2010-08-30_REVISION - C1981008 (3)

Home Browse Search

7. There does not appear to be a need for clarification on this item, and it is therefore not been addressed in this response. 8. Regarding the replacement pages submitted in March 2010: a) Since the response to adequacy questions has led to changes throughout the application text, the entire text is being resubmitted with a new page numbering. A table of contents has been added for ease of use. b) Table 1 has been altered to meet the requirements of DRMS and to be easier to understand. This includes the re-ordering of items in the table and addition/subtraction of columns. The footnote has also been removed. c) The values have been rearranged and are now correct. d) This paragraph has been removed. e) All of the information relating to the specifics of the statistical adequacy calculations has been removed from the narrative. Please refer to the 1310- Logic report for explanation of the calculations and demonstration of statistical adequacy for all vegetation data gathered. 9. A narrative of the reclamation and management history of the areas that Phase 3 bond release is being requested on can be found at the start of the Phase 3 section. Narrative addressing the "quality standard" of the approved permit can be found in the revegetation success discussion in the Phase 3 section. 10. A summary table has been constructed based on the guidelines provided by DRMS for the data shown in Tables Al and A2. These tables can be seen for both the Phase 2 and Phase 3 releases in the appropriate sections of the application 11. BIO-Logic has corrected the mathematical error that was present in their report previously. This includes: a) In Tables 2, 4, and 6 the alpha error probability was changed from P=0.1 to P=0.2. b) The Equation 6 error was corrected by BIO-Logic, as can be seen in the attached revised report. c) See a) and b) above.