My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2014-04-02_REVISION - C1981012
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1981012
>
2014-04-02_REVISION - C1981012
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 5:41:47 PM
Creation date
4/3/2014 12:58:49 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981012
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
4/2/2014
Doc Name
Review of Diversion Ditch Design
From
Susan Burgmaier
To
Leigh Simmons
Type & Sequence
TR69
Email Name
SLB
LDS
SB1
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.
/
8
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
Leigh Simmons <br />C 1981012 — TR -69 <br />Page 2of4 <br />• The overall gradient of this ditch is approximately 2 %. <br />It appears that at one time there was an approved design specific to the RDA Upland Diversion <br />ditch (eastern branch), but it has possibly been inadvertently removed. Please either identify the <br />location in the permit application package of the approved design for the RDA upland diversion <br />ditch, or provide a new design for the ditch. If NECC is unable to locate the design, a new design <br />could be based on the existing design information for Culverts C75 and C76 (currently approved <br />pages 24 -26 of Exhibit 19(24)). NECC would need only to submit a proposed channel design (such <br />as a SEDCAD channel utility output) for inclusion in Exhibit 19. <br />2. Notice of Violation No. CV- 2013 -009 was issued for "failure to construct and maintain the RDA <br />upland diversion ditch in compliance with the approved design ". The abatement of the violation <br />required construction of the ditch so that it is in compliance with the approved design. In <br />response, NECC has <br />• proposed to revise the permit to remove the specifications for Ditch D -55 (page 2.05 -11a), <br />which was not cited in the notice of violation, <br />• provided a typical cross section for the ditch (shown on the RDA -Ditch Profile drawing), and <br />• provided plan and profile information on Ditch D -55 and the RDA Upland Diversion Ditch. <br />NECC has not adequately addressed the requirement to construct the RDA upland diversion ditch <br />as designed. <br />a) Please provide surveyed ditch cross - sections, for the constructed RDA Upland Diversion ditch <br />to indicate that the ditch has been constructed as designed. <br />b) Please restore the previously approved page 20.5 -11a that lists the design information for <br />Ditch D -55. <br />3. The as —built locations of ditches D -55 and the RDA Clean Water Diversion on the "RDA Ditch D55 <br />Plan" drawing are consistent with the approved design. The title of this drawing, however, is <br />somewhat misleading. Please revise the title of the drawing to clarify that two ditches, the RDA <br />Diversion Ditch and Ditch D -55, are depicted. <br />4. The RDA— Ditch Profile drawing includes a light weight dashed line (most evident between stations <br />27 +00 and 29 +00) that is not identified on the drawing. Please revise the RDA — Ditch Profile <br />drawing to include a legend that identifies all lines and symbols used in the drawing, and revise <br />the title (consistent with Item 3, above) to indicate that both D -55 and the RDA Upland Diversion <br />are depicted. <br />5. After reviewing the October 8, 2013 as -built information for the RDA Upland Diversion ditch, the <br />Division required NECC to regrade the RDA diversion ditch to ensure that there is continuous, <br />positive flow from the high point of the ditch to the lowest elevation at the terminus of the ditch. <br />NECC, in the TR -69 submittal, indicated that the ditch was regraded and provided an updated <br />profile of the ditch. The profile drawing dated January 31, 2014 does not use the same survey <br />points as the October 8, 2013 survey, so it is difficult to ascertain whether NECC has addressed the <br />pool areas identified by the Division in the October 8, 2013 survey review. The survey points were <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.