Laserfiche WebLink
u <br />Mr. Rob Zuber <br />August 25, 2015 <br />Page 2 <br />10. Response Accepted. <br />11. Response Accepted. <br />12. Response Accepted. <br />Rule 3.02.2 — Determination of Performance Bond <br />13. The Division has completed the portion of the technical adequacy that would <br />potentially change the reclamation cost estimate. We will start to calculate the <br />new estimate for TR -105. <br />Response: No response necessary. <br />Rules 4.13 and 4.14 — Contemporaneous Reclamation and Backfilling and Grading <br />14. Response Accepted. <br />15. Response Accepted. <br />16. Response Accepted. <br />Rule 4.27 — Operations on Steep Slopes <br />17. Response Accepted. <br />Rule 4.05 — Hydrologic Balance <br />18. The following items are related to the SEDCAD modeling provided in Exhibit 7. <br />a. Response Accepted. <br />b. Response Accepted. <br />C. The sub -watersheds are now delineated in a more and are acceptable to <br />the Division. Some other items still need to be addressed in the Streeeter ditch <br />and pond models, as.follows. <br />i. In Table I (page Exh. 7-14-6) it appears that the design widths of the <br />lower segment of Streeter Gulch Ditch have doubled in size. Where they <br />over -constructed before. Please explain. <br />Response: The ditch segments in question were reclaimed from 1978 to 1984, and the <br />adjacent reclamation has achieved Phase III release in 2012. In an earlier version of the <br />ditch design performed by Montgomery Watson in September 1998 and reported in <br />A T,-uJi,t one Ei),n_;^'(:,),,(,rt rtttr . m <br />