Laserfiche WebLink
PAGE 4 <br />May 19, 1994 <br />BARBARA PAVLIK <br />27. Early application of mulch utilized a grass hay at 1 Yz tons per acre due to the lack of <br />available straw. Straw mulch is currently being utilized at 1 ton per acre with better success <br />than the grass hay. Straw mulch has yielded better coverage with the current application <br />and is showing less wildlife grazing activity. If the availability of straw mulch decreases and <br />necessitates the use of grass hay mulch in the future, the 1 Yz tons per acre will be resumed. <br />28. No riparian community reference area has been determined. Page V-47 has been revised <br />to reflect this situation. Three copies are enclosed. <br />29. Page V-59 has been revised to include DMG's accepted formula for revegetation success <br />criteria. Three copies of the revised page are enclosed. <br />30. As suggested by DMG, WFU will use the Student's t-distribution instead of the least <br />significant difference test (LSD). Page V-59 has been revised to reflect this change. <br />31. It appears that DMG has reviewed the old Section I since there is no Page I-16 in the new <br />Section I submitted with the new application. The new Section complies with the <br />requirement of Section 2.03.4(3). <br />32. Again, DMG's reference is to the old document. The new document complies with the <br />regulatory requirement. <br />33. Again, DMG's reference is to the old document. The new document lists violations upto July <br />1, 1993. Since WFU was issued additional NOV's on December 16, 1993, Page I-9 has <br />been revised to include this information. Three copies are enclosed. <br />34. As a part of NOV C-93-157, DMG was satisfied that "as built" maps for the ponds were on <br />file. <br />35. Table V-2 of the application document gives an updated list of all ponds. Could it be that <br />DMG is referring to the table in the old document? <br />36. We have not found Map VE-1 in the permit. As noted by DMG, Map 20 is indeed obsolete <br />and should be removed from the permit. Map 32 should be kept since it has "typical" details <br />of various culverts, ditches, etc. Map 139 in the permit depicts the existing Sediment control <br />structures at the East Portal. We have included three copies of a page titled Map 20 - <br />Deleted May 1994 for insertion in the existing Map 20 pocket. <br />