Laserfiche WebLink
access/haulroad is located on moderately sloping side hills and ridges, thereby minimizing erosion. <br />downstream sedimentation, and flooding. No stream channel diversions are planned." <br />The reference to Map 24 showing topography remains inaccurate, though not out of compliance. <br />44.a) The Division's adequacy letter, dated January 14, 2000, asked, <br />After submittal of Exhibit 2~0 and additional maps from Colorado Yampa Coal Company permit C- <br />81-071 pertaining to Ha:d Road A Certifications, this response appears to meet the requiremen[s <br />=1.03.1(1)(d). Twentymile Coal Comparry needs to submit labels to the maps to indicate that these <br />submitted maps now apply to the Foidel Creek permit, and needs to indicate where the maps will <br />reside in the Foidel Creek permit. <br />Twentymile Coal Company provided self-stick labels to the Division for these maps during a meeting <br />with Twentymile Coal Company at the Division offices on January 18, 2000. These labels are <br />acceptable. <br />~ 58. The Division's September 10, 1999 requested, <br />Exhibit 8 requires a Table of Contents due to the volume of injormation contained in this Exhibit. <br />SAE calculations and the waste water treatment plans are presently not included in the main table of <br />contents in Volume !. <br />An appropriate index or table of contents for Exhibit 8 has been received. This item has been <br />adequately resolved. <br />62.a) The Division's original question, in our March 2, 1998 adequacy letter, stated, in part, <br />Many of the [as-built pond] surveys are no! certified by the surveyor. Injormation gathered by <br />Mr. Peter Epp for Pond D, Fish Creek Loadout (tipple) pond, Pond B, Pond G, Fish Creek <br />Borehole Ponds needs to be signed and dated by the surveyor. <br />Twentymile Coal Company submitted information on December 6, 1999. The Division had the <br />following comments regarding the submitted materials: <br />The pond Dstage/storage diagram is legible and was signed and certified by the surveyor. It <br />still needs a label as to where it is to be filed in the permit. The principal spillway elevation does <br />not agree with the calculations submitted May 17, 1999. Please correct this discrepancy. <br />TCC re-surveyed the Pond D principal spillway, and submitted a new Pond Dstage/storage <br />diagram on January 25, 2000. <br />The elevation of the principal spillway on the most recent stage/storage diagram received by <br />DMG on January 25, 2000 now agrees with the SEDCAD analysis done by Montgomery Watson <br />(May 1999). However, while the plan view topography of the pond shown is half the size of the <br />previous stage/storage diagram, the scale for both is represented as 1 "=50 feet. Which is correct? <br />If the latest scale is incorrect, please correct and re-submit a new stage/storage diagram. <br />C: \J H B\C82056\RN03\020100resp. doc <br />