Laserfiche WebLink
Page 3 <br /> Mr. Eric Scott <br /> September 18, 2019 <br /> adequacy issues have been addressed. This Exhibit should be updated as needed to reflect all <br /> changes made during the adequacy review process. The reclamation costs have been updated. <br /> Permittee still needs to obtain legal right of entry from Town of Milliken for the parcel in the permit <br /> located on the west side of the permit for Exhibit N, and information for Town of Milliken must be <br /> included in Exhibit 0. The operator is waiting on the Legal Right to Enter. An email showing <br /> that the legal right to enter is pending is attached. <br /> - For Exhibit S,please provide a separate map and a table indicating where the structures are <br /> located within the permit and within 200'of the permit, and information showing who owns what <br /> structures, so that the provided structure agreement mailing information can be verified to be <br /> accurate and complete. A separate map and table have been included showing the <br /> structures. All signed structure agreements have been included. <br /> DRMS has reviewed the updated stability report provided demonstrating that the existing setback <br /> from the powerline within Cell (23 feet from shore to pole)is stable. DRMS noted that one of the <br /> assumptions made in the analysis is that the existing shoreline is at the final configuration and has <br /> been sloped at no steeper than 3.•1, H.•V. Has this assumption been verified, and if so, <br /> how?If the existing slope has not been verified to be 3:1 or flatter,please re-run the analysis <br /> utilizing more conservative value that would be representative of un-reclaimed mine slopes of 1.5.•1 <br /> H.•V. If the existing setback cannot be shown to meet the required factor of safety under these <br /> conditions, the permittee will need to commit to immediately backfiUing the existing Cell 2 shoreline <br /> to a stable slope/distance in the area adjacent to the overhead power line within 30 days. (3.1 <br /> slope or flatter as shown in the provided analysis, or a minimum 55'offset from the powerline as <br /> demonstrated by the original stability analysis).A copy of the structure agreement between <br /> Xcel/PSCO is included in this response and should be adequate to address this comment. <br /> In addition an updated analysis using 1.5 to 1 side slopes and the offset from the powerline <br /> of 23-feet was performed. The results were within engineering standards and show an <br /> adequate factor or safety. All signed structure agreements are attached and proof of <br /> delivery are attached. <br /> This concludes the Division's second adequacy review of this application. This letter shall not be construed <br /> to mean that there are no other technical deficiencies in your application. Other issues may arise as <br /> additional information is supplied. Please remember that the decision date for this amendment application is <br /> September 5, 2019.As previously mentioned, if you are unable to provide satisfactory responses to any <br /> inadequacies prior to this date, it will be your responsibility to request an extension of time to allow for <br /> continued review of this application. if there are still unresolved issues when the decision date arrives and <br /> no extension has been requested, the application will be denied lfyou have any questions,please contact <br /> me at(303)866-3567x8140. <br />