REV07144 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The Division has no further concerns. BRL submitted a copy of the construction permit in the submittal dated April 4, 2007 for inclusion into Volume I[I of the permit application. Section 2.05.3(4), Ponds. [mooundments. Other Treatment Facilities and Diversions 5. Does the proposed hydrology design plan take into account alf of the irrigation ditches and Fire Mountain Canal undershoots and overshoots that drain into this area? The Division has no further concerns. BRL stated that they will control any irrigation flow so that no flow will enter the gob pile area. The Division has no issue with this plan as long as the irrigation flow does not enter any of the upland diversion ditches that are designed for the gob pile area. If such water does enter the upland diversion ditches, the ditches must be redesigned to account for the additional water inflow. 6. The hydrology designs for sediment ponds J and K include runoff from areas designated as orchard, pasture and irrigated hayland. However, it would appear that BRL will need to remove all orchard land, resulting in the orchard land becoming disturbed land. In addition, there appear to be isolated areas ofpasture and irrigated hayland that probably won't be maintained as such, resulting in those lands reverting back to disturbed land. If you agree, please revise the appropriate hydrology designs for Pond J, Pond K and ditches D-J3, D-JS-1, D-JS-2, D-J9-1, D- J9-2 and possibly D-Jll. The Division has no further concerns. Revised page Exh-8-179 was provided in the April 4, 2007 submittal and revised pages Exh-8-180iv and Exh-B-I 80v were provided in the submittal dated May 8, 2007. No changes to the design for ditch D-J12 were needed. Please explain why there are pasture land and irrigated hayland included in the hydrology design for Ditch-J2 on revised page Exh-8-178. It would appear that the berm surrounding the topsoil stockpile would limit the subdrainage basin to disturbed land on the topsoil stockpile alone. The Division has no further concerns. Ditch designs were revised appropriately. [n the January 3, 2007 submittal, pages Exh 8-178 and Exh 8-180v were revised. In the April 4, 2007 submittal, BRL provided renumbered revised pages Exh-8-180vi through Exh-8-I80xi. Page Exh-8-180v was resubmitted in the May 8, 2007 package. 8. As shown on proposed Map 2Q Map 21-I, Map 21-3 and Figure 1 of Volume XI, there are several drainage ditches that do not intersect smoothly with receiving ditches. If there is signifrcant runoffflowing in these ditches, these abrupt intersections could result in scouring or overtopping of the ditches. Please consider modifying these drainage ditch intersections so that the approach angle of one ditch into another is smoother. The Division has no further concerns. Ditch intersection configurations were modified on Maps 15, 18, 2Q, 21-1, 21-3 and Figure 1 in the January 3, 2003 submittal. 9. Proposed revised page Exh-8-174 contains hydrology data fora 357 acre subwatershed designated as Area H This page is a renumbered page Exh-8-172 from the currently approved