in a barrier
to the normal replenishment of
•
existing species?
d.
a ri-
Reduction in acreage. of. any g
g
culturA `_ crop?
S.
Animal Life.'.Will.the proposal result
in
substantial:
a.
Change in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of.
animals birds, 1and:, animals:,
including .r.eptil`es-,,-::..fish. aril shell=
fish, benthic organisms, insects or
!
micro fauna) ?
b.
Reduction of.the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species
of animals?
c.
Introduction of new species of
;.
animals into :an .area, or,result in:
�.
a barrier to' the migrat-.ion or
movement of animals?
d.
Reduction of,.encroachment upon, or
'
deterioration. to existing fish or
--an
wildlife habitat?
-41
Appendix F - page 3 of 9
YES MAYBE NO
6. Noise. Will the Proposal result in
substantial:
a. Increases in noise levels?
Y
b.Exposure of people to severe noise.
levels?
7. Light and Glare. Will the.proposal.
Produce signs scant light or glare?
8. Land Use. Will the proposal result
in a signif icant
a Alteration of the planned land use
of an area, or establish a trend
which will demonstrably lead to such
alteration?
b. Conflict with uses.on adjoining.
properties, or: conflict with
establi:;'-%d recreational-, educa-
tional'; religious or scientific
uses. of an area?
9. Natural Resources.. Will the proposal
..result in substantial:
a: Demand for, .or increase in'the rate
of use of any natural.resources?
b. Depletion of any nonrenewable
natural.resource?
10. Risk of U set...Does the proposal
invo ve a risk of.an explosion or
the release of hazardous substances
(including, but not limited to, oil,
pesticides, chemicals or radiation)'
in the event of an accident or upset
conditions?
11.Popiilattiio4. Will the proposal.
sign cantly alter the location,
distribution., 14ensity.,..or : grow:th
rate o..t:he human, population; of an
area or' 6hys:ie;ally divide an
established community?
•12. Hous ihg. Will the proposal
signs scantly affect existing housing,
or create a demand for additional
housing?
0
r
YES MAYBE NO
13.
Trans. ortation/Circulation.. Will the
result in:
proposal
a.
-Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement?
b.
Significant effects on exi.stinr
parking facili.tieg, or demand for
new parking?
c..
Substantial impact upon existing
:transportation systems?
d.
Significant alterations to present
patterns of circulation or movement.
.. o -f. people and/or goods?
e.
Alterations to waterborne, rail or
air. tra.f f ic?
f:
Increase in traffic hazards to motor
Avbk
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
14.
Public Services. Will the proposal have.
an
effect -upon, or result in a substantial
need for new or altered governmental
`:. •
servicers in any of the following areas:
a.
Fire protection?
b.
Police protection?
c.
Schools?
d.
Parks or other recreational
facilities?
e..
Maintenance of public facilities,
.'.including roads?
f.
Other governmental services?
15.
Energy. Will the proposal.result in:
a.
"Use of substantial :amounts. of fuel
or energy?
b.
-Substantial increase in demand upon
:
existing sources of energy, or
require the development of -new
sources of energy?.
43
AnnPncii x F --
naoP
Utilities. Will the proposal result
in a nee for -new -systems, orsub-
stantial alterations to the following
utilities:
a. Power:o r natural gas?
b. Communications systems?
c. Water?
d. Sewer (will trunk line be extended,
providing capacity to serve new
development).".
e._ Storm water.:drainage?
17. Human Health. Will the proposal.
result..in:
a. -Creation : of '. any .health hazard or
D.otential health hazard (excluding.
mental health)?
b. ;Exposure .of people to potential
health hazards?:
... So.lid..Waste. Will thero osal result
P P
.in any significant impacts associated -
with solid waste disposal or litter
control?
19. Aesthetics.. Wi11-the proposal result
in the obstruction of any public
designated.or recognized scenic vista
open to the public, or will .the
proposal-tesult in- the..,c :eat o`ii:of' an`
aesthetically offensive 'site open to
public view?
