My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2016-05-17_REVISION - C1982056
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1982056
>
2016-05-17_REVISION - C1982056
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 6:22:06 PM
Creation date
5/17/2016 10:35:11 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982056
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
5/17/2016
Doc Name
Adequacy Response
From
Twetymiel Coal, LLC
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
MR296
Email Name
JLE
DIH
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.
/
6
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
TWENTYMILE COAL, LLC - FOIDEL CREEK MINE (C-1982-056) <br />MR16-296 9 -EAST UTILITY BOREHOLES <br />TECHNICAL ADEQUACY RESPONSES (05/16) <br />2.04.4 — Cultural and Historical Resources, 2.05.6(4) Protection of Historic Resources: <br />I Proposed revised page 2.04-9.2, does 170t follow with the preceding page. It appears this page is missing <br />formation that was added with PRI 1. Please revise the page as necessary and review this page and insure it <br />follotirs iritli the preceding and following page. <br />2. Included trith the submittal was a Class III Cultural Resource Inventory report prepared by Metcalf <br />Archaeological Consultants dated August 2015. This report, herein called the Metcalf Report, is to be added to <br />Exhibit 6T based on the sanninary of'revisions and additions sheet submitted with 111R296. The Metcalf Report <br />is a duplicate of'the report that is already included in Exhibit 6L that ivas added to the perinit with the approval <br />o f' NIR2S9. Given this, it does not appear it is necessary to add this report to Exhibit 6T. Please revise page <br />2.05-45.30 to cite that the Alelt:4' Report is included in Exhibit 6L and dated August 2015 to differentiate it <br />JI -0/17 other surreys caa•rentlY included in Exhibit 6L. Also please provide an updated coversheet for Exhibit 6L <br />to indicate that it includes the AIR296 survey area. <br />3 According to the Metcalj Report, Site 5RT3325 and 5RT3324 are eligible to be listed on the National Register <br />of'Historic Places (NRHP). Site 5RT3325 is located within the disturbed area ij'the Option 43 drill pad is <br />constructed. Given this, the statement made on proposed revised page 2.04-9.2 that the proposed project will <br />not impact identified cultural resources is not accurate and will need to be revised. TC will need to revise their <br />plan or remove Option 93 in order to avoid disturbing this site. Avoidance of the site or farther <br />testinglinitigatiot of'the site is recommended by Metcalf'Archaeological Consultants on page 21 of the Metcalf <br />Report. <br />4 In a letter dated September 8, 2015 fi-onn Eduard Nichols the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) that <br />was sent to the Division regarding MR289, PRIO and PRII, SHPO agreed that sites 5RT3324 and 5RT3325 <br />are eligible for listing on the NRHP. In accordance lrith Rule 2.05.6(4)(b), please provide a protection plan <br />J61- the 5RT3325 site in section 2.05.6(=1) of the permit located on page 2.05-171. <br />Response: The referenced pages have been reviewed and revised for continuity, and to include a <br />reference to the previously provided survey report and cover sheet. Given that the Option 3 location <br />encroaches on an identified cultural resource site, TC has reviewed and eliminated this option. The <br />relevant text has been reviewed and revised to eliminate references to Option 3. Copies of revised text <br />and maps accompany these responses. <br />2.04.9 Soils Resource Information <br />5. The proposed affected area for the 9 East Borehole is outside of boundaries of the know soil resources found at <br />the site depicted on Map 17 and discussed in section 2.04.9 of the permit. For the proposed affected area, <br />please provide the info7'11101i077 required by Rade 2.04.9. <br />Response: The current NRCS soil survey and soil descriptions for the project area have been reviewed <br />and a copy of the NRCS soil mapping for this area is provided for placement as a supplement to the <br />existing soils map. The relevant text in Section 2.04.9 has been reviewed and updated, as appropriate, to <br />address the soils in this area. Copies of revised text and maps accompany these responses. <br />2.05.3(4) — Ponds, Impoundments, other treatment facilities and diversions <br />6. Based on the information presented in the proposed Exhibit 49EE the structure details associated tirith <br />proposed diversion ditches 1, 2, and 3 were completed without freeboard. There was no discussion in the <br />provided text or design to serve cis a justification not to include freebourd in the proposed ditch designs. Per <br />Rule 4.05.3(7)(6), diversion design shall incorporate freeboard no less than 0.3 feet. Please provide detail <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.