My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP08712
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
8001-9000
>
WSP08712
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:49:21 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 3:10:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8149.700
Description
Miscellaneous Small Projects and Project Studies - Homestake Project
State
CO
Basin
Arkansas
Water Division
2
Date
4/25/1974
Author
Black and Veatch
Title
Environmental Impact Report - Homestake Water Collection System Extension for Aurora and Colorado Springs with related documents Volume I
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
EIS
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
169
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Vertical shjlfts from the ground surface to the tunnel bore would <br />generally be used for diversion of water from streams into <br />tunnels, Shafts would probably be drilled upward from the <br />tunnel and the shaft muck disposed with tunnel muck. <br /> <br />2. Disposal of Tunnel Muck <br /> <br />Tunnel excavation would produce large quantities of excavated <br />rock and earth, commonly referred to as "tunnel muck", which <br />would require disposal. With the exception of the Red Cliff and <br />Turkey Creek Tunnels under Plans F and F-1, and the tunnels <br />under Plan G, all tunnels would apparently be bored through <br />igneous and/or metamorphic rock which is only superficially <br />weathered. Muck produced from these types of rock would <br />probably range in size from blocks one-half cubic yard in volume <br />to rock dust. It is expected that the amount of minus 200 mesh <br />size material resulting from blast - excavation will be no more <br />than 2 to 3 per cent by weight.' <br /> <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Considerably more fines will occur when faults or shear zones <br />are crossed by the tunnel. Generally, it is expected that blast- <br />excavated tunnel muck from igneous and metamorphic forma- <br />tions would be reasonably clean and inoffensive and would create <br />only minor amounts of dust and potential water-borne turbidity, <br />Muck produced by tunnel boring machines would contain much <br />more fine material. Muck produced from tunnels in sedimentary <br />rock would also be expected to contain considerable fines regard- <br />less of tunneling method. <br /> <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />The tunnel muck wou ld likely be unsu itable for use in construc- <br />tion of project components, except as a surfacing and embank- <br />ment material. Select muck would be used for surfacing work <br />areas, access roads and parking areas to inhibit dust and erosion, <br />to <br />L") <br />~ <br />o "Predicting Materials Handling Properties of Tunnel Muck", by H. F. <br />Haller and H. C. Pattison, Proceedings North American Rapid Excava- <br />tion and Tunneling Conference, 1972, Vol. 2, p 1279, <br /> <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Under Plans E, F, F-1, and F-2, excess tunnel muck would be <br />placed in dam embankments. Under Plans A, B, C,and D, excess <br />muck would be deposited in an approved disposal area, com- <br />pacted and shaped to designed contours, and then covered with a <br />minimum 12 inches of job excavated material. The surfaced area <br />would then be ferti Iized and seeded with native grasses and <br />planted with seedling trees. <br /> <br />An alternative method of disposal of excess muck would be <br />placement in off-site embankment or surfacing projects if such <br />projects are in progress in the vicinity of the Project Area during <br />the construction period. <br /> <br />Disposal of muck from the Turkey Creek Tunnel under Plans F <br />and F-1 and from the tunnels under Plan G should be covered <br />under the E IS being prepared for the Eagle-Colorado Project by <br />the DWB. <br /> <br />C. ROAD CONSTRUCTION <br /> <br />Roads would be constructed for access to working tunnel portals, <br />dam sites, and pipeline rights-of-way. Access to construction areas <br />in the Homestake and Cross Creek Valleys would be as described <br />under Section It I.A-1. Access for the Turkey Creek Tunnel <br />construction under Plans F and F-1 and for all construction <br />under Plan G will be covered under the EIS prepared by the <br />DWB. <br /> <br />Access roads would be constructed to planned grades and would <br />be graded and drained to inhibit erosion, The roads would be <br />surfaced with select tunnel muck or other granular material to <br />inhibit dust and surface erosion. <br /> <br />After completion of construction, all roads except those classed <br />as permanent by the U. S. Forest Service would be restored to <br />satisfactory grades as covered under Section III.A-5. The re- <br />stored surface would be covered with site excavated soil, fertil- <br />ized, and seeded to native grasses, Seedlings, trees, and shrubs <br /> <br />25 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.