2015-07-14_REVISION - C1981019 (2)

Home Browse Search

Chris Gilbreath Page 2 20 May 2015 12. Response Accepted. Rule 3.02.2 — Determination of Performance Bond 13. The Division has completed the portion of the technical adequacy that would potentially change the reclamation cost estimate. We will start to calculate the new estimate for TR -105. Rules 4.13 and 4.14 — Contemporaneous Reclamation and Backfilling and Grading 14. Response Accepted. 15. Response Accepted. 16. Response Partially Accepted. The Division will not be able to propose a decision on TR -105 until the landowner letters have been submitted. Rule 4.27 — Operations on Steep Slopes 17. Response Partially Accepted. Page 4.27-1 in Volume 1 has been updated but the analogous page(s) discussing steep slope mining in South Taylor in Volumes 12 has not been updated. Please either revise the text in Volume 12, Rule 4.27 (starting on page South Taylor/Lower Wilson — Rule 4, Page 22) with current information or eliminate it. Rule 4.05 — Hvdrologic Balance 18. The following items are related to the SEDCAD modeling provided in Exhibit 7. a. Response Accepted. b. Response Accepted. c. The sub -watersheds are still not delineated in a conventional way. It appears that the only criterion is curve numbers, and the end result is basins that make no sense in terms of topography and drainage pattern. Please account for topography in your delineations. d. Response Accepted. e. The sub -watersheds are different at the south end. Please compare Figure 1 in Exh. 7 -ST to Figure 1 in Exh. 7-14E. f. Response Accepted. g. Response Accepted. h. Response Accepted. i. Response Accepted. j. Please compare the slope from the topography for subwatershed D in Figure Exh. 7-14PP-8, which is approximately 3%, to the value in the SEDCAD model (structure 22 on page Exh. 7 -PP -343), which is 33%. Please correct this slope as needed.