PERMFILE106726 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

- 3 - January 10, 1989 X. Topsoil 11. The Ilidterm Document Page 9, Item 5 requested an update of original application pages 32 and 33 to reflect site specific data collected by James iJalsh on behalf of Pueblo Coal. On Page 39 of the Renewal Application the subject section was modified to indicate that certain maps and tables had been revised to reflect results of the Walsh study. However, the text on Pages 37-39 of the Renewal Application does not differ substantially from the text on Pages 32 and 33 of the original application, and thus the text is not consistent with the revised tables and maps. The text still needs to be revised to accurately reflect the results of the IJalsh study. 12. Page 9, Item 7 of the I1idterm Review Document requested replacement flaps 5-1 and 5-2 to accurately depict approved topsoil stockpile changes. Also requested was an updated Table 5-3 (Topsoil Stockpile). The maps were submitted with the Renewal Application and have been updated as requested. However, neither of the maps were certified by a Registered P.E, or Land Surveyor as required by Rule 2.10.3(2). The maps will need to be properly certified and resubmitted. Table 5-3 submitted with the Renewal Application has been updated but still does not accurately reflect the currently approved plan, since Topsoil Stockpiles 7 and 8 are not listed. The table should be revised to list these stockpiles along with their projected final volumes and dimensions. 13. Table 5-2 (Soil Balance) submitted as Page 72-a of the Renewal Application is identical to Table 5-2 as submitted in the original Permit Application. A revised version of the table reflecting results of the James Walsh study was submitted with a May 5, 1983 adequacy response letter. This updated Table 5-2 should be submitted for inclusion with the Renewal Application. * 14.E Actual acreage from which topsoil has been salvaged and the (s~ resultant salvage volumes should be determined and compared with the projections of Table 5-2, based on acreage of the various soil `^ map units salvaged to date. Reasons for any significant ~ discrepancies should be evaluated and re spread depth projections ~ `- should be modified, if appropriate. A survey based estimate of ~~ ~,` ~~ current topsoil stockpile volumes should be provided, and Table 5-3 should be revised to reflect the updated volume projections. ~~~ October, 1988 measurements made by the Division indicate ~ substantially greater topsoil stockpile volumes than projected.