Laserfiche WebLink
<br />January 27, 2997 <br />T.H.E. -Amendment Application <br />PAGE 2 <br />ditches, culverts, downdrains, settling basins, or other pertincmt structures <br />that will be installed as best management practices to manal;e anticipated <br />stormwater runoff. The operator should supply a short narrative explaining <br />how stormwater will be controlled along the proposed haul road corridor and <br />provide a plan view map which shows the locations of the storm~Nater controls <br />to be installed. Also, the designs submitted indicate a proposed catchpoint on <br />both sides of the haul road, throughout its entire length. The purpose of the <br />catchpoint is unclear to the Division. Therefore, please provide a narrative <br />which explains the purpose of the catchpoint is unclear. Plea:;e explain the <br />purpose of the catchpoint. <br />8. The operator has indicated that the existing and planned haul roads will stay <br />in place as long as necessary for the construction company acce:~s to the main <br />shop and office complex. The Division requests that T.H.E., Inc. provide the <br />following items in order to demonstrate compliance with the Construction <br />Materials Rules & Regulations: 1) a letter from the City of Can~~n City which <br />exempts T.H.E., Inc. from reclaiming the proposed new haul road. and corridor, <br />2) a revised reclamation plan and map which shows appropriate portions of the <br />existing haul road and corridor to be reclaimed as industrial land, not <br />rangeland or wildlife habitat, and 3) itemized costs for removal'. of the upper <br />half of the existing haul road during final reclamation. <br />11. The Division requests that T.H.E., Inc. include in the amendme~at application <br />correspondence from the Water Quality Control Division pertaining to the <br />review of the stormwater management plan and the WQCD determination of <br />dischazge permit requirements. <br />15. The Division agrees with the proposed design for the runoff diversion channel <br />leading from Pond 1 across the current crushing and processing area at a grade <br />of 1-2%. However, the applicant has not adequately responded to the <br />Division's request to verify the channel design and riprap sizing in the <br />steeper sections of the runoff collection channel. Again, there appear <br />to be 500 linear feet at a grade of 5% and 550 linear feet pit a grade of <br />17%. If the operator truly intends to build the diversion ~:hannel at a <br />grade of 1-2% throughout its entire length from Pond 1 to ]Pond 5, then <br />there will be an elevation difference of at least 75 feet from the <br />diversion ditch to Pond 5. It appears that there would either be a 75 <br />foot waterfall or the collection channel will be constructed at a grade <br />other than 1-2%. Please clarify. <br />It is imperative that all designs for proposed stormwater controls be acceptable to <br />the Division prior to approval of the amendment application. <br />16. The applicant's proposal for routing stormwater runoff into Pond 3 and from <br />Pond 3 to Pond 4 via speed bumps is not acceptable to the ]division as a <br />permanent control for stormwater management. The operator should consider <br />installation of culverts, cross drains, low water crossing, or other structure to <br />properly convey and control stormwater runoff leading into and out of the <br />proposed sediment and detention ponds. It appears that there Kill be at least <br />three (3) such structures necessary. The Division requests that the applicant <br />revise the stormwater management plan map to show the location of collection <br />