My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2011-07-11_APPLICATION CORRESPONDENCE - C2010088
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Application Correspondence
>
Coal
>
C2010088
>
2011-07-11_APPLICATION CORRESPONDENCE - C2010088
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:35:29 PM
Creation date
7/11/2011 10:38:45 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C2010088
IBM Index Class Name
APPLICATION CORRESPONDENCE
Doc Date
7/11/2011
Doc Name
Adequacy Response #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.
/
43
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 <br />-24- July 8, 2011 <br />CAM : No longer applicable. The railspur could be considered as a haul road <br />not in the disturbed area as defined in Rule 4.05.2(4) and, therefore, falls under <br />Rule 4.03.1(4)(iv), best management practices will apply. Please see revised <br />sediment pond configuration as shown on Map -16. <br />Division Response: Response accepted regarding the reconfigured sediment <br />pond designs. However, there are still questions regarding the entire rail <br />loop being considered as not in the disturbed area (see Item 47 above). <br />CAM - Comment noted and addressed in item 47. <br />55. Division Response: Response accepted. <br />56. Under Rule 2.05.3(4), in the Sedcad designs for the west culverts, a curve <br />number of zero is used for the irrigated wetlands area, citing a ground cover of <br />100% as justification for that curve number. If the wetlands are saturated or are <br />comprised of standing water, a precipitation event could produce runoff, in spite <br />of the vegetative cover. Please describe the nature of the wetlands as it relates <br />to the determination of the curve number. <br />CAM Response: Revised the Curve Number to 74, based on cover of 97.33 %, <br />which equates to "Good ", for a soil type of 'C'. Please see revised page Exhibit <br />9 -49. <br />Division Response: In the submittal dated April 11, 2011, CAM revised the curve <br />number of the wetlands to 74, which is a reasonable value to the Division. <br />However, the April 11, 2011 submittal left out the Sedcad peak discharge data <br />sheet for the west culverts that had been included in the original submittal on <br />page Exh -9 -7. In addition, there are no Sedcad data sheets that show the peak <br />discharge for the designed event for the other culverts on site. Finally, there are <br />no Sedcad designs that show that a culvert of a certain diameter can handle the <br />designed peak discharge for the designed precipitation event. Please provide <br />the appropriate Sedcad data sheets for all of the loadout culverts. <br />CAM Please see SedCad data sheets showing peak discharge for the requested <br />culverts begin on page EXH. 9 -69 in Appendix 9. The culverts were designed <br />as stated on page EXH 9 -2 which states the 'Culvert size based on Figure 4 -18 <br />from the Handbook of Steel Drainage and Highway Construction Products book'. <br />57. Division Response: Response accepted. <br />58. Division Response: Response accepted. <br />58a. On revised page 2.05 -19 of the April 11, 2011 submittal, there is a statement <br />that the ponds will be cleaned out no later than when the ponds are 75% <br />full of sediment. Please revise this sentence to read that the ponds will be <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.