My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL56512
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL56512
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:40:54 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 11:31:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982055
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
3/30/1994
Doc Name
02-24-94 MEETING AT RATON CREEK MINES ENERGY FUELS MINING CO RATON CREEK MINES PN C-82-055
From
DMG
To
ENERGY FUELS MINING CO
Permit Index Doc Type
PUBLIC CORRESPONDENCE
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.
/
5
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
Mr. Allen Weaver, Mine Engineer -4- March 30, 1994 <br />Energy Fuels Mining Company <br />4. Watershed diversion ditch 1 maintenance and design. <br />Evidence of erosion exists in Section B of Watershed Diversion 1. During our <br />meeting we discussed several options for erosion control of the steep section located <br />above the powerline light use road. Discussed options included: <br />a. Channelize the existing gully from the outlet of ditch section A downslope to the <br />powerline light use road, and install energy dissipating structures, silt traps, and <br />riprap as necessary to control erosion; or <br />b. Extend Section A of Diversion 1 approximately 20 feet further west to outlet to <br />the natural drainage that currently defines section C of Diversion 1 below the <br />powerline light use road. Submit demonstrations that the natural drainage will <br />safely pass runoff from the 100-year, 24-hour precipitation event. <br />Riprap has been dumped on the outslope of the road embankment of the powerline <br />light use road at the location where Watershed Diversion 1 crosses the light use <br />road. This riprap has been dumped in a manner that disrupts the cross section of the <br />channel. Paragraph 4 of page 425 R, revised May 1993, of the permit, describes the <br />triangular channel that was to be lined with riprap (D50 = 6 inches) where <br />Watershed Diversion 1 crossed the powerline light use road. Maintenance is needed <br />at the location where Diversion 1 crosses the light use road and on the outslope of <br />the road embankment to ensure that Diversion 1 safely pass the design storm event. <br />Contradictions exist in the permit concerning Watershed Diversion 1. A data table on <br />page 358Rd lists Drainage Structures, Return Periods, and Precipitation amounts for <br />the 100-year and 10-year events. This table states that Watershed Diversion 1 has <br />three sections. Section A and B are designed for the 100-year, 24-hour precipitation <br />event, but Section C, located down channel from sections A and B, is designed for <br />the 10-year, 24-hour event. The current copy of Map 12, certified by <br />P.G. Corser, P.E., June 24, 1993, supports this data table in that this copy of <br />Map 12 shows three sections of Watershed Diversion 1. On page 425R, however, <br />Watershed Diversion 1 is described as having four sections, with Sections A, B, and <br />C being designed to convey the 100-year, 24-hour precipitation event, and <br />Section D, located down channel of sections A, B, and C, being designed for the 10- <br />year, 24-hour event. The labeling of Watershed Diversion 1 needs to be consistent <br />to avoid confusion. Please describe whether Watershed Division 1 will have three <br />sections or four sections and revise the corresponding permit section accordingly. <br />Rule 4.09.2(7) states that sediment control structures designed to divert runoff from <br />entering onto the coal refuse pile must be designed to safely pass runoff from the <br />100-year, 24-hour precipitation event. Watershed Diversion 1 Sections A, B, and C <br />have been designed in accordance with Rule 4.09.2(7), but Section D, which <br />conveys flow from Sections A, B, and C around the sediment pond before <br />discharging to the natural stream channel, has only been designed to pass runoff <br />from the 10-year, 24-hour event. The Division believes that such designs are <br />contradictory to prudent engineering practices. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.