Laserfiche WebLink
r <br />:~ <br />Jim Pendelton suggested that it may be possible to avoid having to change the permit <br />boundary if EFCI can get permission in writing from the affected property owners, allowing <br />them access to those areas of potential subsidence outside the permit area. This would <br />allow EFCI to repair any damage which might occur in those areas. This same approach <br />was used with Mid Continent when their subsidence-affected area crossed off the permit. <br />Item 32: <br />The compaction testing methods employ common practice and should be adequate. I am <br />not sure that testing just twice yearly will really tell you much about the overall stability of <br />the pile. It seems more appropriate to me to require compaction tests at intervals of <br />specific volume or construction stage of the pile, rather than at some arbitrary time period. <br />In this way, testing would be more frequent during high production periods when a lot of <br />material is being placed in the pile, and infrequent during slow periods. Be sure to check <br />and make sure that the stockpile design calls for compaction to 90% of maximum drv <br />density, versus Proctor density. <br />Item 35: <br />I was not impressed with the Isopach map. Although it does "aid" subsidence evaluation, <br />It is at a scale of 1"= 400' when you asked for 1" = 200', and the contour interval is 400 and <br />500 feet! This gives only three isopach lines for each seam over the entire property. <br />