Laserfiche WebLink
i. <br />Burnell, Jim <br />From: Ryan Z Taylor [rztaylor@fs.fed.us] <br />Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 4:08 PM <br />To: Burnell, Jim <br />Subject: RE: PR-10 comments clarification <br />Jim, <br />Sorry if I misunderstood what you needed. I only included a response to <br />the comments identified as "submitted by the U.S. Forest Service" (in the <br />Dec 16 letter from CDMG to the FS). The Forest Service believes MCC has <br />adequately addressed all the comments within the Dec. 16 letter, although <br />we would still like clarification/response on the outstanding items within <br />our January 28, 2005 correspondence. <br />Ryan <br />"Burnell, Jim" <br /><j im.burnell@stat <br />e.co.us> <br />"'Ryan Z Taylor "' <br />02/09/2005 09:30 <rztaylor@fs.fed.us> <br />AM <br />To <br />cc <br />Subject <br />RE: PR-10 comments clarification <br />Thanks, Ryan. I've been going over these and noted that there are several <br />other questions you didn't mention below. #62, 69 aren't addressed on your <br />memo. <br />Thanks <br />Jim <br />-----Original Message----- <br />From: Ryan Z Taylor [mailto:rztaylor@fs.fed,us] <br />Sent: Tuesday, February 08, 2005 4:01 PM <br />To: jim.burnell@state.co.us <br />Cc: Liane Mattson; Levi Broyles <br />Subject: PR-10 comments clarification <br />Jim, <br />Per our conversation this morning here is a clarification of the Forest <br />Service's reply to Mountain Coal Company's (MCC) South of the Divide Permit <br />Revision (PR-10): <br />We received CDMG's Dec 16, 2004 letter outlining MCC's responses to <br />1 <br />