20. Recreation. Willthe proposal result
in an impact upon the quality or
quantity of existing p«blic.recrea-.
tion -facilities?
21. Archeolo ical'/Historical:` Will the
proposal resu.t in an a teration.of
a significant archeological. or
historical site, structure, object
or building?.
0
YES MAYBE NO
C
44
Apperidix F - .page 6 of 9
YES MAYBE NO
'112.' Mandatory Findings of Significance.
a. Does the project have the potential
to'.degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, .cause.a.fish or wildlife
population to..drop below self
sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a;plantor animal com
munity,:reduce.the number or restrict
the..range .of a rare or. endangered
plant• or. -animal or eliminate important
examples of -the major periods. of
California history or prehistory?
b. Does the project have -the -potential.
to achieve short term benefit: to,
the detriment of:oublicly adopted
long-term envircnmental goals?
c. Does the project have impacts which
are individually limited, but
i cumulatively considerable? (a project
may impact.on two. or more separate
resources where --he-impact on each
resource is relatively small,.but
where the effect of the total of
those impacts on the environment is
.significant . )
d. Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings,'
either directly or indirectly?
45
Appendix F - nage 7 of 9
PORTI-4 F f
-) 7. S' 4IJA�RANGL$ 1 is.It v .�
I 1 P
A
• \\ t '• 1, ' 1 I I tl
31
IN
1.
J unkla / �- ��1' ' ` -� :°•
Ret
'T\ \ •\:/�`-!'i /`,`t\\� -�; t( .1, 1411
_ 1� 1 '�r-'X ( _�• �t I - :n i f 1 1•'- I• � s Iq P �-
SITE F.. lne•- , . \ li ( ,% / o i1++4i n Sd0
sb
I�a ev'r )�-1•1\ `,V Q.. .i. I' i.•.I .� �•" /� I r' ''+`•x:012 ' 11, /•:•'�"�_l '�.a_��', , ::/ ''.l\ �`�
JL T,] _ �:� /1 n `,'.• '• - \J \ 964. .�xt1i� ':�
j.
�' ,, is � � r•� t.•�• •; .f. S �1-; , '�� :(� '_ r �; ,,�-\.�-!a' _ ,• •_
��/ �, / 1 �1� 1` �� { �� �1' I• i % Lime .. s'
• � ' i'�• l ' / �, I( i / �' 1. 1 j 1 g \ _.r_ • .,,�Sdddiei
r / n „t!a / r 1 ; �• �, J I , 1 \ %a L\ - Fo11 111,w
btDntlde ) ,Sit
I . .\_• • ,
1 � 1
REGIONAL MAP
.. i WTT ll .
fC *
CITY. I`
DE
( (� f
—t!M.
L
f AIA rA
1 RILOA
f , Ir BAR Gil-
co
irCo ► p f
)..: o ect S± tpp� tC ' ;.ate •--t� 'L �.
J FE
D YT �I ...r .° •, ' d LNERO t BERRY CREEK
iv�2¢ Du Nhle
....
.-- fCATN[✓ FALLS A • `
.� •�i � Vii' '�. � �%°r" �'
NE SON ui ' .'•�' ..+•
.nae _.,.r •a ,�
c A MILLS
rorroESTw». r---� �
NJ VALE
rFBIGG 'O F
.°
47
BUTTE COUNTY
i
Applicant: Ronald R. hr' I.A`�essor' s Parcel f/ 1+1-08-2
DATA SHEET EIW Log # 81-10-28-03
ASroject Description
1. Type of Project: Mining and Rerlauiation" Permit —
.2. Brief Description: Placer mine with "cut and covei''reclamation.
3. Location: :West side Dry Creek Road, 3/4 mile west of Pentz-Magalia
HIShifEiy; south of Paradise. Cherokee Quad.
