My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2016-01-12_REVISION - M1985112 (7)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1985112
>
2016-01-12_REVISION - M1985112 (7)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/15/2021 2:33:18 PM
Creation date
1/14/2016 11:45:52 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1985112
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
1/12/2016
Doc Name
3rd Adequacy Letter Response AM01
From
Loloff Construction, Inc.
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
AM1
Email Name
PSH
WHE
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.
/
108
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
Mr.J.C. York <br /> July 13, 2015 Page 4 <br /> well yields range from 10 to 1500 gpm and averages 244 gpm. The calculated saturated alluvial <br /> thicknesses ranges from 7 to 82 feet and averages 31 feet. We used the 31 foot average thickness <br /> to define the aquifer bottom and gradient (21 feet west to east) across the model. The average <br /> aquifer thickness is consistent with the 37 foot thickness reported for the Loloff pit (Well permit <br /> no. 77467 F) which was used in the radius of influence calculation (JT Construction, August 27, <br /> 2007). <br /> Appendix B includes the following data plots: Figure B1 - Well Permit Numbers; Figure B2 — <br /> Well Owner; Figure B3 — Well Depth; Figure B4 — Depth to Water; and Figure B5 — Saturated <br /> Aquifer Thickness which support our model conceptualization and assumptions. <br /> Aquifer Permeability <br /> The aquifer hydraulic conductivity(K) is a measure of its permeability. Contoured K's obtained <br /> from pumping tests reported for the State's South Platte Decision Support System (SPDSS Task <br /> 43.3, Figure 5C) groundwater modeling project (CDM-Smith, 2006) range from less than 250 <br /> ft/day to over 680 ft/day. Once the model was calibrated, the model area K averaged 600 to 650 <br /> ft/day(CDM-Smith, 2013, Figure 4-2). We assume an average model K of 625 ft/day. <br /> The assume an average aquifer transmissivity in the model (145,000 gpd/ft) which is the product <br /> of the hydraulic conductivity (625 ft/day) multiplied by the saturated thickness (31 ft). This is <br /> consistent with published transmissivities for the Loloff pit model area by CDM-Smith (2006, <br /> Figure 7a) and Hurr and Schneider, 1972. <br /> Model Boundary Conditions <br /> Model boundary conditions includes the Poudre River, aquifer subflow, and aquifer bottom. We <br /> assigned the elevation of the Poudre River as 1 foot above the interpolated ground elevations <br /> which are 4647 feet (msl) on the west end and 4626 feet (msl) on the east end of the model. The <br /> river stage was assigned a foot above where the topographic elevation contour cross the Poudre <br /> River and interpolated in between. We calculated model cell conductance (COND) as the <br /> product of the streambed unit conductance (Ksb/m) times the wetted river area (length x width). <br /> The average unit conductance obtained from SPDSS vertical permeability tests on the South <br /> Platte tests is approximately 37 ft/day/ft. We assume that the average width of the Poudre River <br /> is 50 feet. Therefore, model cell conductance is 185,000 ft^2/day(37 ft/day/ft * 50 ft * 100 ft). <br /> Aquifer subflow in and out of the model were simulated using constant heads on the west and <br /> east ends of the model set at the ground elevation contours at the Poudre river (4647 ft (msl) on <br /> the west and 4626 ft (msl) on the east side. Constant head cells were spaced every 1000 feet in <br /> the column 1 and every 100 feet along the east side of the model. <br /> Model Mass Balance <br /> Aquifer subflow in and out of the model was solved determined for the pre-pit steady state run. <br /> Table 2 shows that river and aquifer inflows and outflows total 7.8 cfs and there is a net gain in <br /> streamflow of 1.4 cfs within the model domain. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.