Laserfiche WebLink
~ ~ III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII <br />The Corley Company <br />Phone 6325050 P O BOM 1821 <br />COLORADO SPRING S,COLO RADO 80901 <br />June 22, 1992 <br />Pis. Catherine W, Begej <br />Mined Land Reclamation Division <br />1313 Sherman St, <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />Dear Ms. Begej: <br />~I~-~~Ci~~~, <br />'N ~ 2 199 <br />~bined Land <br />" ~n <br />Because you asked us on June 18, 1992, our opinion of the reclamation <br />work performed by Harrison Western at the GEC west pit, we visited that <br />area on Jvne 21, 1992. <br />We made the following observations: the amount of excavation of the <br />sediment pond appears very small; an area of about 25'X200' has been <br />denuded of vegetation and top soil does not appear to have been saved; a <br />30" CMP culvert has been installed to discharge the new fresh water <br />diversion ditch; the 30" CMP trespasses onto Energy Fuels permit area; <br />the new fresh water diversion ditch has about 6 inches of freeboard at a <br />critical point just beyond the sharp turning point of the ditch; the top <br />of the last rock check dam of the main west pit valley drainage is <br />approximately the same elevation as the diversion ditch berm; the <br />boundary of the Harrison Western area has been marked; and our fence had <br />been taken down without permission. <br />We believe (1) that the runoff from the watershed that drains into the <br />existing sediment pond is still greater than the pond capacity; (2) that <br />sediment from the pond was used for the diversion ditch embankment; (3) ,. <br />that top soil was not saved from the ditch area; (4) that the diversion <br />ditch and 30" CMP do not have sufficient capacity to pass a 10 year <br />event from a water shed of about 300 acres; (5) that the diversion ditch <br />water will erode the ditch embankment at the 6" freeboard area or that <br />the west pit water will enter the diversion ditch, depending upon which <br />water shed receives the most rain; and (6) that the Harrison Western <br />boundary has been marked incorrectly because you said that they utilized <br />the stakes that we set out as the reference points, <br />Therefore, we have these specific questions: (a) was the sediment pond <br />capacity measured and certified by an engineer; (b) who is responsible <br />for the reclamation of the denuded area adjacent to the new diversion <br />ditch; (r_) is it permissible to not save the top soil; (d) was the <br />diversion ditch engineered; (e) can Harrison Western enter the Energy <br />Fuels permit area; and (f) what is the legal description of the Harrison <br />Western new reclamation area? <br />S~i~n/c y , <br />VV U/( <br />W.D. Corley, J' <br />President <br />cc: Office of Surface Mining <br />