REV03263

• Permit No: M1985043
• IBM Index Class Name: Revision
• Doc Date: 11/9/1999
• Doc Name: FAX SHEET
• From: KELLY HAGLUND GARNSEY & KAHN
• To: JAMES DILLIE
• Type & Sequence: TR1
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

NOV-09-
From; JeraldS
Ffield
Ph 1999 TUE 04:40 PM
D
H
droD
namicslnco
atedFat:(i(~66
o FAX NG,
Voic
{3D3}841~311T
lt
L
riP
~
f
}I
l
dlG
M
lt
h P, 05/10
.
, .
.
y
ry
y
r e;
e
o
o
e
:
ams~a
o;
a
y
ag
un
n Pageaoryiuesary,nouemoo~ua,im~,ui.wrm
Ms. Lori Potter
Project No. 9974-01
Page 3
November 8, 1999
close monitorlttg of this quarry, it is our opinion that severe impacts to downstream properties
will continue in the future by sediment yields associated with significant storm events.
Lastly, it is our opinion that eho Storm Water Mattagertrent Plan (SWMP) is not complete if the
quarry has to meet eonsauctioa site criteria. We have attached information from the Colorado
Department of Heahh that illustrates their requirements. It appears the SWMP does not meet
Colorado's (or EPA's) minimum criteria.
James Di111e 6/04/99 Inspection Report
Mr. Dillie indicates that a late April and early May storm event oectured that resulted in large
diameter particles being transported downstream. Such a conclusion means smaller diameter
particles were also transported downstream,
His report supports our opinion that the quarry was a significant source of sediment to
downsveam properties. He indicates "Stream banks worn otoded whioh increased the width of
the creek." Also, he states "The amount of material that was collected In the constructed basin is
several feet thick over I-1 acres,"
We do not know if Mt. Dillie actually measured rho depth of material in the constructed basin, In
any event, his last statement deartortstrates that deposition of material must have occurred during
the cad of the runoff event.
When flows discharge tiom a sediment containment system with high velocities, little sediment is
actually captured by the sttucture, Only during the end of such runoff evenu will flow velocities
be low enough to allow foc deposition of small sized sediment particles. It is our opinion that at
least three to 10 times the amount of sediment collected in the construction basin actually flowed
downstream during t}te flood event.
In summary, Mr. Ditlie's report substantiates out professional opinion that stringent sediment and
erosion central practices must be continually implemented for this tttirting operarion, In addition,
enforcement of this policy must be a responsibility of the DMG. Otherwise, continual detrimental
impacts on downstream properties cea be anticipated whenever flood flow events occur.
Mr. Jo~epb M. Ricci's November 3,1999 Letter
We have reviewed Mr. Ricci's letter and have the following comments:
1. The statement about the aedimentatioa pond appears to be correct in that something
apparently was constructed. However, as we have stated above, the structure does not appear
to have been properly sized, designed, or built.
2. The SWMP was not properly prepared and is missing significant information.
3. The fine sized panicles collected at the mined area represetrts only a small portion of the tote!
amount of sediment that discharged i}om the quarry doting flood events.
4, We cannot $rrd say statement in Mr. Dillie's report that says rho back grading ".. ,assisted in
keeping the flow of water fiom the quarry walls in check" We doubt such s statement can be
hydrologically substantiated for the rainfall events that occurred on April 2g --May 2, 1999 or
in August 1999.