LI. Proposed -Density of Development: ITA
5. Amount of -Impervious Surfacing: -.;Ione
6. Access -and Nearest Public Road(s): Access via Dry Creek Road (pvt
roadway), 2 1/4 north from intersection with Messilla Valley. Road.
7.. Method of Sewage Disposal: NA -septic -at -'house.
8. _ Source of . Wate-r Supply: Siring; water.
9. Proximity "of Power Lines: Existing to home site'.
10. Potential for further land divisions and development: None foreseen.
B. Environmental Setting.
1. h sical Environment_:
1. Terrain..
a. General_ TopograpiAc Cha;rac.ter: Moderate to steeply sloping
caryonland.
b. Sl.opes: Slopes are in the 10 -over 30.E range in canyon.area. On- _
site slopes are in the 10-30,� range..
c. Elevation: About 700 feet above sea level,
d. Limiting Factors:. Ground stability in th.e face of steeply. sloping.
2. Soils terrain..
a. Types and Characteristics: Toomes-gravelly loam; Peters -clay
loam; Pentz-sandy loam. Thin layer of soil over tertiary gravel,
Coarse subsurface. Moderate permeability & erosion Well. drained.
b. Limiting Factors: Erosion in face of vast soil surface disruption,
3. Natural Hazards of the..Land
a. Earthquake Zone: Inferred fault passes just south of site.
b. Erosion Potential: i--ioderate d: Fire Hazard: High
c. Landslide Potential: Moderate e. Expansive Soil Potential:
`_..•
Lo IT
4. Hydrology
a.
Surface Water: Dr OreelG on ^ite. Numerous surinr�snhemerf
y -
streams.from hillside.
Annendix F - naze 7a of 9
1
b. Ground Water: Potentially limited reseurce.' Numerous springs.
C.. Drainage Characteristics: Canyon drained by Dry Creek_
d. Aiumal Rainfall (normal): About 40 inches annual y
e. 'Limiting Factors:
5. Visual/Scenic Quality: Very High. Very lots population density.
6. Acoustic Quality: Excellent. Very low population density,
7. Air Quality: .Good.
Biological Environment:-.
8. Vegetation: Plant communities stratified along canyon walls due to
water requirements. Woodland, oak scrub, ridarian communities.
9. Wildlife Habitat: Upper Sonoran Life Zone. Low level of human activity.
Abundant ifildl.ife. deer, coyote, wild turkey, aquatic life, etc.
Cultural Environment
10. Archaeological and Historical Resources iri the -area:.Sensi tiTre . area,
:iumerous resources* exist.in area.
11. Butte County General Plan designation:Apricili i,ral Residential
�. Existing. 'Zoiiing : A-2
13. Existing Land Use on-site: Single-family residence with outbuildings.
Existing -old nine with permit.
r
14. Surrounding Area:
a. Land Uses: Hostly open foothill terrain. Several residences
to sou.th along Dry Creek Road. Powerhouse 1 mile east.
b. Zoning A-2
Gen. Plan designations: Ajzricultural Residential: Grazing -Open
land io.js'outh .f,, southwest.
d. Parcel Sizes: 20 acres and larger..
e. Population: Very low.ponulation density.
15: Character of Site and Area: Open Canyonlands south of Paradise.
16. Nearest Urban Area: Paradise -11 miles to .downtown by roadway.
17. Relevant Spheres of Influence: 11A
18. Improvements Standards Urban Area,: a
1 Fire Protection Service:
a. Nearest County (State) Fire Station:
b. Water Availability? Creek, settline.
ond, springs, truck capacity.
20. Schools in Area: 14A L
Appen .t F - page 7b of
.asiwJi:c:- ... _,.:.�.... .��. .. .: ..W .^Suess'',.`..'as'�':'litluilLi��•'^�_'tu-'.`r'�,�y_. _ —_ _ y_ ...._.._�_ __-_. _. __.. ..
