Laserfiche WebLink
C- 2010 -088 Fruita Loadout <br />4"' Preliminary Adequacy Review (MLT) <br />24- Aug -2011 <br />Page 2 of 6 <br />With the August 2011 response, a letter from the City of Fruita has been provided for <br />incorporation into Exhibit 8. The letter states that, "The City of Fruita will continue to <br />support utilization of 15 Road for this use with the condition that all comments provided <br />through the Mesa County Site Plan and CD ®T Access Permit approval processes are <br />adequately resolved " This item is resolved. <br />2.04.3 Land Use <br />4a. Item resolved with CAM's July 2011 response. <br />Rule 2.04.6 Geology Description <br />6. Item resolved with CAM's April 2011 response. <br />Rule 2.05.3(3) Mine Facilities <br />46. Item resolved with CAM's April 2011 response. <br />51. Item(s) resolved with CAM's July 2011 response. <br />Rule 2.05.3(4) Ponds and Impoundments <br />53. Item resolved with CAM's April 2011 response. <br />2.05.3(3) Roads <br />Haul Road #1 <br />51 a. Please incorporate the comments from the City of Fruita Engineer into the PAP. <br />With the August 2011 response, the Haul Road Surfacing section on page 2.05 -13 has <br />been revised to include the statement, "The City of Fruita will require improvements be in <br />place to structurally support the amount of truck traffic proposed." Item resolved. <br />51b.Item resolved with CAM's July 2011 response. <br />51 c. There is language in paragraph (c) on page 2.05 -8 that is inconsistent with haul road designs <br />described elsewhere in the permit. Please revise paragraph (c) to be consistent with road <br />width and road base thicknesses as revised on Map 15. <br />With the August 2011 response, paragraph (c) on page 2.05 -8 (and -9) was revised as <br />requested. Item resolved. <br />Hnu.l Rnad #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 />