My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
APPCOR11165
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Application Correspondence
>
1000
>
APPCOR11165
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 6:31:35 PM
Creation date
11/19/2007 2:18:05 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1994082
IBM Index Class Name
Application Correspondence
Doc Date
6/23/1995
Doc Name
YOAST ADEQUACY REVIEW HYDROLOGY C-94-082
From
DMG
To
LARRY ROUTTEN
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.
/
2
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
iii iiiiiiiiniu iii <br />• <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />1313 Sherman Sr., Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorado dU207 <br />Phone: (3071 866 3567 <br />FA%~ (3U31 832-8106 <br />Date: June 23, 1995 <br />~~~~~ <br />llEPARTMENT OF <br />NATURAL <br />RESOURCES <br />/ Roy Romer <br />To: Larry Routten c°"ernor <br />tames S. Lochhead <br />From: Kent Gorham ~~ e,e<°rve o~reclor <br />Michael d L°n~; <br />RE: Yoast Adequacy Review, Hydrology, #C-94-082 °'""°° ohe"°` <br />As per your request, I reviewed the information submitted by Seneca <br />Coal Company for the Yoast permit application. I have briefly <br />summarized my concerns and any resolution to those concerns below. <br />1. Lack of pit pumpage in the pond design <br />Mike Altavilla agreed to change the permit text to state that <br />the SCC will check the condition of the pond prior to pumping <br />any pit water to the pond. As the pond will not be <br />constructed till 1996 and any pit water would not exist until <br />1997, I allowed this rather loose language on one condition. <br />He agreed to rerun SEDCAD+ design using a base flow <br />representative of what the operator estimates for pit pumpage <br />discharge (2 cfs maximum). A member of your team should <br />probably follow-up on this to ensure it gets done in the near <br />future. If necessary, I can review any information he might <br />provide. <br />2. Tailwater include on trickle tube. <br />My understanding is that the principle spillway pipe is <br />designed now to outlet at ground level where tailwater may <br />exist. If that is the case, I have no concern. <br />3. Riprap filter layer <br />My understanding after review of the design and discussion <br />with the operator is that they will be using a geotextile <br />under the riprap. This should be confirmed in the field and <br />verified via the as-built certification submitted by the <br />operator after pond construction. <br />4. Permanent Drainage <br />Due to the narrow, far reaching extent of the proposed <br />disturbance, very careful attention should be given to the <br />proposed post-mining configuration, particularly with regard <br />to the permanent reconstruction of the post-mining <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.