My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2016-10-08_REVISION - M1977300
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1977300
>
2016-10-08_REVISION - M1977300
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/9/2020 2:07:02 AM
Creation date
11/9/2016 11:33:48 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977300
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
10/8/2016
Doc Name
Adequacy Review
From
Cotter
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
TR23
Email Name
MAC
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
420
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Engineering Analytics,Inc. 1600 Specht Point Ad. Suite 209 - Fort Collins,CO 80525 .. 970.488.3111 www.EngAnalytics.com <br /> ATTACHMENT D <br /> October 26, 2016 Project No: 110385 <br /> Mr. Robert Noren, P.E. <br /> Cotter Corporation (N.S.L.) <br /> P.O. BOX 1750 <br /> Canon City, CO 81212 <br /> Subject: Responses to CDRMS Comments <br /> Schwartzwalder Mine <br /> DRMS File No. M-1977-300; Technical Revision (TR-23) <br /> Jefferson County, Colorado <br /> Dear Mr.Noren: <br /> Engineering Analytics was tasked to provide responses to comments 6 and 18 in the Colorado <br /> Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety (CDRMS) letter dated July 20, 2016 (Adequacy <br /> Review #1) and comment 6 from CDRMS' August 2, 2016 letter (Adequacy Review #2). This <br /> work is being provided as a follow up to Engineering Analytics' (EA) submittal for Technical <br /> Revision 23 to Mining Permit M-1977-300 dated December 28, 2015. We offer the following <br /> comments. <br /> 1. Adequacy Review #1, Comment # 6: "Please describe how the Operator will place and <br /> compact 4— 6 inches of topsoil on the tops and sides of the WRPs. In addition, clam if the <br /> 4,300 cubic yard estimate of required topsoil accounts for compaction." <br /> Response: The 4,300 cubic yard estimate was determined assuming 9 inches of topsoil <br /> would be placed and track walked to lightly compact it to a final thickness of about 6 inches. <br /> In addition to what was presented in TR-23 (EA, 2015), we recommend the following with <br /> regard to topsoil placement and revegetation procedures. <br /> Topsoil Placement: The topsoil should be end-dumped on the crest of the slope and graded <br /> by dozers. Slopes should be graded to avoid concentrated water flow and subsequent erosion. <br /> The "Best Practices in Abandoned Mines Land Reclamation" by the Colorado Division of <br /> Minerals and Geology (CDMG, 2002) states that for covers "...that the surface of the final <br /> slope should be moderately roughened to help in establishing vegetation, but not so rough as <br /> to promote pooling of water.... The potential for erosion can be reduced by creating grooves <br /> across the slope (or perpendicular to the slope direction). This can be done easily on the last <br /> pass of the heavy equipment using a track vehicle running up and down the slope. " They <br /> further state that "Ideally, the surface to be vegetated should consist of good uncontaminated <br /> soil, moderately roughened to allow the seeds to hold and some moisture to collect. <br /> Roughening can simply be the caterpillar tracks of heavy equipment that has been used at the <br /> site for regrading." Thus, we recommend track-walking the cover to provide a "dimpled" <br /> surface that allows for water infiltration and promotes root growth. <br /> Response to CDRMS Comments.docx I Engineering Analytics, Inc. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.