My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV12801
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV12801
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 1:23:46 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 10:36:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
4/15/1986
Doc Name
MINING PERMIT COAL DECISION FORM PERMIT REVISION
Type & Sequence
PR3
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.
/
29
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
SEDIMENT CONTROL RESPONSES CONTD. <br />• 6) Tables 6.1 and 6.5 show the flows, velocities and depths of the ditches for the <br />100-year event. It should be noted that as shown on this table riprap is not <br />necessary for the ditches until Phase V. At this point, velocities become <br />excessive (over 6 feet per second) and the ditch bottom must be protected. Also, <br />at this point, the ditches become permanent structures. The peak discharge for <br />the ditches for each phase for the various ditches were calculated to obtain the <br />true peak discharge which the individual ditch will carry. <br />7) The riprap size required for the sediment control and clear water ditches are <br />shown on Tables 6.1 and 6.5. The size shown on these tables is the 50% gradation. <br />Based upon recommended gradation requirements from the U.S. Bureau of <br />Reclamation, the maximum size of the riprap will be three times the 50% size. <br />Available sandstone in the area will be utilized for the riprap. <br />TOPSOIL -RULE 4.06 <br />1) Visual monitoring of the topsoil pile and subsoil pile will be peformed on a <br />monthly basis to assure that any possible slumping will be repaired as soon as <br />possible. It should be noted, however, that West Elk Coal Company personnel <br />will observe the stockpiles during the course of regular operations on an almost <br />daily basis and if any problems are noted, corrective action will be taken. <br />2) West Elk Coal Company does not feel, for several reasons, that the subsoil <br />stockpile warrants the use of a survey monumentation monitoring system. We <br />• request that CMLRD review our reasoning for not installing the survey <br />monitoring system. The major points are as follows: <br />1) The subsoil pile is relatively small, at maximum capacity it will contian <br />approximately 45,000 cubic yards. <br />2) A state of the art stability analysis was performed for the subsoil stockpile <br />at maximum capacity and in the planned configuration. The safety factor <br />was calculated to be 1.7 which is greater than the required 1.5. <br />3) The subsoil stockpile is located near Sylvester Gulch, however, the <br />relocated road is between the stockpile and the gulch. The most likely <br />problem, if any were to occur, would be small surficial slumps in response <br />to snowmelt and spring runoff. These would be kept from entering <br />Sylvester Gulch by the road. <br />4) If a major movement of the pile were to occur, it could be identified in a <br />short period of time since it would affect the Sylvester Gulch Road, which <br />is used on a daily basis to inspect the main fan. <br />• <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.