Laserfiche WebLink
J J Dudash - 3 - May 12, 2008 <br />32. No response required. <br />33. DRMS letter dated June 6, 2007 states the Division has no further concerns. <br />34. See response to 31 b. <br />35. Ivan Wong with URS considers the GEI seismic stability analysis of Bruce <br />Park Dam to be a sound conservative evaluation and represents astate-of- <br />the-practice analysis. Their analysis using a M~ 4.2 event results in zero <br />deformation of the dam. Even for the case where the dam may be subjected <br />to the ground motions from multiple events over time, the cumulative effect <br />will be zero deformation. The use of a M~ 4.2 event in the analysis is quite <br />conservative. <br />36. DRMS letter dated June 6, 2007 states the Division has no further concerns. <br />The following data are provided to support this adequacy response: <br />Volume I Table of Contents page for Volumes IIIA, page 2.05-75ii, 2.05.6(6) <br />Subsidence (Pages 2.05-99 through 2.05-125 <br />Volume II Map 9 Shows proposed monitoring wells <br />Volume IIIA Exhibit 18, Seismic Monitoring Summary Statement including Figures 1 <br />through 4, Exhibit 20, Geotechnical Monitoring Plan, Bruce Park Landslide <br />Sincerely, <br />~~~~" `_~ <br />J. E. Stover, P.E. <br />Consulting Engineer <br />cc: Wm. A. Bear, Jr. <br />UBRA Mining Engineer & Geologist <br />Bureau of Land Management <br />Uncompahgre Basin Resource Area <br />2505 South Townsend Avenue <br />Montrose, CO 81401 <br />USDA Forest Service <br />P.O. Box 1030 <br />Paonia, CO 81428 <br />Jason P. Ward, Ph.D., P.E. <br />Division of Water Resources <br />P.O. Box 456 <br />Montrose, CO 81402 <br />