Laserfiche WebLink
I <br />Western Sugar Reclamation Land Development Project <br />Flood Analysis <br />southwest to northeast. Thus berm width through most of life of project will be much rg eater <br />than 100 ft. Also when the ultimate pit is achieved, it will be allowed to fill — and remain full - <br />creating a reservoir and thereby eliminate headcutting. <br />Note that although a berm width of 100 ft is discussed, in actuality the berm width for Tract C at <br />the river breakout location discussed above will be 200 ft. That width adds more conservatism to <br />this analysis. <br />For this scenario, WinDAM B modeling was performed for "Best" parameter input only. This <br />was because the Weakest Parameter Case is ultra conservative. And if there is no headcutting for <br />the Best parameter case, there would also be no headcutting for the Strongest Parameter Case. In <br />addition, the three parameter cases would be confusing on Figure 1 (explained below). <br />Figure 1 illustrates headcutting rate vs. pit fill time. In approximately 10 hours, the headcutting <br />elevation meets that of the pit tailwater elevation and headcutting stops. <br />G g <br />u 6 70 F _ 7oP of f i I fi <br />c <br />U6RO <br />"' � r of ion s`tti�o 5 i9i jt ee�cu � E l!,v.71� oh <br />IM fV l-l;,,Je Ferm <br />L -i <br />y <br />r <br />Ell <br />l fS19 U <br />v S �o !s a0 2s <br />7i�n@ <br />Figure 1. WinDAM B Predicted Headcutting Rate vs. Tract C Fill Time <br />pg. 9 <br />