My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2010-03-05_REVISION - C2006085
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C2006085
>
2010-03-05_REVISION - C2006085
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:00:48 PM
Creation date
3/8/2010 7:55:43 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C2006085
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
3/5/2010
Doc Name
Adequacy Review
From
Environmental Alternatives, Inc
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
TR1
Email Name
KAG
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
4. The Drainage and Sediment Control Plan submitted appears well organized and thorough. <br />However, the Division is perplexed by the first sentence of the last paragraph under the <br />heading Introduction on page 1 which states "The design information provided in this report <br />is understood to be conceptual and not for construction purposes." Rule 2.05.3(4)(a)(ii) <br />requires a detailed design plan for each sediment pond. This kind of "qualifier" is also <br />noted in the report under heading 3.1 particle size and under 4.0 diversion and collection <br />ditches. It is again noted on Map 2 of 2 Sediment Pond Details under the Notes heading. <br />Given the detail and effort put into this report, the Division would normally review this plan <br />under the assumption that it is the design for which Northfield is requesting approval. As <br />such, the Division would expect that this design be used for construction and following <br />construction, Northfield will submit an as-built certification for the pond, certified by a <br />registered, professional engineer. In light of our comments, please provide direction or <br />responses to these concerns. <br />This concludes our adequacy review of the revised materials. Once the cost estimate is updated, we <br />will provide a copy for your review under separate cover. Please submit responses to the issues <br />identified in bold text as soon as possible. If you have any questions, please contact me. <br />Sincerely, <br />Kent A. Gorham <br />Environmental Protection Specialist III
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.