My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV105894
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV105894
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 1:17:54 AM
Creation date
11/22/2007 1:30:14 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
12/20/2004
Doc Name
Responses (E-mail)
From
Byron Walker
To
Jim Burnell
Type & Sequence
PR10
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.
/
2
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
Burnell, Jim <br />From: Walker, Byron <br />Sent: Monday, December 20, 2004 2:09 PM <br />To: Burnell, Jim <br />Cc: Brown, Sandy; Hernandez, Dan <br />Subject: RE: Review of West Elk (C-80-007) PR-10 Responses <br />Jim, this response applies to comment 101 and 100. I have reviewed Exhibit 32B. In this regard a typo on page 3 of Exhibit <br />32B places the Minnesota Reservoir in the northeast corner of the area. It probably should read northwest corner. <br />With regard to the essence of my concern, the study area missed a portion of the proposed permit boundary that encloses <br />the lower portion of the Dry Fork of Minnesota Creek in the NW1/4 SE1/4 Sec31 T13S R90W. In addition, with regard to <br />adjacent areas, suggest the study include the rest of Sec 31 T13S R90W (to the west), Sec 6, 7, and the remainder of 8 <br />T14S R90W for wetland areas along the Dry Fork of Minnesota Creek and along Minnesota Creek (main stem). <br />Please see me if you have any questions <br />Byron <br />-----Original Message----- <br />From: Burnell, Jim <br />Sent: Monday, December 20, 2004 10:29 AM <br />To: Walker, Byron <br />Subject: RE: Review of West Elk (C-80-007) PR-10 Responses <br />Byron, please add a comment to the Question 100 text that reiterates to them just exactly what they should do to <br />make you happy. <br />Thanks. <br />-----Original Message----- <br />From: Walker, Byron <br />Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004 3:33 PM <br />To: Burnell, Jim <br />Cc: Brown, Sandy; Hernandez, Dan <br />Subject: Review of West Elk (C-80-007) PR-10 Responses <br />Jim: <br />In response to your request of December 14, 2004, I have made a review of the responses. <br />~ Question 56. The response is adequate. A revised Page 2.05-92 (November 2004) adequately addresses <br />my concern. <br />J Question 100. The response has a minor shortcoming. The text on page 2.05-93 (November 2004) still <br />does not address the location and configuration of structures and renewable resources lands within <br />adjacent areas. Correspondence indicates that Map 1, 01/94, does. Of the type items mentioned before, <br />the Lone Cabin Reservoir and an extension of Minnesota Creek Road USFS 710 into Section 36 T13S <br />R90W (for about a mile from the proposed permit boundary) is shown. <br />Question 101. Exhibit 32 B was not reviewed. A note says that it was sent to Dan Mathews. <br />Question 102. The issues are adequately addressed on revised page 2.05-132. <br />Question 103. The added section on seismic impacts is adequate. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.