Laserfiche WebLink
<br />C UHB1C820661RN0 310 7 1400adq.doc <br />01/14/00 <br />d) Twentymile Coal Company revised page 2.05-65.2 to adequately address this item. <br />e) Twentymile Coal Company revised page 2.05-127 to adequately address this item. <br />l0. This item is resolved by Twentymile Coal Company's submittal of revised page 2.05-20 and 2.05- <br />81. Revised page 2.05-81 eliminates page 2.05-80.1, and text from revised page 2.05-81 is <br />continued on 2.05-82. This revision is acceptable. <br />11. On page 2.05-9, Twentymile Coal Company revised the annual tonnage to reflect 10,000,000 tons <br />per year. However, this page now states that Twentymile Coal Company achieved the 10,000.000 <br />tons per year in 1993. This is not accurate. The Division believes Twentymile Coal Company <br />achieved the 10,000,000 tons/year extraction rate in 1998. This page remains inaccurate. Please <br />provide a corrected page with accurate information. <br />Page 2.05-54 was revised appropriately. <br />20. Revised pages 2.05-171.7 and 2.05-171.8 adequately addresses this item. <br />21. Pages 2.05-172 and 2.05-172.1 were revised appropriately. Revised page 2.05-179 indicates that <br />"mining occurred in 1887". We believe this to be a typo that needs to be corrected to "1997." <br />Pages 2.05-180, 2.05-180.1, 2.05-181, 2.05-182, 2.05-182.1, and 2.05-183 were revised as <br />requested. Revised page 2.05-184 addresses the Division's concern. Pemvt page 2.05-184.1 was <br />eliminated by the reformatting of 2.05-184. This is acceptable. <br />22.a) Twentymile Coal Company's cover letter dated November 12, 1999 states, "The as-built for the <br />road mitigation work is attached." There is no indication of which exhibit or figure contains this <br />as-built. The Division surmised the as-built was submitted as Exhibit 7f-1. Exhibit 7f-1 discusses <br />an "as-built" by Epp and Associates reviewed by Chris Breeds, but no actual "as-built" was <br />submitted. Exhibit 7f-1 is a model, not an "as-built' certification. Is this "as-built" submitted <br />elsewhere? If so, please specify the location, and if not, please provide the as-built information. <br />d) Page 2.05-177 was revised appropriately. <br />The Division had requested Twentymile Coal Company revise subsidence monitoring discussion <br />of the Eastern Mining District by discussing the district as whole. Page 2.05-188 continues to <br />partition the discussion into "TR 96-24, Section 14 Mining Area", with the following page (2.05- <br />189) discussing subsidence monitoring of the Eastern Mining District. No revision was made to <br />page 2.05-188. The pemtit is not out of compliance with the lack of revision to this discussion, <br />but text remains confusing and disjointed. Since Section 14 Mining Area is a part of the Eastern <br />Mining District, please include the discussion of it with the overall Eastern Mining District <br />discussions instead of partitioning it out as a separate mining area.. <br />e) Page 2.05-] 78 was revised appropriately. <br /> <br />h) The Division's September 10, 1999 adequacy letter requested, <br />