2014-03-25_REVISION - C1996083 (3)

Home Browse Search

Susan Burgmaier -3- March 20, 2014 that material may encroach upon the buffer, please evaluate the effect on the stability of the pile as a whole if the setback is not maintained, BOW2: Please see HBET's response in attached document, section 3.6. 4. Buckhorn's response includes the proper citation. This item is resolved. However, a new, related issue is incorporated here: a) For permanent inclusion into Volume IX of the permit, the two documents submitted by Buckhorn (05- Dec -2013 and 04- Feb -2014) should be replaced by a single comprehensive report which also addresses the issues raised in this latest adequacy review, BOW2: Please see HBET's response in attached document. The Rule request referenced in the first adequacy response has been included in section 3.4 of the attached report. 5. DRMS: The TOC was updated, as requested, but the date of the latest Buckhorn report was listed as February 4, 2012. The date should be February 4, 2014, however the TOC will require an additional revision (see Item 4a, above) that will correct this error. The date of the September 2012 report is listed as September 5, 2012. The report is actually dated September 7, 2012. Please correct the TOC with the correct date for the September 7, 2012 report. It would also be helpful if the list of stability analyses were further identified by the permitting action that prompted the report. Please consider adding the applicable revision number to each listed report. BOW2: Please see the revised Table of Contents. 6. Item resolved 7. Item resolved 8. Item resolved 9. Item resolved 10. Item resolved 11. Item resolved 12. Recent stability analyses (since 2012) have assumed no phreatic surface exists in the compacted waste. Based on the fact that pore pressures, as observed in two Vibrating Wire Piezometers installed in Gob Pile #2, are not dissipating, this