My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2011-06-21_APPLICATION CORRESPONDENCE - C2010088
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Application Correspondence
>
Coal
>
C2010088
>
2011-06-21_APPLICATION CORRESPONDENCE - C2010088
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:34:43 PM
Creation date
6/22/2011 9:31:52 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C2010088
IBM Index Class Name
Application Correspondence
Doc Date
6/21/2011
Doc Name
Adequacy Review No. 2
From
DRMS
To
CAM Colordo, LLC
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.
/
58
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
Corey Heaps <br />CAM Colorado LLC <br />June 21, 2011 Page 43 <br />making the likelihood of establishing a protective vegetative cover unreasonable. <br />However, without adequate vegetative cover, long -term erosion control within the <br />industrial area needs to be addressed. The text states that erosion caused by water will be <br />controlled by "restoring the land to the approximate original contour [which] will minimize <br />or eliminate erosion" because the "existing berms contain most of the precipitation that <br />falls on the industrial area." Erosion due to wind is not addressed in this section. Please <br />reference Rule 4.17 -- Air Resource Protection and the appropriate measures that will <br />be implemented to control wind erosion and air quality. Section 2.05.6(2)(a)(ii) states <br />that the evaporation ponds will be covered with 6 inches of clean fill. Please give a <br />description of the fill material and how the wind erosion potential of the site will be <br />minimized. AIso, Rule 4.15.1(3) is cited incorrectly in the text. The correct rule is <br />4.15.10(3). Please fix this typo. <br />71. For the Noxious Weed Control Plan, please include a broader statement in the second <br />paragraph to comply with 4.15.1(5). Species to be considered include those that are on the <br />State `A' List and those that are on the Mesa County noxious weed list. The County Weed <br />Supervisor should be consulted for appropriate treatment methods. <br />CAM Response: Please see revised page 2.05 -33. <br />Division Response: Response accepted. <br />72. In the third paragraph of the Noxious Weed Control Plan, please delete "If required ", at the <br />beginning of the paragraph and replace it with, "If salt cedar plants establish on the <br />disturbed area... ". <br />CAM Response: Please see revised page 2.05 -33 <br />Division Response: Response accepted. <br />73. Section 2.05.4(2)(e)(vi). It seems that CAM is not proposing to seed the disturbed <br />land/industrial portion of the permit area. If that is the case, please clarify and address a <br />gravel surface or other measures that will be used to control wind and water erosion as <br />required by Rule 4.15.10(3). <br />CAM Response: Please see discussion in section 2.05.4(1) for a discussion regarding Rule <br />4.15.10(3). <br />Division response: This item has not been adequately addressed. Please see comment 70 <br />above and update the PAP accordingly. <br />74. CAM is not proposing a woody plant density standard for revegetation success. Per Rule <br />4.15.8(7), for areas with a post - mining land use of fish and wildlife habitat, minimum <br />stocking levels, planting arrangements, and methods for mitigation of potential adverse <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.