My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL51961
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL51961
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:38:00 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 7:15:47 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981037
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
5/16/1995
Doc Name
FINDINGS DATED MAY 16 1995
Permit Index Doc Type
GENERAL CORRESPONDENCE
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />#3 <br />The State failed to stake the outer limits of grading areas <br />This has caused great expense to the CWL <br />Task #2 says that the State will stake the outer limits of <br />grading where deemed necessary. <br />With regards to this Task, it is my understanding that the <br />contractor attempted to have this area staked. The only <br />written documentation to that affect was noted in a May 16, <br />1995 letter from the contractor. In my further review I could <br />neither substantiate this nor did I find anyone that would <br />deny that this request had been made. As to whether or not <br />this had any impact on the contractor has not been <br />established. In visiting the site and walking most of Chen's <br />Hill I feel that the contractor should have been able to <br />identify the boundaries without to much difficulty. This does <br />not excuse the State for not having responded to the <br />contractors request. <br />Based on what I know, I believe the State might have been <br />negligent in this matter. <br />Task #5 states that the owner will stake the outer edges for <br />the convenience of all parties. It was my understanding that <br />the fence on the east side of the Energy Fuels Mine site and <br />on the west side of the West Slope had been established as the <br />outer edge, which is a clear boundary. <br />It is my opinion that the State was not negligent in this <br />area. <br />Task #11 states that approximately 100-200 feet (see Amendment <br />#1) back from the east edge of the East Pit, as staked by the <br />State, to reduce the high wall. I am of the understanding <br />that the area east and south of the East Pit was flagged. An <br />on site visit showed evidence that the boundaries were based <br />on tree lines along the east side and along the south end <br />there was still evidence of orange markers on many of the <br />trees, which had been placed by the State. <br />Overall there appears to have been good physical landmarks <br />such as tree lines, visible areas of revegetation, drainage <br />contours and some staking or flagging provided. The issue of <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.