Laserfiche WebLink
C- 1981 -008 TR -60 <br />Preliminary Adequacy Review <br />15- Aug -2011 <br />Page 3 of 4 <br />Please revise the index of Maps for Section 2.05.3(3) to include each of the items listed above. <br />2.05.3(3) Text <br />a) Page 2.05.3(3) -2, last paragraph the rule referenced is incorrect — please change to <br />4.05.2(7) <br />b) Page 2.05.3(3) -7, second paragraph — please replace this paragraph with the following <br />sentence: "Updates and modifications to the mine pit dewatering plan are described in <br />Section 2.05.3(3), subsection 6." <br />c) On page 2.05.3(3) -12, the first sentence should read, "...WFC will use Ponds 008 through <br />015 ", rather than 014; <br />d) In the table on page 2.05.3(3) -12, please revise to show that Pond 007 is shown on Maps <br />2.05.3(3) -2 -1 and -2 -2, and that Pond 008 is shown on Maps 2.05.3(3) -4 -1 and -4 -2; <br />e) In the last paragraph on page 2.05.3(3) -12, the second sentence should read, "Pond 011 <br />and Pond 013 will have..." <br />f) Page 2.05.3(3) -14, fifth paragraph — please replace the last two sentences with the <br />following: "Mine pit dewatering was transferred from Pond 011 to Pond 013 in June 2011. <br />These changes are reflected in the amended NPDES permit. <br />g) On page 2.05.3(3) -19, last paragraph, please add that Pond 012 was excavated in Spring <br />2005, and revise the third sentence to state that Ponds 011 and 013 were constructed in late <br />2008. Please add that Pond 014 was constructed in Spring 2004, and reclaimed in Fall <br />2009. <br />4. Attachment 2.05.3(3) -1 Collection Ditches and Culverts <br />a) The As -Built Drainage Area for Ditch C27, which flows to Pond 015, is given as 6.163 <br />acres, which is less than half the 12.6 acres used in the design. Please provide an <br />explanation of the reduction in area. <br />b) The runoff curve number, CN, for Ditch C27 has been reduced from 79 to 76. Please <br />provide a rationale for the curve number selected, including the assumed Hydrologic Soil <br />Group and any other factors considered. <br />c) For Ditch C27 channel design, the as -built Bed Slope is given as 2.04 %, while the Design <br />slope was given as 6.50 %. During an earlier field inspection of the site, prior to <br />construction, Ross Gubka indicated that the ditch gradient would be approximately 0.5 %. <br />Please verify that the value used is consistent with the ditch as constructed. <br />d) The Channel Lining is now described as "Sandy loam noncolloidal ". During a site <br />inspection, the channel was observed to be lined with materials of varying characteristics, <br />including fractured rock. Please verify that accurate materials and values have been <br />considered and selected for incorporation into the analysis. <br />e) For Ditch D 1 W, which diverts "clean" water from the as- yet - unmined western area of the <br />permit, the Drainage area has been reduced — from 12.6050 acres to 6.7800 acres. The text <br />explains that this is due to the contributions of several different sub - watersheds. (No <br />response is needed.) <br />Attachment 2.05.3(3) -18 - NPDES Permit <br />With TR -60, amended Discharge Permit No. CO- 0000213 has been provided for inclusion in <br />the permit as Attachment 2.05.3(3) -18. The permit, issued by the Colorado Department of <br />