2011-12-29_APPLICATION CORRESPONDENCE - C2010088

• Permit No: C2010088
• IBM Index Class Name: Application Correspondence
• Doc Date: 12/29/2011
• Doc Name: Adequacy Review
• From: Joe Dudash
• To: Mike Boulay
• Email Name: MPB
• Email Name: SB1
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

DIVISION OF RECLAMATION, MINING AND SAFETY
Department of Natural Resources
1313 Sherman St., Room 215
Deriver, Colorado 80203
Phone: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
Date: December 29, 2011
To: Mike Boulay
From: Joe Dudash
RE: Fruita Loadot` I rmit No. C- 2010 -088, CAM Colorado LLC
New Permit Application, Sixth Surface Water Adequacy Review
Office of
Mined Land Reclamation
.b
STATE OF COLORADO
CAM's submittal generally satisfies the requirements of the Biological Opinion concerning
surface water. However, the following are my adequacy review comments concerning the
submittal:
COLORADO
D I V I S I O N OF
RECLAMATION
MINING
-&-
SAFETY
John W. Hickenlooper
Governor
Mike King
Executive Director
Loretta E. Pineda
Director
I have finished my review of Cam Colorado LLC's responses, dated December 14, 2011, to the
Division's adequacy review letter dated November 21, 2011. As you had mentioned, the
Division had requested that the conservation measures contained in the USFWS Biological
Opinion be incorporated into the permit application text.
In response to your e -mail dated December 16, 2011, I checked the hydrology designs for the
three sediment ponds and the spur line culverts. The sediment ponds are designed to contain the
runoff from the 25 year -24 hour precipitation event, as required. There are no discharge
spillways associated with these sediment ponds. Also the spur line culverts had been designed
for the 100 year -24 hour precipitation event, as required.
1. As stated on revised pages 2.04 -37 and 2.05 -48 and shown on Map 13, a 12 inch thick
liner will be used in all three sediment ponds. The Division requests that the permit text
be revised to describe the method that will be used to maintain the full 12 inch thick liner
after pond cleaning.
2. In item number c at the bottom of revised page 2.05 -50 and at the top of revised page
2.05 -51, the response appears to contain information that does not pertain directly to the
Rule in question. Rule 4.18(5)(c) asks for a description of those measures which will be
taken to exclude wildlife from entering a pond which contains toxic materials. The
Division agrees that special measures such as fences do not need to be employed to
protect wildlife from any standing water in the sediment ponds since such water would
not be considered toxic. Any possible pond water toxicity might be relevant should the
water leave the pond and enter Reed Wash. However, the text on perceived risks and the
Office of
Denver • Grand Junction • Durango Active and Inactive Mines