Laserfiche WebLink
Susan Burgmaier -7- June 12, 2014 <br />flow depth - the design information indicates that the flow depth is 1.2'; the table <br />I ists 1.5. Please revise the ditch table on Map 227 so that it is consistent <br />with the design information on page Volume Xl, App, B -73, <br />B W2; Map 227 has been revised to show the flow depth= l.2' and the ditch depth = <br />1.5' to be consistent with page App. B -73. Page App. B -2 shows the ditch <br />depth= 1.5' which is consistent with page App. B -73. <br />i) Response accepted. <br />k) New Item — The Minimum Culvert Size table on Map 22 -1 indicates that the <br />minimum size for Culvert 32 is 30 ". The design information on page Volume XI, <br />App. B -30 calls for a 24" culvert. Please revise the culvert table on Map 22-J <br />so that it is consistent with the design information on page Volume Xl, <br />App, B-30. <br />41. DRM Map 32 has been reviewed and approved under Technical Revision No. 77. <br />42. Response accepted. <br />Reclamation Cost Estimate — Rule 2.05.4(2)(12) <br />43. DRM : a) The reclamation cost estimate for waste pile reclamation (cover and <br />topsoil replacement) will be updated under Technical Revision No. 77. As such, we will <br />not propose to approve the revised cost estimate page provided by BRL under TR -84. <br />b) Response accepted. BRL provided the requested volume. <br />The Division has prepared a reclamation cost estimate for TR -84 to update the cost of <br />demolition of Gob Pile #3 area structures (elimination of conveyor and refuse bin no <br />longer proposed for construction, revised culvert sizes, addition of culverts not in prior <br />estimate) and the reclamation of the Pond J expansion that results in a reduction in <br />liability of $<10,624.39 >. The estimate is attached. <br />B W2: Comment noted. <br />New Items: - <br />44.The second bullet in the Assumptions section of the 15 -Oct -2013 Buckhorn analysis <br />states, "revised gob properties were derived from recent laboratory testing on <br />consolidated gob material by ATT Laboratories ". Laboratory test results, particularly <br />those upon which model assumptions are based, should be incorporated into the <br />appropriate geotechnical report(s), as was done by Buckhorn in 2006 and 2007. <br />a) Please expand the TR -84 (and any current or future) stability analysis to <br />