My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2008-06-09_REVISION - C1996083 (2)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1996083
>
2008-06-09_REVISION - C1996083 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:32:41 PM
Creation date
2/24/2010 10:51:04 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1996083
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
6/9/2008
Doc Name
Email Regarding Concern from SEO Bruce Park Dam
From
Kent Gorham
To
Sandy Brown
Type & Sequence
PR10
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.
Page 1 of 1
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
Dudash, Joe <br />From: Gorham, Kent <br />Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 2:48 PM <br />To: Brown, Sandy; Dudash, Joe <br />Subject: RE: Bruce Park Dam <br />While concerns from SEO regarding the dam appeared to be previously satisfied in a memo dated April 2007, they <br />apparently have returned full circle to the dam itself and now insist on a periodic monitoring plan for the dam that will result <br />in data collection. To me, with their own dam safety inspection and monitoring program required by statute, maybe they <br />could suggest what data they would like, for example piezometer measurements, survey measurements, visual walkovers, <br />etc. They after all, are the dam safety experts and this periodic data collection and recording should be no different at this <br />dam than any other around the State. In fact, I assume that they already periodically inspect this structure. <br />Are we periodically inspecting the landslide? SEO has already agreed that the landslide is the greater concern. <br />At some point SEO has got to realize that reducing the risk to zero is not practical nor required. There is no guarantee. I <br />think the mine has done a significant amount of work to demonstrate that mining can be done with little risk to the dam and <br />the reservoir in general. I think the permitting done satisfies our Rules. Should seismic recording show through quarterly <br />submittal and DRMS review that circumstances are more serious than what was anticipated, we can use inspection, <br />enforcement, and revisions to modify plans accordingly. <br />Kent Gorham <br />Division of Reclamation, Mining, and Safety <br />1313 Sherman Street, Rm 215 <br />Denver CO 80203 <br />(303) 866-4931 direct <br />(303) 866-3567 general <br />kent.gorham@state.co.us <br />From: Brown, Sandy <br />Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 10:03 AM <br />To: Gorham, Kent; Dudash, Joe <br />Subject: FW: Bruce Park Dam <br />Any comments Kent? <br />From: Ward, Jason <br />Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 9:35 AM <br />To: Dudash, Joe; Brown, Sandy <br />Subject: Bruce Park Dam <br />Joe and Sandy - Attached is a draft letter regarding comments from our office on the Bruce Park landslide monitoring <br />program presented by Bowie Resources for PR-10. If this meets your needs, I will finalize and send it. Please call with <br />any questions (970) 249-6622. <br />Thanks, <br />Jason Ward <br /><< File: 060608_ltr to_Dudash_DRAFT.pdf >> <br />Jason P. Ward, P.E. <br />Dam Safety Engineer <br />Colorado Division of Water Resources, Division 4
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.