My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2011-04-12_APPLICATION CORRESPONDENCE - C2010088
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Application Correspondence
>
Coal
>
C2010088
>
2011-04-12_APPLICATION CORRESPONDENCE - C2010088
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:32:32 PM
Creation date
4/12/2011 3:02:27 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C2010088
IBM Index Class Name
APPLICATION CORRESPONDENCE
Doc Date
4/12/2011
Doc Name
Adequacy Responses # 1
From
J.E. Stover & Associates, Inc
To
DRMS
Email Name
MPB
SB1
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.
/
46
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
Mike Boulay -28- April 11, 2011 <br />CAM: Page 2.05-9 has been revised. Please see revised page 2.05-43 and <br />pages 2.05-44 & 45 that were updated due to text over-flow and page numbering. <br />50. Since there are several locations where the railroad spur and loop are close <br />to Reed Wash, the Division suggests that a barrier, such as a berm, be <br />constructed between the railroad tracks and Reed Wash in case of a coal <br />spill from the railcars. <br />CAM: Berms will be used in conjunction with silt fences as part of the sediment <br />control plan where the rail spur is near Reed Wash. Details can be found in <br />sections 2.05.3(4), 2.05.6(2) and 2.05.6(3). Design for the silt fences can be found <br />in Exhibit 9, and locations are shown on Map-16. <br />51. The plan and profile of the proposed rail loop is provided on Map 21; there is very <br />little other information presented within the application. Based on communication <br />with Ms. Stover-Bishop, Union Pacific railroad has its own detailed requirements <br />governing the construction of embankments. Please provide a summary of <br />those requirements for inclusion within the permit text. Otherwise, the <br />Division will need to require that the embankments be constructed in <br />accordance with the Rules for roads and embankments. <br />CAM: Page 2.05.9 has been revised, and Union Pacific Construction Standards <br />have been provided in new Exhibit 16. <br />Rule 2.05.3(3)(c)(i) requires that specifications for each bridge be provided. On <br />page 2.05-9, the bridge is described as being 9' in width and 60' in length, <br />constructed of steel girders with concrete abutments. The second paragraph <br />states that geotechnical work on the foundation will be performed prior to <br />construction of the bridge. Please provide general details and a plan sheet of <br />the proposed bridge for inclusion in the permit application <br />CAM: Please see the Bridge plan and profile shown on Map-21. <br />Rule 2.05.3(4) Ponds. Impoundments, and Diversions <br />52. The Division is concerned that groundwater may be exposed during the <br />construction of at least two of the five proposed sediment ponds. Ponds 2 and 4 <br />have bottom elevations that are very close to the groundwater table. For <br />example, using the minimum groundwater elevations (worse case or highest <br />level) reported for Pond 4 in Exhibit 3 and extrapolating these numbers between <br />the wells, the Division estimates the groundwater elevation to be about at 4449.3' <br />at Pond 4. The bottom of the Pond 4 as shown on Map 14 is 4450'. This <br />appears to be essentially the same elevation as the water table at this location. <br />Likewise Pond 2 bottom elevation would be within about three feet of the ground <br />water table at the proposed location for the pond. The Division of Water
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.