Laserfiche WebLink
~' <br />Brian Munson -2- November 17, 1981 <br />In an attempt to verify those estimates, regression equations obtained from <br />Technical Manual 1 (TMI) Manual For Estimating Flood Characteristics of <br />Natural Flow Streams in Colorado, 1976, which was referenced in the application, <br />were used. Using the regression equation for the Mountain Region resulted in <br />values significantly less than those given in the application. Using the <br />regression equation for the Northern Plateau Region resulted in values <br />significantly larger than those given in the application. <br />Rockcastle Company should specify how each of the peak flow estimates were <br />obtained, give the input parameters and equations used. <br />I am willing to allow all of the culvert installations as proposed to be used <br />with the stipulation that, should any damage occur to or because of any <br />culvert installation, this Division retains the right to impose specific <br />culvert sizes to be used to replace any improperly sized culvert. <br />Drainage Ditches: <br />Most of the drainage ditches have velocities under conditions of the 10-year, <br />24-hour storm event which are erosive. This concern is mitigated somewhat <br />by the fact that Rockcastle states the ditches frequently are in bedrock <br />sandstone. A solution to the concern of channel erosion is to line all <br />sections of ditches which have erosive velocities in erodible material with <br />rock riprap. Many channel sections have slopes far in excess of the listed <br />slopes on page III-18 and thereby also have far greater velocities. The <br />ditch section near the NE corner of Pit 4 has a slope of over 15% and has an <br />estimated velocity of about 9 fps. <br />Rockcastle Company should commit to Lining all ditch sections where the <br />velocities would be erosive in the channel type given. Of particular concern <br />are curves and ditches carrying flow from undisturbed areas. <br />From careful examination of the Mining Plan Map, it appears that several <br />sections of the proposed ditches can be eliminated without significantly <br />reducing erosion control. Much of the upland sections of the ditches at Pit 4, <br />Pit 2 and Pit 3 could be eliminated. This Division does not wish to encourage <br />the construction of unnecessary structures. In areas these ditches serve, <br />a satisfactory erosion control system could be implemented with the use of <br />silt fences, straw bales, or other temporary erosion control devices. Such <br />exemptions from sediment pond requirements are allowed by Section 9.05.2(3) <br />of the Regulations, The Rockcastle Company should consider such measures, as <br />it may reduce construction and maintenance costs. <br />Ponds <br />There are three items of concern in regard to sediment pond designs. They are <br />sediment storage volumes, dewatering devices, and the need for the acquisition <br />of water storage rights. <br />