My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2011-04-21_REVISION - C1981019
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1981019
>
2011-04-21_REVISION - C1981019
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:32:46 PM
Creation date
4/26/2011 1:22:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981019
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
4/21/2011
Doc Name
First Adequacy Response Memo
From
Rob Zuber & Kent Gorham
To
Janet Binns
Type & Sequence
PR3
Email Name
JHB
KAG
RDZ
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.
/
6
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
Colowyo PR3 adequacy response memo 3 April 21, 2011 <br />use clean water diversions above topsoil stockpiles? <br />2. The response is inadequate. In addition to topsoil stockpiles, other small disturbed <br />areas in the mine plan do not report to sediment ponds. Please provide a <br />demonstration that the applicable effluent limits can be met using alternative sediment <br />control methods. <br />Rule 4.05.3 Diversions and Conveyances of Less than One Square Mile <br />1. Please explain the rational for construction of Porcupine Draw. Presence of a channel <br />in pre-mining topography is difficult to identify, and the channel appears to run along <br />the side of a hill. <br />2. Please explain the rational for construction of stations 0+00 to 20+00 of Elk Draw in <br />the southeast corner of Section 26. Presence of a channel in pre-mining topography is <br />difficult to identify, and the channel appears to run along the side of a hill. Connection <br />of the upper portion of Elk Draw with Bear Draw appears more appropriate. <br />3. Please explain the rational for construction of stations 0+00 to 32+00 of Bear Draw as <br />a permanent ditch. Making this reach temporary appears more appropriate. <br />4. The drainage areas for Tributary 3 and Upper Badger Draw (upper end above Deer <br />Draw, Section 30+00) appear to be incomplete on Map 41 B. Please review and <br />produce a revised Map 41 B with complete drainage areas. <br />5. A topographic drainage (no name) between Lower Badger and Little Collom is <br />apparent in the southwest quarter of Section 25. Concentrated flows will likely result, <br />and erosion problems could develop. Please review and revise as necessary. <br />Rule 4.05.4 Stream Channel Diversions/Relocations <br />More information is required for channel LCW, which is proposed as a vegetated <br />channel in the SEDCAD run. How will vegetation be established? What other means <br />will be used to prevent erosion per Rule 4.05.4(2)(a)? Also, see Rule 4.05.7 below. <br />Rule 4.05.5 Sediment Control Measures <br />The application is adequate with regard to this Rule. <br />Rule 4.05.6 Sedimentation Ponds <br />The response appears to be adequate, but the designs are related to issues discussed <br />below. <br />2. The response is adequate as "near source" ponds are planned to treat runoff from the <br />area near the Collom Lite Pit. However, as noted in Rule 2.05.6(3)(a), question
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.