Laserfiche WebLink
Page 3 of 3 <br />built slope design and the safety factors of the slope. Please provide the Division with a <br />plan for reworking this slope to ensure that it meets the required safety factor of 1.3. <br />7. The Barr report discusses that there is carbonaceous shale in the reconstructed slopes but <br />it is not shown in the Figure 5 details. Please add the carbonaceous shale to the Figure 5 <br />details in the Barr Report. <br />8. The Barr report states that the HR -1 drainage blanket was placed against near vertical <br />rock faces. This does not appear to match the details that are shown in Figure 5 of the <br />Barr report, where the bedrock slope is uniformly at approximately a 2:1 slope. Please <br />review the statements made in the Barr report with regards to the rock slopes at the <br />location of the filter blanket and the rock slopes shown in the details of Figure 5. Please <br />correct either the statements, the Figure 5 details or both and resubmit those portions of <br />the report for review. <br />9. Based on the stability analyses, the drainage of the slopes is critical, as is continual <br />monitoring for movement and measurement of water (pore pressures). The monitoring <br />plan for the HR -1 appears comprehensive and adequate except for one of the mirrors <br />(prism ?), #2059, which appears to be located on the road. Please explain the reasoning for <br />the location of mirror 92059 and revise as necessary. <br />This completes the Division's preliminary adequacy review for the West Elk Mine's Technical <br />Revision 128. The proposed decision date for this revision is 7 August 2012. Your prompt <br />response to the above adequacy questions will help ensure we meet this date. If you have any <br />comments or questions please contact me at (303) 866 -3567 X8145. <br />Sincerely, <br />James R. Stark <br />Environmental Protection Specialist <br />