Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />46. PWCC re-estimated the volume of Pond 008 embankment and came <br />up with more than the 10,000 cy originally estimated, but not <br />17,000 cy as per the Division's estimate. PWCC will use the <br />conservative figure of 17,000 cy. <br />47. PWCC revised the culvert removal costs based on previous <br />information supplied to Peabody by the Division regarding <br />culvert removal. The costs are based on Means Sitework. <br />48. Table 13-5-1 has been revised to remove blanks and explain <br />general assumptions. <br />• <br />• <br />49a. See Worksheet HYD-1. <br />b. See Worksheet BONEDBR-1. <br />c. See Worksheet HYD-1. <br />d. See Worksheet HYD-2. <br />e. See Worksheet HYD-2. <br />f. See Worksheet DEMO-1. <br />g. See Worksheet LTUSE-1. <br />h. See Worksheet WCDIV-1. <br />i. See Worksheet RIP-1. <br />j. See Worksheet LANDFARM-1. <br />k. See Worksheet HYD-3. <br />1. See Worksheet COALSTK-1. <br />m. See worksheet HYD-5. <br />n. See Worksheet HYD-3. <br />o. See Worksheet HYD-3. <br />p. See Worksheet HYD-4. <br />q. See worksheets RILL-1 and DRDGSED-1. <br />r. See Worksheet HAZ-1. <br />s. There are no PCB transformers at Seneca per annual PCB report. <br />t. See Worksheet RIP-1. <br />u. PWCC does not understand the rationale for this requirement. <br />Seeded areas are monitored on an annual basis and are reported <br />to DMG in the Annual Vegetation Monitoring Report and Annual <br />Reclamation Report. Treatment of seeding failure areas, if <br />any, are considered under the current annual reclamation <br />operations. PWCC feels this is an unwarranted additional <br />bonding cost. <br />50. Both sides of the drainage in question currently contain <br />undisturbed native shrublands which are used by big game and <br />other wildlife species. PWCC is attempting to retain as much <br />of this native habitat as possible. These undisturbed native <br />shrublands will be located in interior reclaimed areas and can <br />also contribute woody plant propagules to adjacent reclaimed <br />areas. With this in mind, disturbance in the area is to be <br />minimized. The contours, as proposed, pose no stability <br />problems and in part, reflect existing topography. <br />51. Certified maps of Exhibit 13-2 are included with this <br />submittal. <br />12 <br />