My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE43804
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
500000
>
PERMFILE43804
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:46:17 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 11:42:26 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
m2004044
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
11/22/2004
Doc Name
Adequacy Review Response
From
Tetra Tech RMC
To
DMG
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.
/
168
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
Mr. Larry Oehler <br />TETRA TECH RMC Adequacy Response M-2004-044 <br />November 22, 2004 <br />Page 3 of 20 <br />bridges between Phase 3 and the West Fill Area. Also, use that map symbol <br />between areas that will not be affected but are in areas that otherwise are to be <br />affected, such as, the portion of the Kerr McGee Oil Well Tank and Separator <br />and associated road. See the definition of "Affected Land" Rule 1 Section <br />1.1(3). For 112 permits, an Affected Land Boundary must be used to show the <br />boundary between land within the Permit Boundary that will be affected and <br />land that will not be affected Another example of where the Affected Land <br />Boundary line should be used is between the West Fill Area and the Brighton <br />and Brantner Ditches and between the Phase 3 area (including the slurry wall) <br />and the unaffected corridor for the Brighton Ditch and the power line. <br />Please refer to the response provided in item (3) above. <br />S. On sheet 5 of 7 (Mining Map), a solid line is shown extending east -west across <br />the narrowest portion of Phase 1. This is an unnecessary line and makes the <br />map a little confusing. Eliminate the line or explain why it should remain. <br />This line is the parcel line referenced to the legal descriptions on the Existing <br />Conditions Map. The line has been removed from the Mining Plan Map (Sheet 5 <br />of 7). <br />Exhibit D -Mining Plan <br />1. Commit to providing any necessary revisions to the mining plan, in the event <br />that the County Floodplain Use permit Process requires a different setback <br />distance from the top of the South Platte River Bank or different protection <br />measures on the inside reservoir bank. <br />If the Adams County Floodplain Use permit process requires changes to the <br />Mining Plan Maps that impact the DMG permit, the applicant will submit a <br />technical revision to the DMG. <br />2. Provide plans for Division review, which will ensure adequate erosion and <br />sediment control measures for protection of the Brantner and Brighton Ditches <br />and the quantity and quality of water in the ditches. The plan should include <br />construction plans /designs for al[ facilities such as diversions and sediment <br />basins or other facilities that will be used to prevent flood and sediment damage <br />to the ditches. The plans should consider the maximum possible 10 year 24 <br />hour storm event. The earliest possible establishment of vegetative cover would <br />be a good practice for control of erosion and sedimentation a~:d should be <br />included in your plans. Your plan for filling the West Fill Area appears to <br />include creating piles 30 feet high with 1 h: l v slopes. Such lo~ag steep slopes <br />would cause rapid runoff and be very erosive. Less steep slopes such as 3h:1 v <br />would be much easier to establish a protective vegetative cover on. The Division <br />H:\3919_019_OIUILRB\DMG Response\lst Adequacy Response to DMG I I-5-04.doc <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.