VJ
DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
AP 41-08-27
Summary: The project is a permit for a'placer mine and a
reclamation plan. The proje-:t area has been exten-
sively.:nbrkaed in the past and has been knowft as the NewEra Mine.
The gold bearing strata crosses the'canyon from east to. west
and the gold is contained in tertiary gravel. deposit -3 above.a
bedrock of Mariposa slate.' The strata is believed to be a
portion df the tertiary i•Iagalia chaiinel. , The gold bearing
strata'is believed to be about 1/3 to.2/3 milewide and between
90 -to 180 feet in depth as it passes throu'g'n the canyon. The
subsurface is composed of cemented, -river washed gravels ranging
from small stones to very large boulders'.'suggesting a large.flow
quantity in the.channel in the pabst.' The 14aripasa slate has
been 'turned sideways. under' the gravels creating a natural' trap
for gol& of all sizes. Assay'. information indicates rich depos-
its of, mineral -s .throughout the .tertiary ;ravel. layers.
The minirig'operation. 'itself -rill. be open=pit and irrill be' staged
`• over a::p.eriod of years. The, operation is proposed to be a wet
-operation.. Mr-. Logan is, presently. mining from one .of. the old
historic shafts and has an existing permit for mining and a
stream alteration agreement with the Depar.tment.of Fish and Game.
(Mr. Gayland Taylor of Paradise is working with the applicant).
During operation.of the go'.d mine the applicant hopes to process
up to 80 yards of rock per Jay•.(about 100 tons/day). materia
removea from the mine 1 ou e grizzly'; washed
and separated into at least6 different sized piles and stored
in mounds beside the first pit (shosm as E months on plan).
Fines to be deposited in the existing holding pond on -sits
ifnich may need to be enlarged as the operation increases in
size. :.,10 water will .be released to Dry Creek. All water u�-,ad in
the operatiori is to'be recirculated. Reclamation of the land is
propused to be cut and cover. Materials extracted from one pit
will be used in covering the previous pit and so forth. Pits
are to be excavated with a dozer and rock pushed to the various
locations in'the same manner. A'front loader may be used at
sone point in the future as operations warrant. No blasting is
planned at this time although at some point in the future blast-
ing may be requ. red.
The following -environmental Impacts and concerns have been identi-
fied -for this proposal. These .concerns will extend over: the 5+
;; ear period for which mining; is proposed.
Appendix F - page 8 of 9
50
' !�'•:.f :: t. �i: \14 �(i )�' 'S(,y�, 41l.ii{t i- •,1� ��.. ���'�� h ..\ `l �.� -f\. '.l<
AP 41-08-27
DISCUo5ION CONTINUED
la: There will be modifications and changes to .the geologic
subsurface. Ground will be removed dctim to.the Mariposa
slate bedrock which will then be scraped and washed.
lb, lc:' Large amounts of tonsoil i•rill be removed and di:?placed.
The reclamation _plan will replace stratified gravel
.and topsoil.
lc, lL& 'As pits are cut back into the hillside, .,extensive visual
.hanges to the canyonside drill` occur.
le, 3b: There. will be veneration of runoff and erosion from the
steeply sloping; canyonside terrain.
if -:Pediment produced from runoff and:erosion may .: be - discharged
to -Dry Creek. Tlie creel: is located on-site; . downslope -from
the proposed bits. Aquatic life is se'
riou^ly affected.by 'siltation.
lh: There may be potential induced earth.movements such as rock -
Slides or landslides: Thee;oiieri pits.,gill be' dug into the
canyonside,s and benched to reduce the potential 'for ground failure.
The .subsurface: profile is. made up: of large rock. cemented with.
• sand: w tl: sone`.-con�loirerate. 'Rocksll a .presents a real hazard
due to the -.subsurface profile which is susceptible to runoff:
Vegetation" trill not lend• stability. 'to. the ground since all the
large trees have been removed from the area where the proposed
pits are to be e::cavated. rack slope of excavated material
should be desi<<Z-ed to withstand an earthquake of magnitude 6.5
Richter.
