Laserfiche WebLink
Memo to Mike Boulay <br />MCC PR-07 Third Round <br />page 3 <br />to taking a more aggressive role in informing the Division of monitoring results, particularly <br />of any observations of detrimental situations. If the reports will be prepared in word <br />processing or spreadsheet format, perhaps MCC could E-mail the word processor or <br />spreadsheet files to the Division weekly. In addition, MCC should be required to inform <br />the Division within a few days of any detection of significant slope instability or other <br />occurrences believed to be detrimental to progress of the SGFA construction. <br />3) Using construction techniques which will minimize or mitigate potential slope <br />failures during and after construction. <br />MCC's statement of intention to apply "top of slope down" excavation practices within the <br />potentially unstable slope areas should help prevent and minimize the unanticipated and <br />runaway slope failures. Equally importantly, it should allow early detection and the <br />implementation of mitigative slope failure treatment methodologies. <br />4) Performing redesign and slope failure mitigation as required to ensure long term <br />stability. <br />MCC's submittal commits to the implementation of a conceptually appropriate selection <br />of mitigative design methodologies to address slope instability problems encountered <br />during construction of the Sylvester Gulch Facilities. The one failing, as observed <br />previously above, is a lack of commitment to aggressively inform the Division when such <br />a redesign involving a choice of mitigative methodology occurs. Admittedly this <br />commitment could be difficult to precisely specify. I suggest that MCC commit to <br />providing notice to the Division whenever it believes a situation warrants the application <br />of a mitigative redesign or construction remedial treatment. The Division and MCC can <br />then proceed. If Division personnel believe, as a result of site visitations, that more notice <br />and detail should be provided by MCC they can inform MCC through inspection <br />narratives. <br />With the resolution of these few remaining concerns, I believe my earlier geotechnical concerns, <br />included in adequacy questions #22 and #71 will have been satisfactorily resolved by MCC. <br />cc: Dave Berry <br />Susan McCannon <br />Doc: M:\COAL\JAP\MTG1PR07.3RD <br />JP/1P <br />