Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Comment 17. Pages 205-89, 93a and 93b have been added/modified to include reference to the <br />Bear Creek fansite. Otherwise, the discussions found in this Section 2.05.5 are quite comprehensive and <br />present overall discussions that would also apply to the Bear Creek fansite. <br />Comment 18. Oxbow believes we are in compliance with the requirements of Rule 4.05.18. <br />Comment 19. Page 2 of Exhibit 2.05-E5, Mine Reclamation Material Balance, containing Table <br />2.05-E5-T2 has been modified to include additional reference to the Bear Creek fansite. <br />Comment 20. Page 2.05-12b has been modified to include or modify Exhibit numbers. <br />Comment 21. Table 2.05-E5-T] - Soil Recovery and Replacement Summary has been <br />modified as requested. <br />Comment 22. Indeed, the page should be 2.05-22b. We regret the error. A modified page is <br />attached. <br />Comment 23. Indeed, the page should be 2.05-29a. We regret the error. A modified page is <br />attached. <br />Comment 24. We have also made the modification per Comment 20 above. <br />Comment 25. It was determined by ACOE that the area in question related to the IIWCRF did <br />not contain jurisdictional waters of the U.S. and no permit was pursued. <br />Comment 26. Indeed, the page should be 2.05-1 lb. We regret the error. A modified page is <br />attached. <br />Comment 27. We believe the 2.05-12b page notation is correct. <br />Comment 28. A reference to the SedCAD Hydrology Printouts for Section 10 has been added <br />to the summary table. <br />Comment 29. As the Division is aware, approval of TR-59 was proposed then withdrawn due to <br />delays with the USFS EA approval process. Oxbow believes TR-59 should be approvable very soon and <br />discussion regarding the coal lease and Permit Boundary lines will not be an issue. <br />Comment 30. The suggested drawing text changes have been made. <br />Miscellaneous Items <br />The Division included a letter from the SHPO dated October 17, 2008. The permit area has been surveyed <br />for cultural resources and the proposed fansite location contains no such resources. Please recall that a <br />copy of the cultural resources report is also presented in Exhibit.2.04-E7. <br />Oxbow is also in receipt of a CDRMS November 18, 2008 Interoffice Memorandum between Jim Stark <br />and Marcia Talvitie. The purpose of the memo was to address TR-60 cost estimate and adequacy <br />questions. Oxbow's responses are as follows: <br />Comment 1. The 1,000 cubic yard topsoil removal estimate was based upon our anticipation <br />that much of the fansite footprint area will not contain available topsoil resources. For example, we <br />expect that the boulder and rock strewn ephemeral Bear Creek channel, and the pre-existing bear creek <br />0 Page 3