Laserfiche WebLink
Corey Heaps <br />CAM Colorado LLC <br />June 21, 2011 Page 32 <br />As a related matter, CAM states on revised page 2.05 -21 of the April 11, 2011 submittal <br />that the borrow area will serve to contain the disturbed area runoff since it will be a pit. <br />However, the proposed borrow area pit must be considered an impoundment, subject to the <br />requirements of Rules 4.05.6 and 4.05.9 and no such sediment pond designs were <br />submitted. Please address the impoundment issue in regard to the construction <br />material borrow area. <br />47a. On revised Map 13 of the submittal dated April 11, 2011, please label pond 1 and pond <br />2 on the plan view. <br />48. On permit text page 2.05 -11 in Section 2.05.3(3)(c), it is stated that haul road no. I is not <br />within the disturbed area. This is in compliance with Rules 4.05.2(4) and 4.03.1(4)(a)(iv). <br />As such, only best management practices are required for sediment control for haul road <br />no. 1. However, there are four Sedcad hydrology designs for the silt fence along haul road <br />no. I that are presented in Exhibit 9 of Volume II. These four designs are not needed and <br />they can be omitted. <br />CAM Response: Comment noted, designs removed. <br />Division Response: In the April 11, 2011 submittal, CAM elected to remove the four silt <br />fence designs for haul road no. 1 from Exhibit 9. However, the Division requests that the <br />ditch representation on Map 16 that runs along haul road no. 1 be removed, leaving <br />only the berm representation and the silt fence representation. <br />49. Please provide a more detailed description in Section 2.05.3(3)(c) on permit text page 2.05- <br />9 and in Section 2.05.6(2)(a)(i) on permit text page 2.05 -43 that describes the sediment <br />control and coal spillage control that will be utilized in the construction and operational use <br />of the Reed Wash bridge. <br />CAM Response: Page 2.05 -9 has been revised. Please see revised page 2.05 -43 and pages <br />2.05 -44 & 45 that were updated due to text over -flow and page numbering. <br />Division Response: Response accepted. <br />49a. As required under Rule 4.03.1(4)(e), please provide designs which show that the <br />bridge can safely pass the runoff from a 100 year -24 hour precipitation event. <br />50. Since there are several locations where the railroad spur and loop are close to Reed Wash, <br />the Division suggests that a barrier, such as a berm, be constructed between the railroad <br />tracks and Reed Wash in case of a coal spill from the railcars. <br />CAM Response: 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 sections <br />