Laserfiche WebLink
Oxboa•.49inin~. LL.C-'ferbnira/Revirion TR-03 <br />11 IG'erJ Caa/ Refux Fanhty <br />Trrhnnal%Idegxag~ Comment/ReJyoareJ <br />.frpromber S, 7003 <br />Pagr 8 <br />Response: Please refer to previous response to Comment 17: The requested information is <br />provided in the Road Design Addendum for inclusion in Exhibit 2.05-E4. <br />23) Aleare provide specific njenntet to the geatechnital demonrtrations that a minimum saf ty factor of 1.3 it <br />maintained for II Wert Haul Road fill slopes rteeper than 2h:1 v (1.SH:1 V cited on page 2.05-29). No such frll <br />slopes or demonstrations wen found in the Geotechnltal Report (Exhibit 2.05-E4). <br />Response: Please refer to previous response to Comment 17. The requested information is <br />provided in the Road Design Addendum for inclusion in Exhibit 2.05-E4. <br />24) The waiverr provided by Ruk 4.05.2(4) are applicable to Rule 4.05.2, and da not waive performance standards <br />under Rule 4.03. Please revise page 2.05-29 accordingly. <br />Response: Please refer to Rules 4.03.1(3), 4.03.2(3), and 4.03.3(3)(a), which reference the definition <br />of "disturbed area" in 4.05.2(4) and define applicability of the design performance standazds as being <br />applicable to: <br />...roads not within the disturbed area in accordance with 4.05.2(4) shall be designed.: " <br />25J Please noire the erors cessions of Figurer 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, and 12 to incorporate the tut rlape di#her (at required by <br />ditch designs). <br />Response; The referenced cross-sections are general designs, which have now been superceded. <br />General ditch configuration is shown on the typical road cross-sections specific ditch designs aze <br />included in Exhibit 2.05.3. <br />26) Please add to the II West Haul Raad discurrionr a detniptian of those measurer to be used to entun that the <br />intents ojthe public and landowners affected an protected. <br />Response; As shown on the Surface and Mineral Ownership Map (Map 2.03-M1), both the II West <br />Hau] Road and Pond ELight-Use Road will be constructed on lands owned by OMLLC. As <br />referenced in the response to Comment 17, expanded descriptions of design and construction <br />practices and considerations to address all applicable requirements of Rule 4.03 were developed and <br />incorporated in the permit text and the Road Design Addendum for inclusion in Exhibit 2.05-E4. <br />27f Pleare include in this application the design ojthe outlet piping and dawnrtream drainage strudunr beyond the wall <br />and beneath the railroad trackr, and propose construction ojthe concrete rtructun as designed in the submittal (eliminate <br />the proposal on page 5 of the Sedimentation Pond E Embankment Wall Derign to jell locate the prinerpal spillway, <br />emergenry spillway, and outlet pipe). While the Divirion ncogni~er that fre/d tanditions may regain minor field <br />mod~cationr, the hydraulic perfornrance ojthis structure cannot be degraded, nor can the railroad trackr and road below <br />be jeopardised. <br />Response: The notation relative to field location of the pond discharge structures is designed to <br />provide the design/construction engineer the flexibility to place these features in the best location <br />during construction. Placement would be determined by the design/construction engineer relative to <br />actual field conditions (i.e.: foundation conditions and materials), construction operations (location <br />relative to concrete pours to optimize strength), and overall alignment of the pond, embankment wall, <br />discharge structures, railroad crossing, and final discharge point. <br />