My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE115749
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
200000
>
PERMFILE115749
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:11:43 PM
Creation date
11/25/2007 1:17:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981071
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/11/2001
Section_Exhibit Name
PR2 APPENDIX I CHANNEL DESIGN
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.
/
28
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
• INTRODUCTION <br />In a notice of violation (NOV) dated August 8, 1986 and subsequently <br />modified on August 15, 1986, the Colorado Yampa Coal Company (CYCC) was <br />cited for violations at isolated locations where drainageway or channel <br />gradients have been oversteepened relative to approved topography. To <br />stabilize the oversteepened channel gradients cited in the NOV, Water <br />Engineering and Technology, Inc. has developed proposed channel <br />stabilization measures (Sheets 1 through 7). Sheet 2 of the enclosed <br />set of drawings delineates the areas considered. Profiles and typical <br />section details are shown on Sheets 3 through 7. The following sections <br />describe some of the important factors considered in developing these <br />channel improvement plans. <br />HYDROLOGY <br />Hydrology for the channel analysis was calculated using criteria in <br />the 1984 SCS Publication, Peak Flows in Colorado. Runoff rates were <br />evaluated assuming an antecedent soil moisture condition classified as <br />AMC II with a curve number of 82. For design purposes, these conditions <br />provide a conservative estimate of flowrates. Sheet 2 indicates the <br />10-year, 24-hour peak flowrates at each of the design points. Hydrologic <br />information is also summarized in Table 1. <br />CHANNEL IMPROVEMENTS <br />Using information provided by CYCC (1985 topographic mapping, scale <br />1 inch = 200 feet, 5 ft. contour interval), proposed channel profiles <br />shown in Sheets 3 through 7 were established. Locations of channels <br />cited in the NOV were determined using survey coordinate information <br />which was also furnished by CYCC. The extent of protection and brief <br />discussions of significant features at each specific area follow: <br />Area 51E <br />The Area S1E channel drains an area of 255 acres. Sheet 3 shows the <br />proposed profile and typical details for riprap channel improvements. <br />Riprap protection over a length of 455 feet at a slope of 15.1 percent <br />is proposed for stabilization of this location. <br />Area 51 <br />The relatively large drainage area (495 acres) contributing to this <br />location (See Sheet 2) necessitates construction of a 20 foot wide <br />channel with riprap lining. A slope of 15.1 percent with riprap <br />protection extending over a length of 445 feet is shown on Sheet 3. It <br />will be important to ensure that the two drainageways which have their <br />confluence upstream of the proposed riprap channel are configured so <br />that a smooth transition of flow into the riprap channel is achieved. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.