Laserfiche WebLink
Roy Karo, SCC <br />C- 1982 -057; SL4 <br />Adequacy Review No. 1 <br />Page 2 of 2 <br />surface drains have been constructed in a V configuration and range from 2 to 3 feet in depth and are lined with <br />Turf Reinforcement Material (TRM). The Division has observed these surface drains during site inspections. <br />Also, the expanded plan calls for one and possibly two subsurface trench drains to be installed. These trench <br />drains are further discussed in the Divisions June 25, 2012 inspection report and originally in the August 31, 2011 <br />Landslide Repairs at Seneca II -W memorandum from Jill Carlson with the Colorado Geological Survey included <br />in Attachment 20 -E. It does not appear documentation has been submitted to the Division that the trench <br />underdrains have been installed. Based on the Division's August 28, 2012 inspection report, it appears these <br />underdrains may not have been installed. The Division believes these underdrains are necessary for the long term <br />stability of the pit ramp slide area. SCC will need to submit documentation such as as -built designs and plans to <br />substantiate these underdrains have been constructed. If the underdrains have not been constructed, the Division <br />will not approve Phase I bond release for the 9.4 acre area encompassing the pit ramp slide. <br />PM4 -D Drainage: <br />5.) It was noted during the June 4, 2013 inspection that a gully has formed midway down the PM4 -D drainage. It <br />appears water has undercut the TRM used to stabilize this drainage. This gully will need to be repaired prior to <br />the approval of the Phase I bond release for this drainage. Please submit documentation this gully has been <br />repaired. <br />This concludes the Division adequacy review for the Seneca II -W Mine; SL4 bond release application. The <br />Division is required to issue a proposed decision for the bond release application by August 3, 2013 and would <br />appreciate a response to this review by July 17, 2013 in order for the Division to finalize the revision within the <br />required time frame. If you need additional time to address the Division's adequacy review please request an <br />extension of the decision date. <br />Sincerely),° <br />Jared Ebert <br />Environmental Protection Specialist, DRMS <br />