My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV106936
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV106936
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 1:21:34 AM
Creation date
11/22/2007 1:38:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982057
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
5/31/2000
Doc Name
Review Memo
From
DMG
To
SANDY BROWN
Type & Sequence
TR36
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
<br /> <br />STATE iii iiiiiiiiiiiii iii <br />999 <br />OF COLORADO <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Department o(Natural Resources <br />1313 Sherman St., Room ? 15 <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 D I v 15 1 0 N O F <br />Phone: (303) 866-3567 MINERAL S <br />FAx: (303)832-8106 & <br /> GEOLOGY <br /> <br />Interoffice MEMORANDUM RECLAMATION <br />MINING•SAFETY <br /> <br />to: Sandy Brown Bill Owens <br />Governor <br />from: Byron G. Walker~~""`-' Greg E. Watcher <br /> <br />subject: TR-37 Review C-82-057, Seneca II-W EaecNrve Duraor <br /> <br />date: May 31, 2000 Michael B. Long <br />Dwision Director <br />references: Your a-mail of May 31, 2000, Seneca II-W, As-bui lt for Haul Road H <br />The scope of this review, in response to your a-mail of May 31, 2000, is a comparison of the <br />information in the as-built report and approved design requirements and Drawing 13-20. I A (As- <br />Built) and Drawing 13-20.1 (Design). <br />The report is complete and well prepared. The report demonstrates that the road was (to the <br />extent possible) constructed incompliance with the approved design. The maximum grade <br />allowed in the design was 10%. The maximum grade of the as-built was 9.99%. Grades differ <br />slightly at compazable locations. Such slight vaziations could be expected in the field. The <br />overall alignment and length of the road as constructed (48+00) is that (close) of the design <br />(48+80.87), and the road was built at the location of the approved design. <br />With regard to the As-Built (Drawing 13-20.1 A itself, 1 suggest the following comments to the <br />applicant. <br />1) Please dimension the cut and fill slopes otcrnss-section B-B'. <br />2) Please increase the range of channel slope (%) in the Roadside Ditch Schedule to read 1 <br />-10% in lieu of 1- 8 (9.99% reported in the vicinity of 15+00 to 16+00), and check that <br />gravel is sufTicient at 9.99% to resist erosion at a flow of 2.9 cfs. <br />I suggest the As-built be added to the Permit Application Package, and not "replace" the design, <br />as stated on page 2 of the report. Such demonstrates that the road was built as approved. <br />Please call me if you have any questions. <br />Cc: Dan Hernandez <br />File: Support, C-82-057, TR-36 <br />C:\ W PDOCS\Support\TR36rvwmemo.057.doc <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.