2011-10-05_REVISION - C1981008 (2)

Home Browse Search

Bench 1 if such materials indeed had been moved to that location. Again, they were not moved there and it is nonsensical to suggest that topsoil would be moved to that location in light of the proposed use of those materials, for the reasons explained above. The Comment did not specify any dates when the alleged activity of moving topsoil to the bench one stockpile took place, so further response would be burdensome as well as unnecessary. 3. Alleged concealment of information from regulators: Third, the Comment alleges "personal experience with other instances where Western Fuels employees were told to conceal information from regulators." This comment strikes WFC as being particularly unfair and inappropriate. If the Commenter indeed has specific factual allegations, or better yet evidence, relevant to this assertion then such should be provided and WFC should then have a fair opportunity to respond on the merits. It is not fair or appropriate to ask the company to respond to vague innuendo, nor is it fair or appropriate to allow this innuendo to influence government actors without specific information that permits a reasoned, factual response. We think it sufficient response to this comment to say that the SAP was developed and will be implemented by a highly reputable and certified soil scientist with considerable input from DRMS and the federal agencies, which WFC specifically sought out on its own initiative (the meeting that was held was initially requested, in the first instance, by WFC). The SAP as proposed is technically sound. Thus, the Comment fails to provide any reason to alter the SAP as proposed. However, each specific suggested modification in the Comment (set forth in the second paragraph of the Comment) is addressed below. 4. Response to proposed modifications: Proposed modification 1: "preserve all existing stockpiles and soils as is, and ... no modifications to same be made pending completion of the testing." WFC has no plans to alter any stockpiles, except to add topsoil to the appropriate topsoil stockpiles, so this comment results in no changes to either TR -61 or PR -06. WFC has complied and will comply with the DRMS request to stockpile all Lift A topsoil material to be removed after August 10, 2011 separately from the existing stockpiles. Proposed modification 2: "it may be necessary that DRMS staff select the specific testing sites." The testing sites are slated to be randomly selected under the current proposed SAP, subject to review by a certified soil scientist who may vary the sampling locations in order to ensure the technical soundness of the sampling, as described in the KeyAg SAP summary. We have invited NRCS, OSM, and DRMS personnel to be present during this sampling. If this protocol is subject to technically well- founded criticism, we are not aware of any but would consider it if offered. Proposed modification 3: "it may be necessary that testing go to greater depth where material has been disturbed." Assuming this refers to the bench one stockpile, no sampling of this stockpile is proposed or necessary. In the stockpiles where sampling will be conducted under TR -61, sampling will go to the full depth of the piles as described in the KeyAg summary under the heading of Stockpiled Soil Resource Evaluation beginning on page 3 of the summary. Proposed modification 4: "more total samples may be required." The goal of the SAP is to adequately characterize the stockpiles, which are assumed to contain well -mixed materials within each pile. The current SAP calls for going to the bottom of the stockpile in many instances, and the number of sampling locations is intended to be sufficient to characterize the piles. If DRMS determines that a larger number of sites, or a larger number of samples to the full depth of the stockpile, is technically warranted then WFC is happy to consider expanding the plan as proposed in the SAP. Proposed modification 5: "Perhaps your soils experts have other ideas as to get truly representative results from the testing." Indeed they do, and the purpose of the meeting among WFC, DRMS, OSM, and NRCS that took place at WFC's request on September 28, 2011 was precisely to solicit such ideas. To the extent the SAP as submitted does not incorporate those ideas, WFC is happy to make appropriate changes. Proposed modification 6: "I am copying OSM and NRCS in on this message in the hopes that the parties can cooperatively develop a protocol that takes these concerns into account." To the extent this comment calls for 3