My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2010-10-27_REVISION - C1980005 (2)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1980005
>
2010-10-27_REVISION - C1980005 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:26:15 PM
Creation date
11/1/2010 10:07:35 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980005
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
10/27/2010
Doc Name
Adequacy Review
From
DRMS
To
Seneca Coal Company, LLC
Type & Sequence
PR2
Email Name
DTM
SB1
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.
/
6
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
2.03.6 1 <br />5. Permit area acreage listed in the legal description on page 2.03-5 was revised to correspond to <br />the newspaper public notice. Item Resolved. <br />6. SCC response indicates that the permit boundary depicted on Exhibit 2.05-M1 (and other PR-2 <br />maps) is correct, and that the discrepancy noted by DRMS is limited to errors on Peabody <br />Sage Creek permit "GIS formatted maps". SCC indicates that the permit boundary on "non- <br />GIS formatted maps" in the Sage Creek permit is consistent with the permit boundary shown <br />on PR-2 maps. They also indicated that the incorrect Sage Creek maps will be updated with <br />the next revision to be submitted for the Sage Creek Mine. The Division has confirmed this <br />information with Sage Creek Coal Company. Item Resolved. <br />2.05.4 <br />7. Revised narrative on page 2.05.4-1 adequately addressed the Division's concerns regarding the <br />acreage within the reduced permit area that has received Phase II bond release. We concur <br />with the 51.5 acre figure specified in the revised narrative. Item Resolved. <br />2.05.4, 3.02.2 <br />8. No response from SCC regarding Cost Estimate; no response required. Item Resolved. <br />2.05.4(2)(c) <br />9. Narrative regarding permanent roads was amended as requested. Item Resolved. <br />10. Narrative regarding permanent channels was amended as requested. Item Resolved. <br />2.05.4 2 e <br />11. Narrative regarding interim revegetation monitoring was amended as requested. Item <br />Resolved. <br />12. Erroneous references to non-applicable regulatory sections were properly deleted. Item <br />Resolved. <br />13. Confusing and outdated narrative regarding revegetation monitoring was properly deleted. <br />Item Resolved. <br />14. In this item, the Division had noted a number of inconsistencies between the revegetation <br />success demonstration methods and criteria described in Appendix 13-13 of the approved <br />P.A.P. and the success demonstration methods and criteria as described in Section <br />2.05.4(2)(e)(vi) of the PR-2 narrative, and clarifications were requested.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.