My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REP38861
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Report
>
REP38861
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 12:22:56 AM
Creation date
11/27/2007 8:12:45 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981041
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Date
8/1/1997
Doc Name
ROADSIDE REFUSE DISPOSAL AREAS APPLICABLE DOCUMENTATION MEMO
Permit Index Doc Type
Waste Pile/Fill Report
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.
/
31
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
Mike Long - 5 - May 18, 1988 <br />Our final visit during the oversight tour was to the New Elk Mine waste pile. <br />Don Frickle and Lou Hamm were impressed with the Gahion-Lined drainage <br />channels completed on the lowermost terrace face at the waste pile. Lnu <br />stated that he was happy with the methods being used to construct the <br />underdrains and to place and compact waste material. The top of the pile is <br />graded to drain, sloping approximately 5 degrees towards the toe of the pile. <br />However, waste is placed in horizontal layers in small areas and compacted. <br />Lou stated that he was impressed with these techniques, as he had been at the <br />Deserado pile. Don Frickle concurred with our .iustification for the ahsence <br />of a diversion ditch on the steep slopes surrounding the New Elk waste pile, <br />Bernie Freeman, however, appeared dissatisfied. He asked several questions <br />regarding what I considered to be the difference between "lifts" and <br />"layers." He apparently thinks our regulations are "less effective than" the <br />OSMRE's. I stated that I considered the difference to he purely semantic and <br />of little significance in affecting the structural stability of the waste <br />piles. Bernie continued to seem dissatisfied with that response. <br />We concluded the oversight tour with a 45-minute discussion, while seeking <br />refuge from a thunderstorm downpour, at the Trinidad Dairy Queen. Bob Liddle <br />and I restated our proposed resolution offers. We rediscussed the format of <br />the DSMRE oversight report. Bernie Freeman stated, in response to our <br />questions, that Lou Hamm and Don Prickle's technical reports concerning each <br />one of the sites visited would not be attached to his oversight report. He <br />stated that he would cite their reports, if he felt them to be appropriate. <br />He further stated that his report would need to be completed prior to the end <br />of May, and he might not receive their reports prior to its completion. <br />My personal opinion tends to question the propriety of the OSMRE's methods in <br />completing their oversight review. I suspect that Bernie Freeman will ignore <br />the technical opinions presented by Lou Hamm and Don Frickle at his whim. I <br />suspect that the oversight report will reflect Bernie's opinions with little <br />consideration given to the technical opinions presented by the OSMRE's Western <br />Technical Center personnel, I recommend, therefore, that we obtain copies of <br />each of Lou Hamm's and Don Prickle's reports directly from the Technical <br />Center, in order to compare their content with Bernie Freeman's oversight <br />report. Bernie also stated that he would not forward a draft copy of his <br />report to us for examination. That report would be the subiect of your normal <br />June meeting with the Albuquerque staff. If my suspicions p m ve correct, this <br />issue will be an ideal topic for the planned facilitation meeting in Keystone, <br />June 28 and 29. <br />cc: Bob Liddle <br />Candy Thompson <br />7413E <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.