My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV01524
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV01524
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 12:59:07 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 8:53:14 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981071
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
7/11/1986
Doc Name
Preliminary Adequacy Letter -with written notes
From
MLRD
To
Colordao Yampa Coal Company
Type & Sequence
PR1
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.
/
16
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
<br /> <br />-6- <br />(Z~ Qro1w~'~Y ~- <br />6. What assumptions, charts, and/or calculations were used in determining <br />the slope length and gradient factor (LS), the cover and crop <br />management factor (C) and the erosion control practice factor (P) for <br />the USLE equation in the designs of both Pond A and the U-Ponds? <br />7. ~/ What assumptions or standards were used to predict a sediment delivery <br />ratio of 0.32 for the U-Ponds and 0.22 for A Pond? Are there a <br />sufficient number of flat areas along these slopes to support this <br />amount of deposition? The Division typically uses a sediment delivery <br />ratio of 0.85 - 0.90, assuming that there will be little deposition <br />during large (10 year) storm events. A high delivery ratio is <br />justified since no gully erosion calculations are considered in the <br />design. <br />8. / Please document the source of information and the assumptions utilized <br />for the coefficients used in the discharge calculation for the primary <br />outlet works discharge sections (i. e., pipe flow equation). <br />9. y Please submit a schedule for construction of the U-Ponds, their <br />associated drainage structures and the drainage system for the east <br />panel, per Rule 4.05.6(1)(a). Itemize in detail the construction <br />sequence, including: topsoil removal for embankment; embankment <br />construction; topsoil removed for pond; topsoil removal for ditches and <br />accompanying buffer zones; clean and dirty water ditch construction; <br />and, subsequent topsoil removal for operations area. <br />10. / The Division requires a commitment to the submittal of a quarterly pond <br />inspection report for all sedimentation ponds per Rule 4.05.6(1)(c). <br />~~11. ~ The Division is concerned about the durability of the material used in <br />ra channels. Please specif the source of the material and its <br />-~~` ~'~ lithif_i,ctt~on_an~.f~actur~_Qatterns. Additionally, please identify <br />Qd7`?~?~.`~~;d' • t e locations of Segment A an dgTn~n't B on Map No. 16. <br />k ~r~" <br />~~~ e ~~ ,. <br />,~a`o'rho'r Stream Buffer Zones - Ruld 4.05.18 't~ ,r'n` r~ <i~.~•~ <br />\~ <br />~~`1 <br />The Division rti~~ J <br />requires documentation within the <br />permit indicating <br /> adherence to all sections of Rule 4.05.18 and applicable sections of <br />1`n~`' <br />V~,.ti 'r 1 <br />~~Ge~~ye' <br />,( N` 4.02. Please <br />along both Fo <br />a narrative. submit a map showing appropriate <br />idel Creek and the South Fork of stream buffer zones <br />Foidel Creek, as well as <br />1 <br />~~~ ~.:5 <br />~Le~ ~~P~1 <br />S ~b <br />is Conseouences - Rule 2.05.6(3)(b)(iv <br />Page 2.05-108 PHC section states that Wolf Creek overburden samples <br />were not tested. This testing must be performed prior to permit <br />issuance and the narrative should be changed accordingly. <br />.,,. . <br />C > -- =• <br />,~ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.