My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE133781
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
400000
>
PERMFILE133781
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:34:28 PM
Creation date
11/26/2007 1:35:12 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1984067
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/11/2001
Section_Exhibit Name
EXHIBIT 16 RESPONSE TO ADEQUACY CONCERNS 6-28-85
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.
/
53
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
Ditch No. 1 has been designed to provide a flow capacity equal to <br />• the capacity of the unmodified stream channel immediately upstream <br />of the structure. The portion of the channel downstream from Ditch <br />No. 1 was previously modified during construction of Highway 110. <br />Following mining activities, Ditch No. 1 will be revegetated in <br />accordance with the vegetation plan described in the Mining and <br />Reclamation Plan. Where possible, temporary revegetation will be <br />established during mining to minimize contributions of suspended <br />solids and to enhance overall stability of the structure. As shown <br />on the Post-Mining Topography Map (Map 14), Ditch No. 1 will be <br />established as a permanent diversion to route Coal Gulch surface <br />drainage through the area of the Coal Gulch Mine. The <br />configuration of the permanent drainage provides a stream gradient <br />and alignment which is geomorphically stable for the area. No <br />artificial structural controls will be utilized in the permanent <br />reconstruction channel. As a result, Ditch No. 1 will re-establish <br />• the drainage channel of Coal Gulch through the area previously <br />disturbed by mining operations. <br />4. The following comments apply to Ditch No. 2: <br />a. Comments 3 a and be above also cooly to Ditch No. 2. <br />Response: Similar design methods have been utilized far Ditch No. <br />2 as discussed in 3 a and 3 b of these responses. <br />b. Will the entire length of the channel be placed in bedrock, if <br />not, what measures will be utilized to stabilize the channel <br />and protect it from erosion. If the entire length is bedrock, <br />it appears that the roughness coefficient is incorrect. <br />Response: The entire length of Ditch No. 2 is placed in bedrock. <br />Increase of Manning's n from 0.025 to 0.035 to accommodate the <br />• bedrock channel does not change the channel design given the design <br />freeboard of 1.0 feet. <br />-$- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.