ENFORCE23612 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MASSEY $EMEN~F $CHWARZ & BAILEY, P.C. Mr. Tom Schreiner December 7, 2001 Page 2 That stated, and as we discussed by telephone yesterday afternoon, there may be some confusion or ambiguity in the 1990 Howe Pit Amendment Application regarding both the structure required at the confluence of the Bull Seep and Bull Seep Slough, and the timing of the installation of such structure. The Howe Pit Amendment Drainage Plan (Plate I) depicts a 430-foot long outlet spillway on the northwest portion of the property. This structure is intended to convey a 100-year First Creek flood event. See Item 6 at page 8 of the Exhibit F Final Drainage Report for Howe Pit, prepared by Tuttle Applegate, Inc. (1990 Amendment Application). The Howe Pit Amendment Drainage Plan (Plate I) also shows the discharge of the Bull Seep to the Bull Seep Slough at a location proximate to the 430-foot outlet spillway. It is unclear whether a separate, Bull Seep only structure is being called out. Item 3 at page 8 of the Final Drainage Report prepared by Tuttle Applegate does not mention a separate structure at the Bull Seep-Bull Seep Slough confluence. Similarly, the Reclamation Plan Map (Exhibit G-1, revised 8/7/90) depicts a structure on the northwest portion of the property and calls it "planned Bull Seep relocated discharge." Note that the initial Exhibit G, dated "5/2/90," did not depict the structure. The scale that applies to the Reclamation Plan Map is unclear, but assuming 1":400', the structure would measure 400'; i.e., a length consistent with the outlet spillway planned for the 100-year event on First Creek in the Final Drainage Report. The Reclamation Plan itself then calls for the re-routing of the Bull Seep prior to mining in Stage Four of the project. The re-routing was to be accomplished as referenced in the "Exhibit F, Drainage Plan and Map Plate 1." To that end, the Howe Pit Amendment Drainage Plan (Plate I) depicts the 430- foot long outlet spillway on the northwest portion of the property. As indicated, it does not clearly show (or appear to directly require) a distinct, Bull Seep structure. Finally, the company has always viewed the 100-year First Creek spillway as a feature that would only be installed at the end of the project, and in a manner that would meet the operational needs of the reservoir operator. Item 5 Please provide any evidence such as photographs or eyewitness accounts of levee failure on the river side of the levee on or about May 5, 2001. (The specific area in question is the flood control levee near the intersection of the relocated Bull Seep and the Bull Seep Slough).