2019-08-28_REVISION - M1980244

• Permit No: M1980244
• IBM Index Class Name: REVISION
• Doc Date: 8/28/2019
• Doc Name: Second Adequacy Review for #s 1 & 2. #3 Response
• From: CC&V
• To: DRMS
• Type & Sequence: TR117
• Email Name: TC1
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

NEWMONT
GOLDCORR
3. Table 12— Nuclear Gauge Moisture-Desnisty Testing Summary— The response is
adequate.
4. Appendix D.3— Underground Workings Remediation As-built Figures: The response is
adequate.
ADEQUACY REVIEW NO. 3
Report:
1. Pre-2019 Record Drawings: The table of contents listst four"Pre-2019 Record
Drawings" The DRMS will accept the response, given the extenuating circumstances.
However, the DRMS will expect future Record Drawing submittals to comply with
C.R.S. 12-25-217(Professional Land Surveyor's seal rules) and Rule 5.1.3 of the
Colorado Bylaws and Rules of The State Board of Licensure for Architects,
Professional Engineers and Professional Land Surveyors (Professional
Engineer's rule for seals).
2. Post 2019 Record Drawings— Table of Contents and References: The DRMS will accept
the response. However, given the response approach to reference specific record
drawings requires going to the Table of Contents to determine the title and drawing
number called out in the text leads to potential confusion and adds unnecessary time to
the document review. Future submittals can be more efficiently reviewed and save time
for CC&V responses if the callouts in the report text directly match the drawing number
and title in the report's Record Drawing section.
3. Section 2.8 Geomembrane: The response is adequate.
4. Section 4 Proiect Deviations:Additional information is required. The first bullet stating
the project technical specifications were sent to DRMS on July 7, 2016. The DRMS
comment asked to clarify if the project deviations were with respect to the final August
2016 approved specification (as part of TR-78) or the July 2016 specifications. The
CC&V response was to remove the first bullet, which does not answer the question.
Please clarify whether the deviations to the project were with respect to the August or
July specifications?
Appendix C, Technical Specifications, of the CQA report did not include the same
specifications as approved in TR-78. Attachment 15 includes the current and
approved technical specification and should be considered the revised Appendix
C. Unless otherwise indicated in the project deviations, all work activity
discussed in the report met the attached technical specifications.
Drawings:
5. Soil Liner Fill Asbuilt, Sheet No. 2 of 3: Mislabeled major contour(9770 vs. 9700) The
electronic response indicates a corrected drawing is attached. The pdf file did not
include this drawing. Please provide a copy of the revised drawing.
The revised drawing is included in this response.