My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2019-02-27_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1982056
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Coal
>
C1982056
>
2019-02-27_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1982056
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/28/2019 7:46:01 AM
Creation date
2/27/2019 10:43:48 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982056
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
2/27/2019
Doc Name
Foiudel Creek Thickener Tank Foundation Review Memo
From
Zach Trujillo
To
Tabetha Lynch
Permit Index Doc Type
General Correspondence
Email Name
TNL
ZTT
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
3
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
<br />Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety <br />To: Tabetha Lynch <br />From: Zach Trujillo <br />CC: Dan Hernandez <br />Date: February 27, 2019 <br />Re: Foidel Creek Thickener Tank <br /> <br />As requested, I have reviewed Foidel Creek Mine’s (Foidel) provided material associated <br />with the new thickener tank construction. As you are aware, it appears that Foidel has <br />opted to go with the “Alternate Foundation Recommendation” provided in the <br />engineering report, Subsoil and Foundation Investigation, Wash Plant – Thickener Tank, <br />Twenty Mile Coal Mine, Routt County Colorado (the Report), by North West Colorado <br />Consultants, Inc. (NWCC). After reviewing the alternative foundation recommendation, I <br />have no concerns regarding the associated design for the thickener tank. However, with <br />the presence of expansive soils and high elevations of groundwater, the potential for <br />differential settlement issues and/or hydrostatic uplift exists which could negatively affect <br />the foundation to the thickener tank. This concern is also noted in the Report. Given the <br />site’s characteristics, it is imperative that the construction of the foundation be completed <br />as stated in the Report. <br />Along with the Report, Foidel included five field reports of the foundation construction <br />performed by NWCC dating from January 8 – 22, 2019. Of these reports, NWCC noted <br />issues due to water saturation or excess moisture content of the compacted fill material in <br />three of those five reports. In one of the reports, NWCC required the excavation and re- <br />compaction of the fill material. Additionally, in field report no. 5, NWCC states the <br />moisture content of the fill material exceeds the acceptable range necessary for optimal <br />compaction. However, no follow-up field report by NWCC regarding this issue has been <br />provided to the Division. At this point, it is unsure on whether Foidel addressed the <br />concerns stated in NWCC’s field report no. 5. <br />After reviewing the NWCC field reports as well as the Report, Foidel has not provided <br />any indication of installation of the recommended underdrain system. As the Report <br />reads, it appears that the underdrain system is independent of either of foundation <br />recommendations and should have been installed. Again, it is imperative that the <br />construction of the foundation be completed as recommended in the Report which also <br />includes the installation of the underdrain system. As stated in NWCC’s Report, “The <br />lower level of the tank must be protected from ground intrusion by an underdrain system <br />and the structure must be designed to resist hydrostatic uplift as discussed above.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.