2009-10-07_REVISION - C1980007 ‎(2)‎

• Permit No: C1980007
• IBM Index Class Name: REVISION
• Doc Date: 10/7/2009
• Doc Name: Geotechnical Review ‎(Emailed)‎
• From: Tom Kaldenbach
• To: Marcia Talvitie
• Type & Sequence: MR357
• Email Name: TAK
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

Ownbach, Tom
CofcGf?n•c?
From: Kaldenbach, Tom
Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 10:38 AM
To: Talvitie, Marcia
Subject: RE: West Elk Mine (C-80-007), MR-357
Thanks Marcia
From: Talvitie, Marcia
Sent: Wed 10/7/2009 9:25 AM
To: Kaldenbach, Tom
Cc: Brown, Sandy; Hernandez, Daniel
Subject: RE: West Elk Mine (C-80-007), MR-357
Good morning, Tom
The addition of the P-3/P-5 conveyor structure will not have an impact on the calculated slope stability for the Lower
Refuse Pile. No new analysis of slope stability will be required for MR-357.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposed project.
Marcia
Marcia L. Taivitie, P.E.
Environmental Protection Specialist
Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety
Durango Field Offilce
691 County Road 233, Suite A 2
Durango, Colorado 81301
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
From: Kaldenbach, Tom
Sent: Tuesday, October 06, 2009 4:16 PM
To: Talvitie, Marcia
Cc: Brown, Sandy; Hernandez, Daniel
Subject: West Elk Mine (C-80-007), MR-357
Marsha,
We recently approved West Elk's TR-118 in which you reviewed the geotech info. TR-118 added the prep plant and
office/lab building to the top of the Lower Refuse Pile.
West Elk has now submitted MR-357 which proposes to add another conveyor to the top of the LRP as shown in red in
the attached drawing.
Do you believe the additional conveyor proposed in MR-357 warrants a re-run of the slope stability analysis that was
done in TR-118?
Thank you for your help.
Tom