2b: There trill be increased dust generation from rock moving
during mining operations and truck traffic operating; on
and off-site, 'The access road leading to the site is especially
dry and dusty during; the dry parts of the year.
3b -,3f: Removal of portion: of the canyonside gill'result in
increased, runoff entering; t.:.e creel: and also entering
the open pit nine. eater enteri'n- the pit mai- have. to be
pumped. out into the holdin,;.ponds since tne..b�3drock slopes away
i -sora the creep on the .dozen-7radient underneath the canyonside.
Turbidity may °increase aue to` .sediment deposition in Dry .Creek.
39,"'Al j j :...: _j,U eroua springs 'exi t:.thr.ou-ho ut the area and on
the:` sub. ect ro ert Old historic. shafts which
n p.. y-: ,
exist- ori -site 'f 122 :w1tn .Zrater to' a shallow depth due to spring
water which infiltrate-... into' the Uravels from above. Bedrock slopes
doVm_ and away from the creel: and catches groundwater. This
;round rater may need to be n_ unped, from the pits to the holdjug;.
Appendix "r• - aag;e 8a of g.` 1
a
1101
DISCUSSION C0 MiMED
Al' 41-08-27
pond. This will result in a decrease in groundwater. quantity
and quality. There are no domestic wells in the area. The
holding pond existing on-site is small at the present time and
is ' situated very close to the-crech'. This pond,. -may need .tp.:b;e
relocated i-rith a greater setback from the creek to reduce
surface .;rater quality impacts. The streambanr should be reinforced
and culvert- installation *z -rill be required jrnere stream crossings
are anticipated. Standing water in the holding pond should not
be a problem since the grater will continually circulate through
extraction machinery,
4a: 'There will be removal.of vegetation as part of the mining
operation. Only Grasses and small shrubs will 5e removed
since all large trees have been removed from this portion of. the
site in `the past. Reve etatioin of the hillside i -Till be part
of the reclamation planin'an .effort. to stabilize'the ground
surface after mininjr'has taken place.
5d: riildlife habitat will be reduced for.. the duration of the
minim operation. Tlie site :is very: rood low elevation
wildlife habitat and animal life is abundant including ifild
turkeys, deejq:coyote, etc. Once-. reclamation is complete the:
• habitat .will: be partially restored.
6a,,b.: There will be"Ekenerat'lo-n llo l•se due ;;o the mining operation.
Tile . near.est residence beinfr occupied at this .. tine is 1: 1/2
miles . away*. Blasting "(with explosives) may occur as part of the over-
a.tIon .
8: Grazing land will be reduced, to some degree temporarily,
until.. reclamation is complete.
10, 17b: There irill be creation of potential health hazards and
rim:= of .upset. 11oice to workers, traffic -hazards and
the use and storaf-e of .fuel and/or e :Plosives on --site gill all
require safety mea-ures to be undertaken on-site.
9a: 14atural resources including gold and other minerals trill be
consumed at an increased rate. Fuel will also be consumed.
i`_inerals trill probably be replenisaed to some de ree as more
are brout;lit dot•rn fron the iii; L1 country by, runoff.
13a,13c, 13d, 13f: The proposal trill generate additional traffic
along Dry Creel: Road. Other roadways leading
to file site include Messilla Valley Road, Pentz Road, Highway7U
and Hi liway 99. - ,mployee vehicles and haulin,; trucks will be
the primary reason for the increase. Dry Creek Road is a narrow,
poorly maintained roadway which is impassable to two Tray traffic
at most spots. i:ormal traffic may not be able to reach the site
during periods of heavy runoff during the rainy .season. Dry Creels
Road will need to be inDroved over the - 2 1/2 mile stretch leading
toMessilla Vallq_Y Road to reduce, impacts to the road itself and
al:.o to reduce the impact. of dust generation affecting resp I-nts '
-110
n I-, this roadway.
