Laserfiche WebLink
NEWMONT <br /> �rUU�a � _�K 3 ,.r acid Ylu�a <br /> and the first lute in the second paragraph on p. IS "Differential settlement across the base <br /> emphasis added,' of the F"LF2 Phase 3 pad has been presented. " imph•that no consideration was <br /> given to the abrupt transitions over subsurface bench crests (discussed in Comment x2). Please <br /> provide additional discussion for the basis of these statements. <br /> Newmont Response: <br /> Consideration has been given to differential settlement at abrupt transitions from intact rockfill foundation <br /> to pit backfill the text of the results and conclusions section (now- Section 5 2.7)has been updated. <br /> DBMS Comment(italics): <br /> 83. Figure 3. Phase 3 PSS.4 Filling Curve. Pursuant to currently upproved Emergencv Response Plans <br /> for the other PSS-ls, the Division is required to be noticed when the average PSS.4 water level is 80 <br /> percent capacity. This will be required for the VLF 2 Phase 3 PSS.4. The BYO percent volume is not <br /> indicated on Figure 5. Please add the 80 percent elevation to Figure 5 and resubmit it. <br /> Newmont Response: <br /> Figure 5 has been updated to include the 80% capacity. Figure 5 is included in the updated design, <br /> provided in Attachment 13. <br /> DRMS Comment(italics): <br /> 84. VLF2 Phase 3 Issued for Permitting Drawings. The.following comments relate to the 2-draawings <br /> provided in the Drawings section ojAppendix 1. <br /> it. A0L General.4rrangement. Section 2.3 of the F"LF2 Phase 3 Design Report discusses how <br /> underground workings that may be encountered are to be treated bill no drmvings or <br /> drawing notes are included in the submittal should these be encountered. If underground <br /> workings are encountered, how is the contractor to know what approach to take? The <br /> Division recommends the previousiv used underground workings remediation design and <br /> detail drawings be included in _Ippendix 1. If not, and underground workings tire <br /> encountered, the Division may require a technical revision. <br /> b. A08, PSS.4 Layout.Just below the Section P c•allout, there is a note with u leader identifi•ing <br /> "Transmittal Through". To what does this refer:' <br /> c. A10, Stage C Grading Plan. The SGOS,4 grading appears to be tit a 1.5H.-1 Vslope in excess <br /> of 15Ofeet in some places above the proposed edge ofliner. Given the run-of=mine material <br /> in the SGOX4, what is to prevent raveling uncl large boulders from coming clown on the <br /> installed liner and damaging it prior to ore stacking" <br /> d A15. Leak Detection and Erosion Control Details. No erosion control details appear to be <br /> oil the drawing. The drawing includes 8 notes. The Division could only find cullouts for <br /> notes 1, 2, and 8. If Notes 2 through , are necessary, please provide cullouts, otherwise <br /> remove them. <br /> e. A16, 6"LF Sections and Details, Sheet 1. In Note 2, the lust lute states "the following steps <br />