My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981017 (249)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
General Documents
>
Coal
>
C1981017
>
_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981017 (249)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/2/2020 10:47:01 AM
Creation date
6/20/2012 10:02:53 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981017
IBM Index Class Name
GENERAL DOCUMENTS
Doc Name
Bid Documents (IMP) 1995 Correspondence
Permit Index Doc Type
General Correspondence
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
180
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
in contact. It is used as an erosion control mat for the purpose <br /> of stabilizing hill slopes from erosive processes. This product is <br /> said to function similarly to coconut fiber or other erosion <br /> control blankets utilized on steep or unstable hill slopes; it <br /> holds soil particles in place for a sufficient amount of time to <br /> allow vegetation to become established. Unlike conventional <br /> erosion control blankets, Soil Guard may be applied to a hill slope <br /> without first removing rock and other objects which would cause the <br /> blanket to lose contact with the ground surface, thus rendering it <br /> less effective than desired. <br /> An approximately one quarter acre test plot was selected adjacent <br /> to the hydro seeded and hand seeded terraced test plots. Ammonium <br /> di-phosphate fertilizer was hand broadcast across the slope in an <br /> unmeasured quantity. The Mine Site Seed Mixture was hand broadcast <br /> over the slope. Some of the same mixture was added to the Soil <br /> Guard as it was being mixed in the hydro seeding truck. The Soil <br /> Guard was sprayed across the slope from access roads above and <br /> below the test plot area. It was reported by Revex representatives <br /> that application from above and below is necessary in order to <br /> ensure an even distribution of the product across the slope. It is <br /> assumed that application in areas without road access from below <br /> would have to be accomplished using hand held hoses on the slope. <br /> The application of the Soil Guard was observed to be quite <br /> thorough. Little, if any, bare ground was observable after the <br /> application of the product. The material dried out completely <br /> within a matter of days, and formed a hard cover over the outslope. <br /> This cover appears to be very resistant to wind erosion, however <br /> its ability to sustain surface water runoff will not be known until <br /> the spring. The major draw back with this product is the cost of <br /> application. It was reported by Revex that the cost of the <br /> product, including application, is $3,000 per acre. This does not <br /> include seed and fertilizer costs. Presumably, the cost would rise <br /> if application using hoses was necessary due to a lack of access. <br /> These test plots will be observed during the spring and summer of <br /> 1996. Vegetation experts within the Division will be asked to <br /> evaluate the relative success of each technique. It is hoped that <br /> this will lead to a cost effective method of stabilizing the <br /> outslopes of the mine benches and possibly at some areas of the <br /> road network as well. It is my projection that the most cost <br /> effective and successful technique will be hand seeding and <br /> mulching of the artificial benches constructed of rebar (roof <br /> bolts) and logs. <br /> A large gully was observed adjacent to the revegetation test plot <br /> areas. In a test designed to control erosion, two sediment traps <br /> were constructed in the gully. Both traps were constructed by <br /> driving six foot long roof bolts about four feet into the outslope <br /> on both sides of the gully. A third roof bolt was placed <br /> horizontally (perpendicular to the gully) , resting against the <br /> 16 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.