Appendix P - nage 8b of 9.
AP 41-08-27
DISCUSLUO1 CONTILUL'll
14a: Th A. u area' has a hir-Jt fire hazard rating. Tree proposed
mininf; bnoration ahould employ some -on-site fire protec-
tion: :ieasuro7:,' onnocially in ;the, face of use and .storage of
fuel o'n-auto.: ..
15)a ..'L'ner„y: in. tho :form of focsil.:fuels'. V111 be consumed at an
incrc.:ood rate.
17b: The;ro frill be an exposure of people and .property to the fol.low,-
inr, hoalth ha::ardc : fire. hazards, heavy truck travel (s.ome
carryinj; Diflai-Imableb)'over a hazardous mountain roadway, storage
O41 infleruiableo on-:,ite, severe noise levels,. potential rock or
land slidoo at the open rine, risk of upset'., into spring water
used. for domestic use.
19: Th'e- visual character., of the site will change due 'to the,
introductioA cf gaining equipmeiit onsite* and the formation,
of o;icii minim; nits and roc'; ;Hounds. Vegetation removal will be
Iimlted ..to ,raszcs -and small shrubo in the beginning.
21: `Phe n r o jdct cite is iri avex^f. sensitive archeological area.
• A site survey is'beinr completed and will be' appended to this
renott.
The :Ie:r Bra fans is an area trlth many old mine .shafts, some of
which mai- be :o:f his.torical importance +. The. Office. of Historic
Preservation located at 1220 K Street, Third Floor; Sacramento,
California, 95814, ( 916) 44:5-8006, should be contacted regarding
.�hri P ctori al .l�i�Rrt^n 2 of h s ine. Bulie in 18g of tie
a irn a �1vi oT dines �eo�ogy has information aLout the
ewa zne.
Additional Comments:
1. A Streambank Alteration Permit trill be required from the
Uenartment of Pish and Gane; The applicants existing permit
Nill need to be revier,,cd periodically as the size of the operation
iner.pase.s.
2. A Report of Tactei,rater Discharge trill be required from the
State ;tater Quality Control 13oard since �•he mining operation
is to be- a. .ret one.
3. ` The possibility' of the applicant securing a bond.' to ensure
implem&n'ia.tion: of the Reclamation Plan s%iould be studied.
4. The .mining, operation will involve 5 to 10 people over a period
of. up to 5 year:.
• 5. Any net -r areas to be mined till be subject to Cowlty and State.
review of the Rehlamation Plan and the '.,ining Permit.
53
l lendix P - Pal. e 8c of 9
y 1 AP 41-08-27
• DISCUSSION CONT1Nur;b
22'c: The potentially significant impacts on a cumula ive basis
are those identified with a "mA_ybe" response in. the checklist
.2 2-d: Environmental effects', namely those relative to water
quality, air quality and the *ambient noise levels,. may adversely
affect persons in the area.
Addendum:
4b:. Two rare and endangered plants the Red Bluff Rush and the
Butte County Checkermall.ow, occur witl.in 1'i. to 2 miles,* to the
northeast and southeast of .the project site. Since the habitat
descriptions for these plants does not correspond to the subject
area, a botanical survey for .these .potential plant 'species is not
deemed necessary.
8b: The public hearings before the Planning Commission and Board
of Supervisors on this project, between August and October 19P1,
demonstrated that there is serious public controversy concerning
the environmental effects of this project. -In accordance with
Section 15084 (c)''of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) Guidelines, an environmental.impact report (EIR) should
be prepared in such instances. An exception is made to.the EIR
requirement when the controversy isnot related to an environmental_
issue.- In this case, many of .the. concerns raised by ,property
owners in the vicinity and by representatives of local and state
agencies do pertain to.environmental issues.
Appendix F = page 8d of 9
54
•
J.