My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV105597
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV105597
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 1:17:25 AM
Creation date
11/22/2007 1:27:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981019
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
2/20/1992
Doc Name
COLOWYO COAL MINE PN C-81-019 MR-19 HYDROLOGIC REVIEW
From
MLRD
To
STEVE WATHEM
Type & Sequence
MR19
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.
Page 1 of 1
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
iii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii <br />999 <br />MINED LAND RECLAMATION DIVISION <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />7373 Sherman St., Room 2t5 <br />Denver, GO 80203 <br />303 8663567 <br />Fax: 303 832-8706 <br />OF COO <br />R~^ ~: <br />f~ ~ ,: <br />v> <br />•• ~~ <br />~ rg76 <br />Roy Ramer. <br />Governor <br />Fretl R. Banta. <br />Divrsion D~ractor <br />DATE: February 20, 1992 <br />T0: Steve Wathen <br />FROM: Joe Dudash D <br />RE: Colowyo Coal M~ne, Permit No. C-81-019, MR-19, Hydrologic Review <br />This review examined the question of erosive velocities at Colowyo, in <br />response to your telephone conversation with Juan Garcia on February 18, <br />1992. Juan questioned the need for riprap downstream of the MR-19 culverts at <br />the Gossard Loadout, even though the velocity was calcuiated to be <br />4.94 ft/sec. The Division would normally require riprap in a loam soil if the <br />velocity was above 3.5 ft./sec. <br />In Exhibit 7, part 6, of Volume 3, I found several examples of the <br />not requiring riprap in <br />velocities were between <br />in that area came from <br />to Map 6, soils for the <br />examples similar to the <br />riprap. <br />portions of the Streeter Fill Ditches even <br />4 and 5 ft./sec. According to Carl Mount, <br />the area immediately south of Streeter Fill <br />south area, these topsoils were also loam. <br />Gossard Loadout situation and where we did <br />Division <br />though the <br />the topsoil <br />According <br />These are <br />not require <br />Cathy Begej suggested that if those no-riprapped portions of the Streeter <br />Gulch Ditch are showing any downcutting, this would be evidence that what was <br />allowed before may not be working for the type of rainfall that has occurred. <br />Of course the opposite can also be true. I can only suggest that you find <br />someone who has seen those ditches and can remember any signs of erosion. Or <br />else see it for yourself. <br />As to the assertion in Colowyo's permit revision that the soil can withstand <br />water velocities up to 6.0 ft./sec without erosion, I believe they have to <br />submit proof. Since there is a drought going on in that area, I do not <br />believe recent in-the-field experience qualifies as evidence. <br />/ern <br />cc: Larry Routten <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />1513E <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.