Laserfiche WebLink
a. Worksheet No. 8b is not used and to be removed. Worksheet 8A has 6,864 hours for the loader, <br /> and Worksheet 813 has 333 hours for the loader. These are included on Worksheet 13. <br /> b. Worksheet No.8c has been relabeled to 8b. In worksheet 13B the project labeled as <br /> "Revegetation" was mislabeled and should have been "Upgrading of Roads". This has been <br /> updated. <br /> 6.4.14 EXHIBIT N—Source of Legal Right to Enter <br /> 25. Clarification may be required: Based on your responses to Comment Nos. 1 and 2 above,a new <br /> source of legal right to enter may be required. <br /> Response: Response: Castle Concrete, a Colorado company, is a wholly owned subsidiary of <br /> Continental Materials Corp. <br /> 6.5 EXHIBIT REQUIREMENTS—REGULAR 112 OPERATIONS <br /> 26. Design Criteria:The Stantec Memo design criteria section states the assumed seismic coefficient for <br /> the pseudo-static analyses is 0.03g.The July 2012 Seegmiller International stability analyses in <br /> Amendment 3 (AM-03) used a seismic coefficient of 0.075. Please explain the reduction. <br /> Response: The Stantec memorandum used the most recent data available for seismic design purposes, <br /> which specify a peak ground acceleration (PGA) of 0.060g.The standard practice for pseudo-static <br /> analyses is to use a seismic coefficient of 0.5*PGA, based on work by the US Army Corps of Engineers <br /> (Hynes-Griffin and Franklin 1984). Thus,the value of 0.03g is appropriate for design purposes. The <br /> Seegmiller design is conservative, because it did not consider the 0.5xPGA practice. Seegmiller also used <br /> the PGA specified by the Uniform Building Code, but the data on the Uniform Building Code maps have <br /> been superseded by site-specific calculations performed by US Geological Survey(used and referenced <br /> by Stantec in the previously provided Exhibit 6.5). <br /> 27. Material Strength Properties:The last paragraph on the first page of the Stantec Memo states the <br /> less than 3-foot lifts will be compacted by wetting the soil and traversing at least two passes with <br /> unspecified bulldozers or haul trucks.The DRMS requires material and compaction specifications for the <br /> fill material to ensure acceptable material is placed and compacted to an appropriate density. Please <br /> provide material and density specifications and discuss how it will be demonstrated the appropriate <br /> backfill density will be achieved using the proposed three-foot lifts. <br /> Response: The text in Exhibit D has been revised to include material and compaction specifications and <br /> associated geotechnical laboratory testing of the fill material. <br /> 28. Slope Stability Model:The first paragraph of Section 4 in the Stantec Memo references"closure <br /> configurations of the stockpiles". Please confirm the model analyzed the reclaimed highwall <br /> configuration and not just the stockpiles. <br /> Pikeview Quarry Amendment 4, Response to Adequacy <br /> December 11,2019 <br />