Laserfiche WebLink
electronic version of the map with the notation properly revised, on 20- Aug -2010. <br />Resolved. <br />g. Various clarifications requested regarding notations on Map 2.04.9 -2 appear to have been <br />made. Resolved. <br />4L. This item requested clarification of a confusing sentence in subsection 10.1. The same issue is <br />addressed previously in this letter; refer to Item 413(6), above. <br />See Item 41)(b). <br />4M. In this item, the Division requested clarification of text in the first part of subsection 10.2. In the <br />first paragraph of amended subsection 10.2, WFC properly references Dave Dearstyne's 2/11/08 <br />letter, now provided in Attachment 2.04.9 -5A. The third paragraph of amended subsection 10.2, <br />however, is confusing. The paragraph references an "August June 27, 2008 letter from Jim Boyd <br />of NRCS... which is also included in Attachment 2.04.9 -5A ". There is a letter of June 27, 2008 <br />from Jim Boyd included in Attachment 2.04.9 -5A, but it designates the Begay soil in the NW <br />comer of the permit area as prime fain and, and notes that small areas of Darvey -Bari and <br />Begay soils in certain specified locations on the Lloyd and Benson properties do not qualify as <br />prime farmlands because they were not historically managed as cropland and lacked sufficient <br />water for irrigation. The letter does not state that "prime farmlands lose this status if an adequate <br />and dependable supply of water does not exist ". The fourth paragraph of subsection 10.2 is now <br />somewhat outdated and confusing, due to the fact that prime farmland determinations that were <br />pending at the time the narrative was originally written, have now been finalized. <br />Our recommendation is that the confusing and outdated third and fourth paragraphs be deleted, <br />and replaced with a statement that: "In the permit narrative, care has been taken to distinguish <br />between prime farmland soils, and areas that have been determined to qualify as prime <br />farmlands ". <br />DRMS recommended narrative has replaced the outdated paragraphs. <br />4N. The Division requested modification of the language in what is now the last paragraph of <br />subsection 10.2. The language regarding the Bench 1 substitute subsoil material testing was <br />amended as requested. However, the paragraph seems to be out of place in its present location in <br />the text, and would appear to fit more closely in context if it were moved to the very end of <br />subsection 10.4, Item 2. Please consider this revision to the text. <br />The paragraph in question has been moved from subsection 10.2 to subsection 10.4, Item 2 <br />in Section 2.04.9. <br />40. WFC clarified contradictory language regarding handling of prime farmland soils. Resolved. <br />4P. Cover letter states that, `language was changed per DRMS request," but in fact the language was <br />not changed. The last sentence of Item 1, Subsection 10.3, lacks clarity and improperly refers to <br />prime farmland as a land use. Please revise as follows: "If adequate water is available and other <br />definitional requirements are met, the subject area is classified as prime farmland." <br />DBMS provided language has been used to replace the last sentence of Item 1, Subsection <br />10.3. <br />4Q. In this item, the Division requested that subsection 10.4, Item 3, be amended to cite a 6127/08 <br />NRCS letter, and that the text be revised to include reference to the letter in Attachment 2.04.9 -6. <br />In addition, the Division requested proper references to appropriate NRCS letters be included at <br />