Laserfiche WebLink
Aucus'i 8, 2011 <br />MAY DAY MINE CLASS II - SLI3MITT:V, 2 REVIEW <br />P.\(;E 11 OF 15 <br />11. On Sheet C4.12, it is assumed the roadside ditch shown to the west of the road on the typical <br />section outfalls near approximately Station 20 +50. The roadside ditch is shown to capture all <br />water from the road and will capture water from the outcrop west of the ditch. The amount of <br />water needs to be quantified and a designed outfall structure where the ditch ends is needed. <br />Sediment management is a key concern. <br />12. On Sheets C 4.12 and C4.21, the existing CMP is shown to remain, but calculations are not <br />provided justifying its size. Invert elevations are also needed. <br />13. For the cross - section sheets, the proposed road surface is not shown to meet the existing grade <br />in all cases (ie: 11 +00, 12 +00, 13 +00, 17+00, etc) <br />14. For the cross - section sheets, new slopes appear to cut through the rock outcrop west of the <br />access road in some cases (ie: 17 +00, 18 +00). Existing and proposed material specifications <br />are needed. If rock is to be removed, it appears blasting and explosive specifications may be <br />needed as well. <br />15. For the cross - section sheets, the limits of wetlands need to be shown where relevant (ie: 18 +00, <br />19 +00) <br />16. It is not clear how the fill at Stations 18 +00 and 19 +00 will be placed without impacting the <br />wetlands. These areas (and sensitive locations) needed to be thoroughly detailed with precise <br />materials handling instructions and specifications provided. <br />17. The road alignment on the east side of the bridge is not shown. Though reconstruction of this <br />road is not required or requested, its alignment and grades needs to be shown. It is understood <br />that isolated improvements may (but are not required to) be proposed to address some of the <br />most significant safety issues on the road. <br />18. Site and grading plans are needed for each of the staging areas. <br />a. Staging area near CR 124 needs to show adequate parking for employees (1 space per <br />employee) and visual and noise buffering per Mining Plan <br />b. Staging area at lower end of new, unpermitted road needs to identify footprint, location of <br />crusher, quantities of material that can be stored at the staging area (corresponding to <br />Geotechnical Work Plan calculations), and sediment control considering location in <br />. floodplain. <br />c. Staging area at mine site showing portalets and other key features. <br />19. Show potential wetland offset areas in the event road reconstruction results in wetlands <br />damage as indicated in the Geotechnical Work Plan <br />B. An Emergency Management and Response Plan and if emergency vehicles are not included in the <br />intended uses of the access road. The EMRP should include, in addition to standard items: <br />1. An alternative rescue plan for providing service at the mine site and evaluation to CR 124, if <br />road grades are not established to allow for Fort Lewis Mesa Fire District access. <br />2. Plan for tree thinning and other wildfire management actions to decrease risks of wildfire and <br />loss of stable ground and tree cover <br />3. Notification to County OEM when fire, insects, disease, landslides, or other events result in <br />significant loss of tree cover in areas above critical mine facilities so that potential risks 'nay <br />be evaluated and prepared for. <br />PL. \NN1NG DIi]:\ 'MEN'r • 970.382.6263 . • 1060 E. 2ND AVE. • DURANGO, C(».OR.\»O • 81301 <br />