My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2008-12-16_REVISION - C1981022 (3)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1981022
>
2008-12-16_REVISION - C1981022 (3)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:39:00 PM
Creation date
12/19/2008 1:29:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981022
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
12/16/2008
Doc Name
2nd Adequacy Review
From
DRMS
To
Oxbow Mining, LLC
Type & Sequence
TR60
Email Name
MLT
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.
/
9
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
Elk Creek Mine TR-60 <br />2nd Adequacy Review <br />16 Dec 2008 <br />Page 3 of 9 <br />The Division has no further concerns. The check dams were eliminated from the <br />drainage plan proposed in the November 26, 2008 submittal. <br />6. There are no Sedcad designs for the check dams that show the construction <br />requirements for the check dams. Since.the check dams are part of a designed <br />sediment control structure, please revise the Sedcad designs to show their <br />construction requirements. <br />The Division has no further concerns. The check dams were taken out of the <br />proposed drainage plan in the November 26, 2008 submittal. <br />7. The Sedcad designs for the small area exemptions at the north area, topsoil <br />storage area and the lay down area do not include sediment analyses to show that <br />the 0.5 m111 settable solids limit can be achieved. Please revise the Sedcad designs <br />accordingly. <br />In the submittal dated November 26, 2008, Oxbow presented Sedcad designs to <br />show that silt fence or straw bales can be used to meet the settable solids limit. <br />However, the Division has several questions and comments concerning the <br />Sedcad designs. <br />A. Oxbow used the pond routine in Sedcad to model the straw bale sediment <br />trap, with user-input discharge values based on the permissivity of straw <br />bales. The submittal cover letter states that a permissivity value of 5.6 <br />gpm/ft2 was used for straw bales. The Division attempted to calculate the <br />user-input discharge values for the topsoil SAE using this permissivity rate <br />but was not successful. The Division's back calculation appeared to show <br />that a permissivity rate of about 10 gpm/ftz was used for straw bales. If <br />Oxbow wishes to continue to use the pond routine for straw bale sediment <br />control modeling, please explain the methodology used in calculating the <br />user-input discharge values for the straw bales and show an example <br />calculation that was used to obtain the discharge rate used in the Sedcad <br />design for straw bales. Otherwise, please see comment number 7D below. <br />B. Although user-input values for the discharge rates were used in the Sedcad <br />pond routine for straw bales, it does not appear that any filtering of <br />sediment by the straw bales was modeled in the Sedcad designs. For <br />example, in the Sedcad design for straw bales for the topsoil SAE, the <br />particle size distribution at structure #1 shows that 100 % of the sediment <br />for all particle sizes except the smallest particle size is passing out of the <br />structure. In addition, the trap efficiency that is stated in the pond results <br />for the same Sedcad design is zero. If Oxbow wishes to continue to use the
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.