My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE103075
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
100000
>
PERMFILE103075
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 9:56:44 PM
Creation date
11/24/2007 9:37:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1986015
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
6/21/1988
Doc Name
PUEBLO EAST PIT DRAINAGE INVESTIGATION
From
WRC ENGINEERING INC
To
VALCO INC
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.
/
15
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 />Mr. Mark Klune <br />WRC File: 1664/2 <br />Page 3 <br /> <br />This ditch (see Alt. A on Exhibit 2) bisects the pit area and would place <br />limitations on the portions of the pit that could be mined. At a meeting on <br />May 4, 1988, Mark Klune directed WRC to investigate the possibility of an <br />alternative ditch paralleling the Booth-Orchard Canal along the northeast <br />boundary of the pit. The idea of tying back into the Booth-Orchard Canal was <br />discussed, but dismissed as a possibility because of a negative difference in <br />elevation. <br />On May 6, 1988, WRC along with Mark Klune conducted an additional field <br />survey to determine the feasibility of diverting the flow from the Alt. A <br />ditch to a diversion ditch paralleling but at a lower elevation than the <br />Booth-Orchard Canal and avoiding the property not owned by Valco. We <br />concluded that this ditch could be constructed at a slope of 0.6% + with a <br />minor amount of excavation and using the over-burden to construct a dike <br />parallel to the Booth-Orchard Canal for most of its length. See Alt. B on <br />Exhibit 2. Proposed ditch cross sections are shown on Exhibits 3-A and 3-B. <br />Conclusions and Recommendations <br />1. The Booth-Orchard Canal is not a feasible alternative for diverting <br />the flaw from the arroyo for the following reasons: <br />a) existing condition <br />b) flat slope limiting capacity <br />c) portion not owned by Val co <br />2. The straightened portion of the arroyo (Alt. A) can be used with a <br />minimum of rehabilitation to carry the 10-year peak flow through the <br />site. However this will limit the area of the pit that can be <br />mined. <br />3. When the mining approaches the arroyo (Alt. A) a diversion ditch <br />(Alt. B) can be constructed to divert the flows from Alt. A ditch <br />along the northeastern part of the pit to the Arkansas River. <br />WRC recommends that: <br />1. The existing straightened arroyo (Alt. A) be upgraded to carry the <br />peak flow from the 10-year storm (600 cfs.) and be used while mining <br />the west portion of the pit. <br />2. When mining approaches the arroyo, the diversion ditch (Alt. B) be <br />constructed to divert the 10-year flow to the east and into the <br />rive r. <br />3. Upon completion of the mining in the area of the arroyo, the <br />drainage be allowed to flow into the lake created by the mining <br />operations, and the diversion ditch area within the pit area be <br />mined if desired. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.