Laserfiche WebLink
Amy Eschberger <br />M-2016-010; Third Adequacy Review – Exhibit G <br />Page 2 <br /> <br /> <br />M:\Min\TC1\_El Paso\M-16-10 Hitch Rack\AME-Memorandum-ExhG-3AR M-16-10-2016-09-23R1.docx <br />it needs to be noted that the culvert is approximately 400 feet longer on Figure <br />G-9, than that shown in Figure G-8. <br />C) Figure G-12. Culverts LTC-CC-2, -3, and -4 are shown to be removed, but the <br />access road contours have not been modified to indicate the fill in these <br />drainages will be removed to the original contours to facilitate positive drainage. <br />It is the Division's understanding that the road is to be removed/reclaimed at <br />closure. As such drainages need to be restored to equivalent pre-mine condition. <br />Also, as the Division will defer to Exhibit F for final grading. These drainage re- <br />contouring efforts need to be shown on Exhibit F as well. Finally, it does not <br />appear that this earthwork was included in Exhibit L. Please: <br />a. Clarify the need for grading/re-contouring in these culvert removal <br />efforts; <br />b. Make appropriate revisions to Figures G-12, F-1 and F-2; and <br />c. Either confirm the reclamation costs are included in Exhibit L, or provide <br />those costs. <br />D) Exhibit F drawings. Similar to Comment (C) above, culverts LTC -CC-5 & -6 are <br />also expected to be removed (even though Figure G-12 does not cover that area <br />of the road). Figures G-6b and c indicate some earthwork is needed to cross <br />those the two drainages. Please: <br />a. Clarify the need for grading/re-contouring for these culvert removal <br />efforts; <br />b. Make appropriate revisions to Figures F-1 and F-2; and <br />c. Either confirm the reclamation costs are included in Exhibit L, or provide <br />those costs.