Laserfiche WebLink
Jason Musick <br />C-1996-038 / TR -98 AR#2-Geotechnical <br />27 -May -2015 <br />Page 2 of 3 <br />repose for many materials, the Division believes that a minimum static safety factor of 1.3 needs <br />to be achieved for the cut slope proposed for Borrow Area #3. Please evaluate the stability of <br />the proposed slope to ensure that the required FoS will be achieved. <br />DRM 05/26: BRL has removed Borrow Area #3 from consideration. This item is no longer <br />pertinent. <br />Text - Volume IX (cover in application says Volume XI) <br />1 (9) DRMS 03/11: Please update the Table of Contents to show pagination changes resulting from <br />TR -98. <br />DRMS 05/26: The Volume IX ToC was updated as requested. However, the date of the TR -98 <br />HBET analysis appears as July 15 rather than July 30, 2014. Please revise the date accordingly <br />both at this location and on revised Volume I ToC page xiii. <br />2 (10) DRMS 03/11: The Certificate immediately following the TOC has not been updated since <br />September 2013. Please update to reflect the current status. <br />DRMS 05/26: The certificate was updated as requested. This item has been satisfactorily <br />addressed. <br />3 (11) DRMS 03/11: Page 4a of the approved PAP illustrates the changes to Gob Piles #2 and #4 that <br />have been approved under various revisions. Please update this diagram to reflect changes <br />made subsequent to TR -76. <br />DRMS 05/26: Page 4a was updated as requested. This item has been satisfactorily addressed. <br />4 (12) DRMS 03/11: Page 5 has been revised to include the East and North expansion proposed under <br />TR -98. The text indicates that no extension of the underdrain is necessary for East and North <br />expansion. According to Section A -A' (Figure 1), the pile is being extending further up valley. <br />Please explain why no extension is necessary. <br />DRMS 05/26: Figure 2 and Map 21-3 were revised to show the extension of the underdrain up <br />the valley, as requested; however, the text on the map directs that the extension will be made <br />only if seeps are encountered. This zone of Gob Pile #2 qualifies as a Valley Fill configuration, <br />bringing the requirements of Rule 4.09.2 into play. Subsection (2) of this rule requires that <br />subdrainage systems shall be constructed along the natural drainage system, from the toe to the <br />head of the fill. (Any associated lateral drains are to be constructed if areas of seepage are <br />found.) Please revise the map text to show that the underdrain will be extended, as required. <br />5 (13) DRMS 03/11: On Page 6, in the first paragraph, the disturbed area for Gob Pile #2-4 has been <br />revised from 58.0 (approved) to 50.9 (proposed). Please provide an explanation for this <br />decrease. <br />DRMS 05/26: Page 6 was revised, and the original acreage restored. This item has been <br />satisfactorily addressed. <br />6 (14) DRMS 03/11: On Page 7, language in first 3 paragraphs has been written to speak of future <br />activities ("will be", etc.). Please update the text to reflect current status of these activities. <br />DRMS 05/26: The text was updated, as requested. This item has been satisfactorily addressed. <br />