Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Jack Henris <br />July 13, 2016 <br />Page 15 <br />m:\min\tc1\_teller\m-1980-244 cc-v\am-11\m-80-244-am-11maincommentr12016-07-13.docx <br /> Screen capture from TR-55, note 300-foot limit for sheet flow (underlined) <br /> <br />63. Results of Storm Routing, p. 7. Based on Comment No. 62 channel/culvert sizes and riprap <br />should be re-evaluated. Please keep in mind that Sedcad’s PADER method for riprap sizing <br />typically undersizes riprap. On the other hand, the Simons/OSM method (the other Sedcad <br />option) results a very conservative (large) riprap size. [Note: The Division will periodically <br />inspect stormwater channels and if frequent maintenance is required for riprap-lined <br />channels, the Division may require a technical revision to increase the riprap size.] <br />64. Sedcad Results. There are riprap, channel and culvert sizing analyses for both the 5-year <br />and the 100-year storm events. Please confirm hydraulic structure design was done using <br />peak flows from the 100-year design event, and not the 5-year storm. <br />65. Appendix 11, Reclamation Cost Model. Page 5 indicates the cost model includes “all <br />additions and modifications that have been made up to the date of submittal”. Please be <br />aware that additional technical revisions (i.e., TR-78 currently being reviewed by the <br />Division) will have an impact on the bond estimate. <br />66. Appendix 12, ADR No. 2. The Spill Response Plan and Spill Prevention Control and <br />Countermeasures Plan for the Cresson Project does not appear to contain reference to or <br />figures depicting the ADR No. 2. When and how will this be submitted to the Division? <br />Additional Comments/Concerns <br />67. Pursuant to C.R.S. 34-32-102, the Division is tasked with protecting and promoting the <br />health, safety, and general welfare of the people of this state when related to the extraction <br />of minerals and the reclamation of land affected by such extraction. The proximity of Teller