Laserfiche WebLink
Knight Piesold Table 2.8 <br /> C O N S U L T I N G Cripple Creek and Victor Gold Mining Co.(Newmont) <br /> Cripple Creek and Victor Mine <br /> Stormwater Management Plan Evaluation <br /> Previous:Current Comparisons—Existing Contributing Basin Areas and Runoff Curve Numbers <br /> Basin Steffens(2012) Knight Piesold(2018) Steffens(2012) Knight Piesold(2018) <br /> (Reference Figure 2.1) Total Area Total Area Composite Curve Number Composite Curve Number Potential Justification for Area Discrepancy <br /> (ac) (ac) (CN) (CN) <br /> EMP 6 Not Available LtLAJ 32.2 NA 74 Steffens NA. <br /> EMP Sa91.7 26.6 66 91 Area reduction:Previous inflow diversion channel removed. <br /> EMP Sb NA 137.3 NA 73 Steffens NA. <br /> EMP 8c NA 130.1 NA 91 Steffens NA. <br /> EMP 9a-d combined Area increase:New inflow diversion channel constructed. <br /> EMP 11 NA 58.2 NA 84 Steffens NA. <br /> EMP 13 Area increase:Steffens did not include area up-gradient of road within catchment,KP did. <br /> EMP 16 Area reduction:Steffens included waste rock area KP did not. <br /> EMP 17,17a,17b combined Area reduction:Steffens included waste rock area KP did not. <br /> EMP 18 69 71 Area reduction:Justification NA. <br /> EMP 20 •r Area reduction:Steffens included waste rock area,KP did not. <br /> EMP 21 69 69 jArea reduction:Justification NA. <br /> EMP 22 19.7 21.1 66 64 Similar areas and CNs. <br /> ECOSA toe berm NA 50 ISleffens accounted for most of this area in EMPs 16 17 and 20. <br />