2015-09-24_REVISION - C1982056 (2)

Home Browse Search

c. TC's response: As previously noted, Site 900 now falls within the eastern limits of the planned WCR mining area, however, exiting Site 29 is outside the affected area, and would be suitable for collection of information on any downstream water quality/quantity effects from the proposed WCR mining activities. d. Division's response: See item No. 7 above. The Division believes a new surface water monitoring site should be established along Foidel Creek upstream of the confluence of Middle Creek. Please revise this page accordingly and update Exhibit 4E-11 and Exhibit 14 as necessary to add this additional monitoring point. e. TC's Response: Please refer to previous response to Item 7. Rule 2.04.4 - Cultural and Historic Resource Information and Rule 2.05.6(41— Protection of Public Parks and Historic Places PRI 0 requests an increase in affected area of 150 acres. It was found during the review of PRI 1 (Which mirrors the PR10 application except for it excludes mining in the area TC is currently seeking a lease modification for coal lease COC -54608) that permit section 2.04.4 was not proposed to be revised with updated information required by Rule 2.04.4. Given this, TC hired Metcalf Archaeological Consultants, Inc. to conduct a Class III Cultural Resources Inventory for the newly proposed affected area. The Division received the results of this inventory on August 21, 2015. These results have been forwarded to the State Historic Preservation Officer's office (SHPO) for review and the Division is awaiting their response. The following items will need to be addressed: a. The PR10 application revised pages do not include updates to section 2.04.4 of the permit to discuss the cultural resources inventory conducted for this project. Such language is included in revised pages currently under review for MR289. It would be appropriate to include the language currently proposed with MR289. For consistency, please revise this section of the permit to discuss the cultural resources found within the proposed WCR affected area. b. According to the inventory, two sites; 5RT3324 and 5RT3325 are recommended to be eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and total avoidance is recommended. These two sites are within the area that will be affected by subsidence. It does not appear surface disturbance activities other than possible impacts from subsidence will occur in these areas. TC, the Division and SHPO will need to coordinate to determine if appropriate mitigation and treatment measures are necessary prior to undermining these areas. If mitigation and/or treatment measures are necessary for these sites, a discussion of such measures will need to be included in Section 2.05.6(4) of the permit. TC's Response: Section 2.04.4 has been reviewed and revised to reference and discuss the results of the supplemental cultural resource survey covering the additional subsidence area. Both of the recommended eligible sites are lithic scatters with demonstrated potential for buried cultural material. TC has requested that our archaeological consultant, Metcalf Archaeology, review their information regarding the two subject sites, and provide an assessment of the potential for adverse impacts to these sites from the anticipated mining -related subsidence. TC is working with Metcalf to provide information on the anticipated magnitude of subsidence in the subject areas as a basis for their evaluation. Given the anticipated timing for processing of the pending lease modification application, it is anticipated that this assessment can be provided for review prior to any final approval.