Laserfiche WebLink
commitment to designate a stream buffer zone and to mazk with buffer zone signs the azea not to be <br />disturbed along the south bank of Munger Creek. <br />As such, the Division will able to make the specific finding required by 4.OS.18. This fmding and the <br />associated specific authorization will be included within the proposed approval decision for TR-14. <br />No further information regarding this item is requested o[ the applicant. <br />14. Adequate information was provided to allow the Division to grant a vaziance from the requirement for <br />a designed sub-drainage system, pursuant to 4.10.3(5). The specific variance will be included within <br />the Division s proposed approval decision for TR-14. No further information regarding this item is <br />requested of the applicant. <br />19. The application narrative in Section 2.2.5 under Site Prepazation and Construction was amended to <br />address additional subsoil sampling within the Rivra vaziant soil type as requested by the Division.. <br />However, the narrative states that the additional sampling would be conducted prior to initiating <br />construction. <br />The Division believes it is important that the additional soils data be provided within a specified <br />timeframe, well in advance of the initiation of construction, so that adequate time will be available to <br />evaluate the information and make any necessary modifications in the soil salvage or handling <br />procedures. We suggest that sampling procedures, locations, and timeframes be discussed during <br />a scheduled site visit on October 10, and request that a more detailed commitment be provided <br />within amended revision text following that visit. <br />Adequacy items not specifically addressed above were determined to have been adequately addressed by <br />the response submittal. <br />As we noted within the August 1 PAR letter, requved additional bond will need to be provided prior to <br />final approval of the revision. If acceptable bond has not been submitted before our proposed decision is <br />issued, a stipulation with specified deadline for bond submittal would likely be attached to the decision. <br />Two comments were received from agencies notified of the revision application, a written comment from <br />the Colorado Historical Society (enclosed), and a phone request from Bruce Fowler of the BLM Grand <br />junction Resource Area. As you know, the proposed disturbance azea is on BLM surface, and Bruce <br />requested a site visit, which has been scheduled for Thursday, October 10, at gam. <br />The 60 day deadline for issuance of a decision on this revision was September 6. As you laiow, there were <br />a number of substantive adequacy issues to address, and that deadline was not met. We would request that <br />you waive the 60 day timeframe, and agree to an extension to November 1, 2002 for issuance of a proposed <br />decision. <br />Please contact me if you have any questions. <br />Sincerely, 1 <br />Dan T. Mathews <br />Environmental Protection Specialist <br />cc: Denver File <br />