My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2014-02-07_REVISION - M1979094HR (5)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1979094
>
2014-02-07_REVISION - M1979094HR (5)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/15/2021 2:30:06 PM
Creation date
2/13/2014 1:49:25 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1979094HR
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
2/7/2014
Doc Name
Revised DDP
From
Whetstone Associates
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
AM1
Email Name
TC1
DMC
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.
/
153
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
JD -7 Mine — Drainage Design Plan 15 <br />The Maximum Permissible Velocity of 7 ft/sec is applicable to earthen channels to prevent excessive <br />erosion and scour. Velocities of 7 to 13 ft/sec are acceptable for rubble -lined channels, 20 ft/sec for <br />concrete channels, 12 to 15 ft/sec for smooth and rough asphalt channels, respectively, and 30 ft/sec for <br />gunite (sprayed concrete) sections. At the JD -7 Mine, channels that are excavated into bedrock are similar <br />to rubble -lined or concrete channels, and higher permissible velocities may be acceptable in specific <br />sections or reaches of the channel. Erosion and sedimentation have less effect on fisheries and <br />macroinvertebrates in drainages at the toe of Monogram Mesa than at other locations, because surface <br />water is intermittent or ephemeral and there are no perennial streams (or "live streams ") as receiving <br />waters. <br />2.3.3 Culverts <br />Values for hydraulic headwater, tailwater, barrel flow rate and barrel velocity were determined for the three <br />existing culverts at the site (CV1, CV2 and CV3, Figure 11), using methods and parameters provided in the <br />Federal Highway Administration (FWHA) document HEC 22 (FWHA 2009) and modeled in the FHWA <br />software program HY -8 Version 7.2 (FWHA, 2012). <br />The results of the culvert capacity analysis for the current condition are provided in Section 5.6. For the <br />planned condition, the area draining to each of these culverts will be the same or smaller, so it was not <br />necessary to re- analyze culvert designs for the planned condition. <br />This drainage design plan does not contain recommended locations for any new culverts. However, if the <br />need for new culverts is identified in the future, any new culverts installed by Cotter will be designed with <br />adequate capacity to convey the 100 -year 24 -hour storm and will be 18 -inch diameter minimum to reduce <br />the potential of plugging with wind -blown debris and animal denning activities. <br />2.3.4 Retention Ponds and Spillways <br />The stormwater retention ponds have been evaluated to determine their ability to contain the 10 -year 24- <br />hour runoff volume while passing the 100 yr 24 -hour event with a minimum of 1.0 ft of freeboard. For the <br />proposed stormwater retention pond at the toe of the expanded open pit waste rock pile, spillway design <br />parameters were established according to HEC 22, chapter 8 (FHWA, 2009) design specifications for broad <br />crested weirs. Flow rates and velocities over the spillway were evaluated in HydroCAD using the <br />characteristics of a trapezoidal weir. <br />2.3. S Riprap / Granular Bedding / Gravel Mulch <br />Channel protection requirements, riprap sizing and rip rap grading specifications were evaluated based on <br />the channel velocities calculated using WinXS Pro software and spillway velocities calculated using <br />HydroCAD. Based on the channel velocity and scour, the HEC 15 guidance (FHWA, 2005) was followed <br />to determine the requirements for bed material size. The analysis was conducted for the major stormwater <br />conveyance structures (diversion ditches) using the depths, widths, and side slope ratios established for <br />each feature. <br />HEC -15 (FHWA, 2005) gives the following design recommendation for rip rap lined channels: <br />• The ratio of sizes of D100/D50 and D50/D20 shall fall between 3.0 and 1.5Z. <br />• Placed thickness should not be less than the diameter of the largest rock size in the gradation. <br />• Material shall be durable and angular but not slabby (length:thickness < 3). <br />• Riprap shall extend 1.0 x flow depth above flow level. <br />2 The largest rip rap size (13100) shall be no larger than 3 times the median particle size (D50) and no smaller than 1.5 times the <br />median particle size (D50). Similarly, median particle size (1350) shall be no more than 3 times and no less than 1.5 times the D20 <br />size. This specification assures an appropriate size gradation for erosion control. <br />4149A.140207 Whetstone Associates <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.