Laserfiche WebLink
Page 2 of 6 <br />acres associated with the PR -9 application as to why 560 acres is not added to 1,035 and <br />500 added to 3,620. <br />TC Response: Recent updates to mining plans have resulted in some modifications to the <br />areas and acreages to be added under PR12 -09. These revisions have reduces the <br />acreages proposed in the original PR12 -09 revision application. TC currently proposes to <br />increase the Permit Area by approximately 160 acres, and the affected area by <br />approximately 640 acres. The referenced text pages have been reviewed and revised for <br />consistency with the updated plans, and copies of the revised pages accompany these <br />responses for replacement in the PAP. <br />Division Response: Based on a review and a comparison of the existing MAP 23 Mine <br />Plan, the Division has estimated that the proposed affected to be approximately 330 acres <br />rather than 640 acres as stated in TC's adequacy response. In addition, the revised Map <br />23 shows a reduction in the approved permit area. The area of SE1 /4 SW1 /4, Section 27, <br />TSN, R86W is identified as no longer being in the permit area. With the reduction in <br />permit boundary, the mined affected area falls outside of the approved permit. Please <br />discuss the location of the 640 acres of affected and the difference in the proposed <br />affected area delineated on proposed Map 23 and approved Map 23. In addition, if <br />it is the intention of TC to reduce the permit boundary at the location listed above a <br />discussion should be submitted as to the justification of the approved affected area <br />falling outside of the proposed permit boundary. <br />3. Division's Initial Comment. Proposed page 2.05 -15 identifies coal ownership within the <br />Life of Mine permit boundary. The proposed page does not identify Stuckey, et al as a <br />coal owner. However, proposed Map 2 does identify Stuckey et al as a coal owner within <br />the proposed revised permit area. Please update the proposed section 2.03.4 (6) to <br />include all owners of record within the permit boundary. <br />TC Response: With the reduction in the area covered by this proposed revision, the <br />Stuckey et al. coal tract is no longer included within the Permit Boundary. The change in <br />Permit Boundary in TSN, R87W, Section 34 does include the Male Lease which is <br />included in the listing of coal owners. The change in Permit Boundary in T %N. R87W, <br />Section 13 includes additional area already covered under the State Coal Lease (CO- <br />3229). This response is adequate. <br />4. Division's Initial Comment: Proposed pages 2.03 -33.3 and 2.03 -33.4 identify Federal <br />Coal Lease COC -72980 as being modified as of September 2012, Federal Coal Lease <br />Application as being filed August 2012, and a lease pending with David and Linda Male. <br />Please provide the Division with the following: a copy of the modified Federal Coal <br />Lease COC- 72980; a copy of the Federal Coal Lease application, and the coal lease with <br />David and Linda Male. <br />TC Response: Appropriate documentation verifying TC's rights of ownership and <br />control for the subject mining areas and associated lands accompanies the responses. <br />This response is adequate. <br />