Laserfiche WebLink
Alm <br /> . Transit Mix Concrete Co. <br /> 4) In Figures C-I I and C-12, the locations of all monitoring wells are shown on the Insert Plan <br /> View, with the exception of MW-LTC-7. Please add the location of MW-LTC-7 to the insert. <br /> Additionally, monitoring wells MW-LTC-2 and MW-LTC-6 appear to be mislocated, as they are <br /> outside of the proposed permit boundary. Please correct the locations for these two wells. <br /> Response: Figures C-I I and C-12 have been updated to accurately show the monitoring well <br /> locations and to show the MW-LTC-7 location. <br /> 5) In Figure C-12, Insert Plan View, Little Turkey Creek is located approximately 300 feet from <br /> the northern pit crest on section line C-C'. However, on the C-C' cross-section the northern pit <br /> crest is located approximately 200 feet from Little Turkey Creek. Please eliminate the <br /> contradiction and ensure all permit documents consistently describe the operation. Please revise <br /> the cross-section and/or insert to ensure consistency and accuracy. <br /> Response: Figure C-12 has been revised to show the surveyed creek location. The pit crest is <br /> located approximately 260 feet from Little Turkey Creek. Similar to Figure C-11, this cross- <br /> section shows a discrepancy between the topography and the creek location. Transit Mix had the <br /> creek and road surveyed by a licensed surveyor; however, the topography is from the El Paso <br /> County data clearinghouse based on a LIDAR flight. The discrepancies between the two data <br /> sources are likely the result of the LIDAR limitations, topographic changes between the LIDAR <br /> flight and the present(i.e. flooding and road work). As stated on Figure C-1, Transit Mix has <br /> used the best available data for all designs and figures. <br /> EXHIBIT D - Mining Plan (Rule 6.4.4) <br /> 6) Please provide discharge/energy dissipation details for drainage channel 172-2 at station 29+00 <br /> per Figure C-9d. Please provide these details for both the operational phase and final reclamation <br /> phase. <br /> Response: Typical energy dissipation details are included on Figure G-16. A riprap apron at the <br /> culvert outlet draining from the Plant sediment detention basin will provide energy dissipation <br /> during the operation of the quarry. This apron will extend below the culvert outlet at least two <br /> times the culvert diameter. For reclamation, the culvert will be replaced with an open channel <br /> excavated into native bedrock. The channel gradient of approximately 3.6% matches the <br /> gradient in Little Turkey Creek and no additional energy dissipation is required at the confluence <br /> of the creek and channel F2-2. <br /> EXHIBIT E -Reclamation Plan (Rule 6.4.5) <br /> 7) Revised Figure C-1 shows the portion of the access road to be paved, and the approximate <br /> location of the proposed power distribution line. However, Figure C-1 does not delineate or label <br /> the proposed 4-strand wire fencing. Additionally, the applicant's response to Item No. 51 of the <br /> Preliminary Adequacy Review states that removal costs have been included in Exhibit L for this <br /> fencing. However, the only fencing demolition costs included in Exhibit L address 245 feet of <br /> chain link fencing from the central substation. Please revise Exhibit L to include costs for <br /> removing the 4-strand fence, and Figure C-1 to delineate and label the 4-strand fence. <br /> Hitch Rack Ranch Quarry(M-2017-049) <br /> Response to Comments—March 20,2018 <br />