APPCOR11063 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

/45. The Division has no further concerns. BRL added the information for the four culverts to the culvert table in a revised page Exh-8-26. ./46. The Division has no further concerns. The annotation for the culvert at the base of the gob pile was added to revised Map 20, Sedimentation Control Plan, and revised Map 21-1, Drainage Plans. " 47. The Division has no further concerns. Map 20, Sedimentation Control Plan, was revised with an annotation for culvert C-F1. ,/48. The Division has no further concerns. On page Exh-8-23 the VV operator stated that 6 fps was the threshold erosive velocity. The operator's consultant noted the Division's position that 5 fps was a general guideline threshold velocity only. The actual design erosive velocity would depend on soil type and vegetation. ~ 49. The Division has no further concerns. The annotations for ditches D-F1 and D-F2 were added to revised Map 20, Sedimentation Control Plan. /50. The Division has no further concerns. The information for the five ditch designs was added to revised page Exh-8-24. 51. The Division requested small area exemption (SAE) designs for the coal waste pile topsoil pile and the coverfill stockpile. On behalf of BRL, WESTEC submitted revised pages and revised Drawings 95266-02 and 95266-04 for Volume IV, which include designs for the SAES. The topsoil stockpile covers .3 acres and the coverfill stockpile covers 1.5 acres, BRL stated that SAES were needed in these two cases, due to the topographic restrictions in that general area. Concerning the coal waste pile topsoil stockpile SAE, BRL has decided not to put in an upland diversion ditch directly above the stockpile. There is a haul road ditch upgradient of the stockpile, but, due to the ditch's location, there still is a .5 acre area that drains against the topsoil stockpile. This area should be watched to see if an upland diversion ditch immediately adjacent to the topsoil stockpile will be needed. Concerning the coverfill stockpile, the revised calculation worksheet, found in Appendix C, for the "temporary upland diversion for coverfill" shows an input discharge of 26.80 cfs. However, in Appendix B, the worksheet for the "upper diversion of coverfill" for the 100 year-24 hour event shows a peak discharge of 28.66 cfs. Please reconcile this difference. 4