My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2011-08-10_APPLICATION CORRESPONDENCE - C2010088 (2)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Application Correspondence
>
Coal
>
C2010088
>
2011-08-10_APPLICATION CORRESPONDENCE - C2010088 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:36:44 PM
Creation date
9/8/2011 7:40:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C2010088
IBM Index Class Name
Application Correspondence
Doc Date
8/10/2011
Doc Name
Adequacy Review Letter No. 3
From
DRMS
To
CAM Colorado, 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.
/
19
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 />August 10, 2011 <br />Page 12 <br />lifespan of the roadway. These same methods and parameters can also be utilized haul <br />roads, particularly where the haul trucks are commercial, over -the -road vehicles. <br />CAM's proposed minimum thickness design for this project, with additional materials to <br />be added as'necessary, will probably suffice, given the relatively short haul road lengths. <br />This portion of the item is resolved. Please incorporate the comments from the City of <br />Fruita Engineer into the PAP. <br />51b. Item resolved. <br />51c. Page 2.05 -13, Haul Road Maintenance, mentions road shoulders (none are currently <br />proposed, but possibly should be) and paved surface (none proposed). Please review this <br />paragraph to ensure it accurately describes what is proposed. <br />CAM - Text about road shoulders and pavement was removed from page 2.05 -13. <br />Division Response: Text regarding road shoulders and pavement was removed from <br />page 2.05 -13. This portion of the item is resolved. <br />There is language in paragraph (c) on page 2.05 -8 that is inconsistent with haul road <br />designs described elsewhere in the permit. Please revise paragraph (c) to be consistent <br />with road width and road base thicknesses as revised on Map 15. <br />Additional Questions regarding Haul Road #2 <br />51d. The last paragraph on page 2.04 -2 describes coke particulate matter (10,000 cy) that was <br />buried in trenches. Haul Road #2 and the Rail Loop alignments both cross the coke fines <br />area. Has any type of geotechnical investigation been done to ensure this is a suitable <br />foundation for haul road and rail traffic? Is there a minimum thickness of embankment <br />material that will be required to "bridge" across any unsuitable material? <br />CAM - There has not been any type of geotechnical investigation to ensure a suitable foundation <br />for haul road and rail traffic. CAM will perform necessary geotechnical work prior to <br />construction. <br />Division Response: Please incorporate any subsequent modifications into the PAP. <br />51 e - f Items resolved. <br />Additional Questions regarding the Rail Loo <br />51g -h. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.