Laserfiche WebLink
Permit Revision 2 <br /> a <br /> Installation of a culvert at F, Sta. 7+50 to 8+00 would route flows to a sheer drop <br /> of very erosive mancos shale, and would thus be very erosive. The reference <br /> may be intended for Road E, but we don't see much benefit there. We would <br /> like to review this matter further at your next inspection. <br /> The catchment dike at the base of the slide area will be installed as required. <br /> We would like to discuss the design with you, as the requirement for a height of <br /> two bales rather than one seems unnecessary. <br /> Additional items and concepts. <br /> 1. Catchment Basins below the gullies. PR-2 proposes installation of catchment basins <br /> above the ditch outlets, in consideration that equipment access to areas off the road <br /> is all but impossible, making it difficult to install or maintain the structures. We think <br /> the proposal is the most practical alternative. <br /> 2. Check dams are proposed in gullies to prevent additional downcutting. <br /> 3. We have not proposed directing road flows to sediment ponds. After review of the <br /> situation along Road B, relating to Pond 016, we are concerned that problems of <br /> flow build-up and velocity -in the ditch would eat into the road cut embankment <br /> (something of a problem in that area, in any case). PR-2 proposes installatio of an <br /> additional culvert further up the road segment to deal with that situation. <br /> 4. PR-2 definitely embraces the concept of catchment basins along inslope ditches <br /> along road system, and commits to implementation of this concept as site conditions <br /> allow.- <br /> Yours truly, <br /> Ou WNk., <br /> Diane Delaney <br /> Mid-Continent Resources <br />