2015-10-27_REVISION - M1980244 (2)

Home Browse Search

b. Will the proposed 10 to 12 -inch diameter fresh water pipeline follow the same alignment as the barren pipeline? The proposed water pipeline does not follow the same alignment. The alignment for the water line is depicted on Drawing C-3 of the submittal. Primarily, it runs from the crusher water line towards the proposed water tank and then from the water tank to the SGADR (this was generally noted in our submittal letter). A portion of this alignment was viewed, in the field, and approved by DRMS on a recent inspection. c. No detail is provided as to how the pipe-in-pipe/sleeve design is terminated (e.g., hole through a blind flange, etc.) to demonstrate how potential leakage would be prevented from leaking out at the transition between double and single containment. Please provide an appropriate design detail and include a minimum length the double containment extends onto the lined area on both ends of the transition area. As is depicted on the profile view of Drawing D200 both ends of the proposed sleeve would gravity drain to lined areas in the case of a leak. There are no additional design accommodations being envisioned at this time. Note 6 on Drawing D200 indicates a minimum extent over lined areas, of the pipe -in -pipe containment, of 10+ feet. The profile also indicates that the pipe -in -pipe containment be extended to ensure gravity flow into the Mill Platform Drainline containment area. 2) Pipe demolition. Telephone conversations between CC&V and the Division indicated a possible oversight during the review of AM-10/MLE2 in 2012 that demolition costs for pipelines may not have been included in the Exhibit L submitted with AM -10 and subsequently as part of the biannual surety increase (SI -05) submitted to the Division in 2014. As a result of these conversations, it was suggested the biannual surety review due with the 2016 annual report be revised to include appropriate demolition costs. I have reviewed the 2014/SI-05 Tabs 18 (ArequaVLF) and 19 (SquawVLF) and found demolition costs for 30" pipe (6,900 ft in the AGVLF & 4,082 ft in the SGVLF) and 24" pipe (4,082 ft in the AGVLF & 12,422 ft in the SGVLF). Please confirm whether or not the listed pipe lengths and sizes include all surface pipe expected to be in place at the end of MLE2. The quoted lengths of pipe, within the warranty estimate, are correct with the exception that the 24" pipeline length for the AGVLF is 21,200 ft. vs. 4,082 ft. The pipeline lengths, within the estimate, are reflective of what CC&V expects to be in-place at the end of MLE2. As with any estimate, CC&V revisits the appropriateness of any assumptions/inputs on an on-going basis. If it is determined, during review that this number is either under or over stated a correction is made by CC&V. 3) Reclamation cost estimate: The original TR -76 submittal did not include a demolition cost for the 14 -inch diameter barren solution line. Based on telephone communications, CC&V provided a barren line demolition cost estimate of $24.00 per foot on October 19, 2015 via email. Please confirm this cost includes the "sleeve" proposed for double containment. The supplemental estimate, for the barren solution line, does include the sleeve (roughly $600). CC&V is committed to providing proper warranty update estimates with TR submittalse. CC&V's current warranty estimate provides roughly $1,047,000 for VLF pipeline demolition (this additional pipeline demolition w/sleeve is estimated at about $8,700 and can be accommodated in the current warranty surplus).