Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Memo to Dave Berry <br />Bowie No. 2 Third Supplemental Response <br />page 6 <br />more reliable than experiential or literature determinations." Iclosed that memorandum <br />by concluding; "Until the material shear strength parameters used in the analysis can be <br />successfully verified, the Division will be unable to approve construction of the proposed <br />coal refuse disposal pile at the Bowie No. 2 mine." <br />In his letter of January 21, 1997, James Stover restated his earlier position; "BRL and <br />WESTEC contend the stability analysis on the proposed coal refuse pile is valid. <br />Colorado Registered Professional Engineer Allan J. Brietenbach, (#15247) certified the <br />design of the refuse pile as being prepared in accordance with generally accepted <br />professional engineering principles and practice. The certification of the report and the <br />fact the report was prepared by appropriately qualified professionals provides BRL with <br />confidence the coal refuse pile will be stable as designed." Mr. Stover then closed his <br />letter by stating that not withstanding their position, BRL has directed WESTEC to <br />mobilize a drill rig to obtain additional samples of the Mancos Shale to verify the strength <br />parameters used in their earlier stability analysis. In my opinion, the results of this further <br />sample collection and analysis should allow the resolution of the appropriate material <br />shear strength parameters for the Mancos Shale. In consideration of this commitment <br />by BRL, I believe it would be appropriate for the Division to include a stipulation <br />addressing the proposed waste pile in a partial permit approval. The Stipulation would <br />disallow any construction activity on the waste pile until the Division has reviewed the <br />subsequent material testing submittals by BRL and found the waste pile plan to be <br />adequate. <br />In closing, it is my desire that Mr. Stover and BRL understand the Division's position in <br />regard to certification. Certification is generally held as an affirmation by a professional <br />that a technical analysis has been prepared in accordance with accepted professional <br />practices and technical principles. I concur with this understanding. However, as in <br />many State's engineering statutes, Colorado's statute contains no specific reference to <br />certification. There is no legal force or status attributed to certification by any other <br />Colorado statute. Further, as I stated above, the Division is required to complete a <br />finding regarding the adequacy of the application, based upon its content, to demonstrate <br />that the performance of the mine will meet the requirements of our regulations. <br />Certification by a professional is considered by Division personnel in arriving at our <br />opinions of technical adequacy. However, the technical adequacy of submittals must be <br />judged on their own merit. The Division stands ready to defend its opinion regarding the <br />adequacy of the permit application. <br />