My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2011-08-24_APPLICATION CORRESPONDENCE - C2010088 (2)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Application Correspondence
>
Coal
>
C2010088
>
2011-08-24_APPLICATION CORRESPONDENCE - C2010088 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:37:10 PM
Creation date
8/25/2011 9:09:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C2010088
IBM Index Class Name
Application Correspondence
Doc Date
8/24/2011
Doc Name
4th Surface Water Adequacy Review
From
Joe Dudash
To
Mike Boulay
Email Name
MPB
SB1
JJD
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.
/
5
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
Page 3 of 5 <br />5) There appears to be an inconsistency as to what sediment control structures will be <br />constructed alongside the railroad spur line. The Map 21 plan view appears to show <br />berms in place but the cross - section B -B' shows that ditches will be next to the <br />railroad track. However, on Map 16 and Figure 13 (Map 13 ?), there appear to be <br />ditches on both sides for only part of the spur line. Please explain or revise the maps <br />so that there is consistency among these maps. <br />The Division has no further concerns. In the August 19, 2011 submittal cover letter, <br />CAM explained that the sediment control along the spur line and a portion of the <br />railroad loop varies due to Union Pacific construction standards for cut sections <br />versus fill sections and, also, for the protection of the wetlands. Additional sediment <br />control symbols were added to Maps 16 and 21 for clarity. <br />6) Please add more detail to the discussion of pond reclamation,in Section <br />2.05.3(4)(a)(ii)(D) and, as was done for the topic of road reclamation, please add a <br />reference in Section 2.05.4(2)(c) on page 2.05 -30 that a general discussion of the <br />reclamation of the sediment ponds is presented in Section 2.05.3(4)(a)(ii)(D). <br />In the August 19, 2011 submittal, CAM added additional information on pages 2.05- <br />20, 21 and 31. However, the Division requests an expanded discussion concerning <br />pond reclamation, including where the fill will come from since the ponds will be <br />incised, compaction of the fill material and whether or not topsoil will be applied. <br />7) There are two short purple line segments shown along the railroad loop on Figure 13 <br />(Map 13 ?), Map 16 and Map 21, one between track locations 53 +00 and 64 +00 and <br />one between track locations 106 +00 and 110 +00. Please explain and add their <br />designations to the map legends or remove these lines. <br />The Division has no further concerns. In the August 19, 2011 submittal, CAM <br />explained that the purple lines represent ditches. Maps 16 and 21 were modified to <br />show ditch symbols. <br />8) Please update Section 2.05.6(b)(i) on permit text page 2.05 -54 to reflect that there <br />are three ponds and one SAE in the current sediment control plan. <br />The Division has no further concerns. Page 2.05 -54 was revised accordingly in the <br />submittal dated August 19, 2011. <br />9) Please change 20% slope to 0.2% slope for ditch 1 -d in the Ditch and Culvert Design <br />Summary on page Exh. 9 -2. <br />The Division has no further concerns. The summary on page Exh. 9 -2 was revised <br />appropriately in the submittal dated August 19, 2011. <br />10) Please change "V-Ditch" to "Trapezoidal" and 0.5% slope to 8.0% slope for ditch <br />segment 3 -c in the Ditch and Culvert Design Summary on page Exh. 9 -2. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.