My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981017 (220)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Coal
>
C1981017
>
_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981017 (220)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/2/2020 9:52:06 AM
Creation date
6/19/2012 11:12:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981017
IBM Index Class Name
GENERAL DOCUMENTS
Doc Name
Bid Documents (IMP)
Permit Index Doc Type
General Correspondence
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
120
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
6. The following minor revisions need to be incorporated into the Minor <br /> Revision Table: <br /> a. September 1 , 1983 - Exploration of Roads for the Conveyor Corridor <br /> b. September 10, 1984 - Revegetation Seed Mix - Convey or Corridor <br /> C. September 11 , 1984 - Upgrade Light Use Road <br /> 7. Also, there was some confusion in the numbering of more recent minor <br /> revisions. <br /> a. MR-6 is now the Temporary Seed Mix approved October 15, 1987. <br /> b. MR-7 is the Sutey Conveyor Area Expansion formerly MR-6. <br /> 8. Attachment 6, plate 19 - there is no engineer's certification on <br /> Exhibit 2-B-7 for the Wash Plant Ponds. <br /> 9. In Chapter 4, page 6, it is stated that sediment ponds are proposed to be <br /> left in for wildlife grazing habitat. Previously, it has been stated <br /> that no ponds are to remain in. Clarification could be made by stating <br /> that approval will be requested of the Division prior to leaving <br /> permanent ponds in for wildlife habitat. The rules require certain <br /> demonstrations in this case. <br /> 10. On Chapter 4, page 13, the water usage in CFS for the site does not add <br /> up to the total of the CFS. Please explain or correct. <br /> 11 . On Chapter 4, page 20, it is stated that the ponds "have been designed <br /> and constructed in conformance with the U.S. Soil Conservation Service <br /> Practice Standard 3784 ponds (October, 1978)". This is not always <br /> correct in that the sediment ponds have been constructed along the <br /> requirements of 4.05.6(8). The BAT ponds were constructed along this <br /> 'Ponds ' standard. <br /> 12. Please include in table form the following monitoring sites: Ground <br /> water - P-1 , 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8. No. 6, 9 and 11 , GE-1 , GS-1 , GW-1 , <br /> AT-2A, AT-2B and the surface water sites No. 20, Coal Creek; No. 3, Bear <br /> Creek; No. 5, Dutch Creek; No. 1 , Disney Creek; No. 3, Soody Creek and <br /> the Sutey Underdrain. Exhibit 4-C-1 should be revised to include only <br /> these sites and to show the Sutey Underdrai n sampling site. <br /> 13. Map IV-F-1 , Subsidence Monitoring Program, is not in Volume 7. <br /> 14. Chapter V, page 20, Part 3A - the narrative states that Mid-Continent <br /> proposes to retain some of the major buildings at the portals for <br /> post-mining use. I assume this is for the ski area. However, until the <br /> post-4nining land use is approved, the narrative will need to state that <br /> all buildings will be removed. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.