Laserfiche WebLink
2. Both the initial sad modified designs contemplated a terraced <br />disposal site. `~ d u on ' <br />Colorado, _tertacea_tend_ to concentrate ru_aoff, resulting in <br />increased erosion, downcuttin_g of channels and associa~""f.e3`-~ <br />maintenance work. _ <br />3. The modified embanl~eat design submitted is 1983 contemplated ~'~ <br />intermediate embanl®eat slopes between terraces at S~ori- <br />zontal to 1 verb 1. Slopes of this magnitude present <br />`several problems with respect to refuse disposal, drainage <br />control sad reclamation. First, it is nearly impossible to <br />operate any type of equipment on such steep elopes, making it <br />very difficult to conduct refuse placement, compaction and <br />final grading. Secondly, slopes of thin magnitude are <br />susceptible to significant erosion, and because the elopes <br />are too steep to accommodate heavy equipment, erosional <br />features which develop are very difficult to repair. Slopes <br />of this magnitude are almost impossible to reclaim because it <br />is difficult to conduct overburden replacement, topsoil <br />replacement and revegetatioa activities. Finally, successful <br />revegetatioa on elopes of thin grade would be very difficult <br />to achieve. <br />4. The drainage control plan contemplated under both previous <br />designs includes collection o! all drainage from the refuse <br />disposal area via the terraces, and concentrating it within <br />small ditches located around the perimeter of the refuse <br />disposal site. Thin method of drainage control tends to <br />concentrate all drainage in very limited areas, which results <br />in significant erosion, dowacutting, required ditch main- <br />teaaaee, and ezcessive sediment delivery to sediment pond sad <br />sediment control structures. <br />1987 Revised Deeiaa <br /> The revised design presented here should alleviate moat, if not <br /> all, environmental problems which have been ezperienced oa the <br />466 <br />Revised 1/88 <br />