Laserfiche WebLink
Mike Long - 2 - May 18, 1988 <br />Don Frickle was concerned that some of the diversions visited may not be large <br />enough to pass the required 100-y Par/24-hour event, He will complete his <br />review of these permit specifics within the next several weeks, This issue <br />relates to the current regulation modification debate being continued by Candy <br />Thompson with regulatory personnel of the OSMRE, regarding requiring <br />diversions to accommodate 100-year/24 hour versus 100-y Par/6-hour event <br />runoff. In the case of the Powderhorn pile, Don Frickle is also concerned <br />that drainage from the southwestern portion of the top of the pile may not bP <br />captured by the ditches routing drainage to the sediment pond helow the pile, <br />I have indicated verbally to the OSMRE representatives that wP would he <br />willing to remedy a permitting flaw by requiring more detailed discussions of <br />pile diversion designs in future permits, <br />Waste Pile Configuration <br />The waste piles at Deserado, Orchard Valley and Mt, Gunnison No. 1 seem to <br />have passed muster, Don Frickle is checking the diversion sizing, but Lnu <br />Hamm appeared satisfied with the structural aspects of these piles. Boh <br />Lidd1P reports that Cathy WPIt, environmental representative for Orchard <br />Valley, did state that they had not hePn conducting compaction testing for the <br />past year, and that their engineer had inadvertently inverted the pile facial <br />angles. Asa result the slope angle of the pile faces at Orchard Va11PV is <br />closer to 1,5:1 than the specified design maximum slope gradient of 7:1, <br />However, those slopes have already been topsnilPd and vegetated, Both of <br />these issues should have been caught during normal inspection and enforcement <br />activities at the site. <br />Lou Hamm's only concern expressed at the Coal Basin waste pile was his opinion <br />that the terraces could be wider, which would increase the stability of the <br />pile, This concern stems from an on-going opinion on the part of the OSMRE <br />(Gary Fritz) that it is deleterious to allow Mid-Continent Resources to push <br />snow over the crest and onto the face during winter months, In a lengthy <br />debate, I attempted to present the pros and cons of this consideration, <br />(1) Snow and ice must be removed from the pile, as demonstrated by the <br />unfortunate waste flows which occurrPA at the old waste pile on the <br />opposite side of the valley during May of 1984, <br />(2) Removal of snow by loaders and truck to a designated snow disposal area <br />will only result in an ice pile which would never melt and would reQUire <br />added disturbance area and additional maintenance considerations, <br />(3) Insulation nn the dark waste pile face appears to melt and sublimate snow <br />fairly rapidly during the winter months. <br />(4) The practice of pushing snow over the crest of the pile onto its face <br />does result in some minor debris being deposited on the terrace benches, <br />However, this problem can be remedied by regrading of the benches in <br />early summer, <br />