Laserfiche WebLink
The Division has no further concerns. In the submittal dated February 3, 2010, BRL provided revised <br />pages 25, 26 and 35 in Exhibit 15 of Volume III. <br />On Map 27, the depiction of the D-seam workings is much more prominent than the depiction of the <br />B-seam workings. Please revise the depictions of the B-seam and D-seam workings on Map 27 so that <br />both depictions are more or less equal in prominence. <br />The Division has no further concerns. Map 27 was revised in the February 3, 2010 submittal. <br />On page 36 of Exhibit 15 of Volume III, the first sentence states that ephemeral and intermittent <br />streams are within the permit area. Please add perennial streams to this statement since portions of <br />Hubbard Creek and Terror Creek are within the permit area. <br />The Division has no further concerns. In the February 3, 2010 submittal, page 36 of Exhibit 15 of <br />Volume III was revised accordingly. <br />9. As required under the subsidence control plan of Rule 2.05.6(6)0, please add an appropriate <br />discussion concerning the Curecanti-Rifle transmission line and the two transmission line towers to <br />the Subsidence Handbook in Exhibit 15 of Volume III. Also, please add a reference to the <br />transmission line and towers in the next to the last paragraph on permit application page 2.05-116 <br />The Division has no further concerns. In BRL's submittal dated February 3, 2010, new page 46 of <br />Exhibit 15 in Volume III and revised permit text page 2.05-116 were provided. <br />10. Please update the appropriate maps to show the change in the mine plan. These same maps should be <br />updated with the current permit boundary, if necessary. <br />The Division has no further concerns. BRL submitted revised Maps 7, 8, 9, 25 and 27 in the February <br />3, 2010. The Map 14B that had been provided in the original TR-65 submittal dated December 1, <br />2009 did not need any modifications. <br />11. Please provide documentation that surface owners above and adjacent to the underground mining <br />areas proposed in TR-65 have received proper notification of the mining schedule, as required under <br />Rule 4.20.2. <br />The Division has no further concerns. In their February 3, 2010 response, BRL showed that the BLM <br />and the USDA-Forest Service received proper notice under Rule 4.20.2. <br />Reclamation Cost Estimate <br />12. The Division 's reclamation cost estimate for TR-65 took into account the drilling of one geotechnical <br />hole and credit for gob vent holes not drilled. The estimate represented a decrease in liability of <br />$135,569.00, which was slightly less than the $135,979. 00 shown in the estimate submitted by BRL. <br />Please inform the Division in writing whether or not the Division's reclamation cost estimate <br />calculation is acceptable to BRL.