2011-07-22_REVISION - C1981019 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Colowyo, C1981 -019, PR3 adequacy No. 3 32 July 22, 2011 Colowyo responded that there will be no changes to the spoil pile configuration resulting from changes made to the mining plan. Item resolved. 2. Exhibit 7 Item 26, Fig. 2 illustrates a proposed "Collom Sump ". It appears that this sump pond may be located near the toe of the proposed excess spoil pile. Please ensure that S &W are informed of the presence of the sump, and its position in the mining sequence, so that any potential effects it may have on the pile itself or the foundation materials may be considered in the stability evaluation. Colowyo states in the March response letter that it will obtain continuation from S &W. or. if necessary, re -run the stability analyses. Please provide the Division with correspondence from S &W addressing any effects the Sump may or may not have on the temporary excess spoil pile. The 2"d paragraph on S &W Page I 1 states that, "Prior to publication of our report, Colowyo informed us the spoil slope will be decreased from the 3H:1 V slope used in our models to a slope of 3.5H:1 V..." On Map 29C, Section A -A' does show a slope of 3AH:1 V on the southern slope of the pile, but the northern (and most critical, for stability) slope continues to be labeled as 3H:1 V. Please provide clarification of the actual slope proposed for construction of the northern face of the temporary excess spoil pile. I, ,dkm v, .anlirmcd chat Ahip pJC doc, rprc <aii the pl.mned -,'o tigur.ninn 1 t11.1 A -,m the nnrthem lope), Item resohcd. b. The paragraph quoted in part, above, ends with an incomplete sentence. Please review and revise, as appropriate. Colott yo ee III ained that the "to" is eru'aneous. Item resoved. 4. The S &W Study (Section 8.0, page 12) provides specific conclusions and recommendations regarding construction of the excess spoil pile. Section 9.0 addresses S &W's Monitoring recommendations. Language found in Rule 4 (pp. 22 -23) does not clearly commit Colowyo to following the S &W conclusions and recommendations. Please revise Rule 4 Section 4.09 to clearly communicate Colowyo's intent. ('nlowvo ha; revised the test in 4,09 to include a direct reference to the S &N report. Item I C"d % ed. 4.15.1 Reveaetation General Requirements 1. Page 27, Use of Introduced Species — In the second exception for use of introduced species, it is stated "prior to the use of aggressive taxa to combat areas that are highly susceptible to erosion, an MR or TR will be obtained from CDRMS to address such circumstances." Aggressive is a subjective tens that is not well defined as it applies to introduced or native species. For better clarification as to when the Division will be contacted with discretionary use of introduced species, change `aggressive taxa' to `introduced species.' This item has been adequately resolved.