Laserfiche WebLink
Mr, Rich Atkinson - 6 - May 12, 1987 <br />velocities. Another alternative would be to present a plan for <br />establishment of channel vegetation to reduce flow velocity and <br />protect the channel, The Division would be pleased to discuss this <br />methodology with Colowyo, <br />Also, the plan for channel stabilization presented in Exhibit 7 <br />requires differing d50 of the riprap bed for various velocities. <br />However, it is not clear whether differing riprap sizes will be~-~ <br />used, or if the maximum d50 of 22 inches will be used for all <br />channel segments. Colowyo should clarify this, and if appropriate <br />provide information on the d50 size requirement for each channel <br />segment. <br />Lastly, velocity calculations for the reconstructed portions of <br />Taylor Creek must he provided, Channel protection must also be <br />provided if the velocity calculations indicate protection is <br />necessary, <br />3. Examination of the sediment control plan, including Maps 12 and 19, <br />indicate that runoff from disturbed areas in the southern portion of <br />Section 10 would not be routed through a sediment pond. It appears <br />that this flow would be discharged through Prospect Gulch, Colowyo <br />should clarify this situation and modify the plan if necessary to <br />insure that all disturbed areas are routed to a sediment pond. <br />4. The narratives on pages 4,05-8, 9, and 16 indicate that some or all <br />sediment ponds may be retained as permanent impoundments. If <br />permanent ponds are being proposed at this time, information must be <br />submitted for each proposed pond to demonstrate that the <br />requirements of Rule 4.05-9 can be met. If this proposal is for <br />future consideration only, the narratives should be revised to <br />clarify Colowyo's intentions. <br />5. On page 4.06-1, the last sentence references Table 2.05-1, However, <br />the next sentence references "this map." Colowyo should rewrite <br />this sentence to clarify which map is being referenced. <br />6, The discussion of overburden ripping in section 4.06.4 should be <br />expanded to include the reason the practice is not being performed, <br />and the expected effect on root penetration into the spoil, <br />7, On page 4.11-2 it is stated that used oil is used for dust <br />suppression at the loadout. Colowyo should describe whether this is <br />in addition to the oil sprayed on the stoker coal, and if so what <br />measures have been taken to minimize soil and water contamination <br />resulting from this practice. <br />8. The rill and gully stabilization plan in section 4.14.6 lacks <br />sufficient specificity to provide the State with alternatives to <br />enforcement action when gully erosion is present on site. The <br />Division's letter of January 21, 1987 sets forth the specific <br />components which must be included in the plan for such alternatives <br />to be possible, Colowyo is not required to revise this plan, but <br />should be aware that the present plan provides no protection against <br />possible enforcement actions. <br />