2011-08-22_APPLICATION CORRESPONDENCE - C2010088 (2)

Home Browse Search

Mike Boulay CAM: Figure 13 has been renamed Map -13. -6- August 19, 2011 the rail loop, that portion of the rail loop adjacent to the borrow area would, then, be considered a haul road within the disturbed area and, as required under Rule 4.03.1(4) (a) (iii) and Rule 4.05.2, be required to pass the disturbed area runoff through a sedimentation pond or other treatment facility. However, a recent proposed change would eliminate the borrow area, borrow area topsoil stockpile and pond 4 from the plan so that portion of the rail loop adjacent to the deleted borrow area can again be considered a haul road not in the disturbed area, with the appropriate non -pond sediment control measures employed. In the July 8, 2011 submittal, Cam provided new hydrology designs and revised maps. In addition, the Division understands that the borrow area will be deleted from consideration. The Division has the following additional requests: 1) Please provide revised permit text, maps and hydrology designs that take into account that the borrow area, borrow area topsoil stockpile and pond 4 will be deleted from the Fruita Loadout plan, that there will be three sediment ponds and that sediment control for the portion of the railroad loop adjacent to the deleted borrow area will not involve a sediment pond. CAM: Permit maps, and various permit pages have been updated. 2) In the July 8, 2011 submittal, a new topsoil stockpile, topsoil pile #3, was added along the railroad spur line. Since this topsoil stockpile does not drain to a sediment pond, the stockpile needs to be designed as a small area exemption (SAE). Please provide the appropriate hydrology designs for the topsoil stockpile SAE, describe the topsoil stockpile SAE in the appropriate permit text sections and add the SAE designation to the appropriate maps. CAM: A new SAE (SAE #1) has been designed for topsoil pile #2 and included as part of Exhibit 9 and shown on Map -16. Exhibit 9 in its entirety has been included due to pond #4 being removed and all pages being renumbered. 3) It appears that Figure 13 should be re- labeled as Map 13. 4) In the submittal dated April 12, 2011, the plan view drawings on Map 13 for ponds 1 and 2 were small and difficult to read. However, in the July 11, 2011 submittal, the plan view drawings on Figure 13 (Map 13 ?) are too small to read. Please submit new plan view drawings of each sediment pond, at a scale that is large enough to easily read the contour lines, contour intervals and elevations.