Laserfiche WebLink
<br />The PSCo /mudfow/blowout was an event that occurred over a protracted period of time <br />during several winter (dormant) months- and was related to no other cause than repair <br />failure. Now that we know that this area is not within the pit boundary, many of the <br />earlier DMG assumptions must be revised. At any rate the affected area is wholly outside <br />of the pit boundary and does not fall under DMG jurisdiction. The immediate effect on <br />Pathfinder is the nullification of the requirement to 'engineer' the outflow/slope area. <br />Pathfinder is also hesitant to enact a recontourine program in this area as it would surely <br />incur liability as a result. The PSCo engineers claim that their contractors achieved <br />industry standard compaction beneath their pipeline,- the independent monitoring data <br />certainly supports that. The roadway itself does not exhibit any unusual signs of <br />instability -yet it would appear that the downhill slope is in need of some treatment. <br />There have never been restrictions placed on the Pathtinder haul road as }'our letter <br />suggests. The BOCC did no[ take action to restrict this roadway and probably cannot. <br />Ewell's statements are, of course, a replay of her delussionary thinking only. This is <br />clearly one of the best-built roads in the region, not to mention , San Miguel County. <br />Contrary to the enviro's published statements. this road was built to engineered standards <br />as designed (as evidenced in the TR submissions) AND meets all relevant SMCo <br />standards, as also submitted. <br />I submit to you that Pathtinder has complied n•ith the requisite TR submission and <br />remediation elements of recent DMG origins and be}ond. We await the DMG response to <br />our submission and continue to conduct our permitted and allowed business activity, <br />ever mindful of our considerable responsibilities. The 112 bond was increased to a level <br />almost double it's previous amount. The successor application was approved and there <br />was no cessation of pit activitv,-albeit sporadic at best. There has been no indication by <br />PSCo that it plans to implement it's 404 permitting, and as a result, needs access to the <br />Pathtinder property. Likewise, and most telling, there has been no attempt by PSCo to <br />access Pathtinder to effect further monitoring of their penstock for any sign of <br />movement.(?)Nor has there been any sign of a PERC inspection or notification. <br />If you desire, we can set aside a portion of our proper[}• for a DMG campsite to <br />accommodate daily DMG inspections as expected by Ewell and others, let me know. <br />Sin ely, <br />~~ <br />Scott Smith, Pres. <br />