Laserfiche WebLink
COLORADO LEGACY LAND <br /> ECHNICAL REVISION#29,COMMENT AND RESPONSE SUMMARY TABLE <br /> COMMENT NO. COMMENT RESPONSE TO COMMENT <br /> Rule3.1.5(2) and(5).As this is an EPF,any disturbance of 2016), each Waste Rock Pile was reclaimed with a minimum of 3- <br /> the waste rock will require recertification of the facility feet (36-inches) of cover material. The proposed smart-ditch is <br /> pursuant to Rule 7.3.1(5). only 30-inches deep. Excavation is anticipated to occur in the top <br /> d. Trench maintenance...?No further response is required at soil or cover material, waste rock material will not be disturbed <br /> this time. and the integrity of the EPF will remain intact. Excavated top soil <br /> or cover material will be placed on top of the North Waste Rock <br /> Pile. This material will be used to improve surface contouring for <br /> drainage and water shedding. <br /> Source: Whetstone Associates Inc. 2016. Schwartzwalder Mine <br /> Environmental Protection Plan. Cotter Corporation (N.S.L). <br /> September. <br /> d We recommend to revisions in response to this comment. <br /> Drawings(Sheets 1 through 5): <br /> [51 Sheets 3 and4.How will the pipe be inspected and maintained The ditch will be inspected visually after major rain events.Debris <br /> before and after closure?Maintenance is of critical importance to a will be removed during the inspection. <br /> pipeline proposed as reclamation/closure design.The Division asked <br /> 6 how the sections will be performed.The response stated how they <br /> "could"be performed.The Division requires a written statement <br /> committing to a particular method for inspection and maintenance <br /> for the life of the permit.Please specify the procedures/methods to <br /> be implemented for inspection and maintenance while the permit is <br /> active. <br /> Drawings(Sheets 1 through 5): We recommend no revision to TR 28 in response to this comment. <br /> The ditch design produces milder hydraulic conditions at the <br /> [61 Please provide design calculations.The response is adequate. downstream end compared to the pervious pipeline. However,for <br /> 7 a conservative design, the riprap sizing was retained from the <br /> previous design(see Attachment 1). <br /> Attachment 2 shows the hydrology for the 4.1-acre area above the <br /> access road,where the ditch will be constructed. <br /> Drawings(Sheets 1 through 5): <br /> 8 Sheet 5.Trash rack:The original comment requested both the trash No longer applicable,the revised design is a ditch. <br /> rack specifications and drawing details.Only the specifications were <br /> provided.Please provide the detail drawings. <br /> PAGE 5OF10 <br />