My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
C150293 Feasibility Study
CWCB
>
Loan Projects
>
DayForward
>
1001-2000
>
C150293 Feasibility Study
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2011 10:57:35 AM
Creation date
6/18/2009 8:45:11 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Loan Projects
Contract/PO #
C150293
Contractor Name
North Sterling Irrigation District
Contract Type
Loan
Water District
0
County
Logan
Loan Projects - Doc Type
Feasibility Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
53
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Mr. James Ferentchak, P.E. - Review of the North Steriing Improvement Project Page 2 of 4 <br />~ecember 30, 2008 <br />Desi~tn Reoort <br />3. Page 3 states that the volume ofi the reservoir at elevation 4069.3 is 74,300 acre-feet, where on <br />page 4 the volume is stated to be 8Q,300 acre-feet at elevation 4069.3. Which is correct? <br />4. On page 6, specdy which datum was used. <br />5. On page 10, specify the depth of the chimney <br />6. On page 28, check the second sentence for clarity. <br />7, On Figure 4, the equation is in terms of X where it shauld be in terms of H. <br />8. In appendix A(2) the stability analysis was performed at a final crest elevation of 4084.5, where <br />according to page 7 of the design repart the proposed raise will result in a cresf elevation of <br />4084.2. This offics recommends adding a statement on page 7 explaining the discrepancy in the <br />crest elevation ir~ the analysis to the proposed raise crest elevation. <br />Desisan Drawins~s <br />Sheet 1 <br />9. For clarity add a note explaining that the sheet index is located on Sheet 2. <br />Sheet 2 <br />10. The capacity at etevation 4069.3 is 80,3Q0 acre-feet, which is not consistent writh what is <br />mentioned in the design report. See comment 2 above. <br />11. Errors in the addition of the total discharge have been identified at elevations 4069.7, 4070.7, <br />4079.7 and 4076.7. <br />Sheet 3 <br />12. This office has no comments on this sheet. <br />Shee~ 4 <br />13. The notes on this sheet indicate that the relocation of the power line and the access through the <br />right spillway abutment is to be designed and constructed by others. This office will need to <br />review and accept the design of these features prior to reiocation or construction. <br />Sheets 5 and 6 <br />14. This office has no comments on these sheets. <br />Sheet 7 <br />15. For clarity, indicate on the Dam crest improvements detail the percent of slope of the crest that is <br />to be constructed toward the upstream side. Also, note the final crest elevation on this detail. <br />16. What is the difference between two crest survey lines shown on the dam crest profile? The <br />difference between the two lines should be darified on this profile. <br />Sheet 8 <br />17. Explain what type of material is being proposed to be used as structural fill to be placed against <br />the dam and levee? This office is not in favor of using the downstream s[ope of fhe dam as a <br />disposat area for fill materials that do not meet the specifications of the project. ff the areas <br />mentioned above are to be used for placement of fill, include details and s~cifications for the <br />placement in this design package. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.