Laserfiche WebLink
C CONTINENTAL MATERIALS CORPORATION <br /> 6.4.4 EXHIBIT D—Mining Plan <br /> 9a. Provide a compaction specification...The response is not adequate, additional clarification is <br /> required.The provided specifications reference ASTM 4343-18. Please confirm this should be ASTM <br /> 4943-18. <br /> Response: The compaction specification should be ASTM 4943-18. The text in Exhibit D has been <br /> revised to address this comment. <br /> 6.4.5 EXHIBIT E—Reclamation Plan <br /> 12a.An estimated volume of available topsoil ...The response indicates about half the necessary topsoil <br /> is available onsite, leaving approximately 56,000 CY of topsoil that must be imported. The DRMS <br /> requires a cost estimate of topsoil importation including possible source(s)and unit price. <br /> Response: CMC's reclamation cost estimate includes costs to mix organic material into the site soil to <br /> manufacture the growth media;therefore,there should not be an additional cost to import topsoil. <br /> 12c. If growth media is to be "manufactured"...The response is adequate. Note the DRMS will include <br /> topsoil importation in the reclamation cost estimate. <br /> Response: CMC's reclamation cost estimate includes costs to mix organic material into the site soil to <br /> manufacture the growth media;therefore,there should not be an additional cost to import topsoil. <br /> 33b.Table G-3: The response is not adequate, additional information is required. Please address the <br /> following: <br /> i.The Lower South Channel, WS-9 should be 20 ft wide to be consistent with the SEDCAD model output <br /> in the response. <br /> Response: Table G-3 has been updated with the 20-ft bottom width. <br /> ii. Based on the channel profiles on Exhibit G-3,there are four engineered channel segment not <br /> addressed: 1)WS-4 at 2%slope, 2) Outlet Channel WS-11 at 7%slope, 3) Upper most WS-3 cross <br /> channel (WS-1 flows?)at 6%slope, 4) lower WS-3 cross channel at 2%slope. Please include these in <br /> Table G-3. <br /> Response: Table G-3 has been updated with designs for these channel segments. <br /> 33c. Channel Transition Design:The response is not adequate.The comment was misunderstood.The <br /> comment is meant to address the cross channel intersection with south-flowing terrace channels(see <br /> below), not the intersection with WS-4. <br /> Pikeview Quarry Amendment 4, Response to Adequacy <br /> March 2, 2020 <br /> 2 <br />