My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2009-04-27_REVISION - M2004009 (7)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M2004009
>
2009-04-27_REVISION - M2004009 (7)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/16/2021 6:12:45 PM
Creation date
4/28/2009 11:29:03 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2004009
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
4/27/2009
Doc Name
Response to Adequacy Review
From
WSI
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
TR3
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
29
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
2 of 2 <br />AS , Cl would like to select the 100% bonding option for the clay liner and forgo the <br />submittal of an engineered liner design. <br />• The submitted feasibility study states that liner material should be placed in <br />maximum 9 inch lifts for compaction, but the text of Exhibit E states it will be <br />placed in one foot lifts. Please change text in Exhibit E to 9 inch maximum lifts, <br />or provide documentation to support the one,foot lifts for liner construction. <br />Exhibit E has been edited to specify 9 inch maximum lift thickness for clay liner <br />construction. <br />• The figure included with the TR (Reservoir Clay Liner -.Typical Cross Section) <br />does not correspond with the recommendations provided in the feasibility study. <br />In particular, the feasibility study recommends a deepened core trench 8 -12 <br />feet in width to a depth of,10 feet below the bottom of the reservoir, or to <br />"practical refusal-in, bedrock, while the figure shows only a shallow 3 foot key. <br />Please resolve this discrepancy. <br />A. Subsurface Exploration Addendum Report has been prepared by EEC which <br />allows for a keyway with a depth of 3 ft below the bottom of the reservoir. This <br />addendum report has been included with this submittal <br />No costs have been included for the installation of the 3 c.f.s, culvert across Cell <br />6 in the provided estimate. <br />Costs for the construction of the 3cfs pipeline as designed in Exhibit F Sheet 3, <br />have been included in the revised Exhibit L. <br />• Only- one topsoil pile is shown on the provided maps (located on the SE corner of <br />Cell 1). Topsoil and overburden material must be segregated and maintained <br />separately until, used in reclamation. Where will the topsoil material from Cells 2, <br />3,4, 5 and.6 be maintained? <br />Discreet topsoil stockpile locations that will be•used to reclaim Cells 2, 3, 4, 5 and <br />6 have been added to Exhibit C-2 Sheet 1-2 <br />• Acres requiring topsoil replacement/revegetation do not match between, Exhibit E <br />text and Exhibit L (61 acres vs. 138 acres). Please clarify. <br />Exhibit E has been edited to specify. 138 acres for topsoil/revegetation areas <br />Sincerely, . <br />Peter Wayland <br />President <br />Encl.-2 - Copies of Exhibit D-E, 2-Copies of Exhibit L, 2-Copies of Exhibit IF Sheet 1, 2- <br />Copies of Exhibit C-2 Sheets 1-2, 2=Copies of Subsurface Exploration Addendum <br />Report, 2-Copies of Surface Use Agreement. <br />we <br />tnv/ronm?ntal <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.