My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2013-08-08_HYDROLOGY - M1977306
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Hydrology
>
Minerals
>
M1977306
>
2013-08-08_HYDROLOGY - M1977306
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 5:23:35 PM
Creation date
8/12/2013 3:47:20 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977306
IBM Index Class Name
HYDROLOGY
Doc Date
8/8/2013
Doc Name
RESPONSE TO GENERAL STORMWATER COMMENTS
From
OPERATOR
To
DRMS
Email Name
DMC
TC1
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.
/
76
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
Response to DRMS General Stormwater Comments — Cotter JD -9 Mine Drainage Design Plan <br />c. Please review Attachment A for additional channel segments identified by the <br />DBMS that are not included in the analyses provided, and submit analyses for <br />these segments. <br />The additional channel segments identified in the review "Attachment A" <br />have been added for analysis. Results of these analyses are included on the <br />worksheets included in Attachment 3 of this response. <br />d. Please note that channels expecting erosive channel velocities will need to be <br />armored with appropriately sized revetment or constructed in non - erodible <br />material, such as bedrock. <br />All engineered channels with velocities exceeding 5 feet per second (fps) are shown <br />to be armored with appropriately sized material. Design velocities can be seen on <br />the worksheets in Attachment 3. Riprap was sized using the Federal Highway <br />Administration HEC -11 methodology (Chapter4: Design Guidelines for Rock <br />Riprap). This analysis and copies of the relevant portions of the FHA guidelines <br />are included in Attachment 4. <br />4. Page ESWMP -7, section 7.4 paragraph and Retention Pond Drainage Design Plan <br />(Sheet 4 of 7). The 100 year, 24 -hour runoff volume criteria used for sizing storage in the <br />pond is acceptable. However, a spillway is necessary to pass runofffrom successive <br />storms as there is no way presented in the Retention Pond design plan to drain the pond <br />via gravity. As such, the emergency spillway for the pond needs to be designed to convey <br />100 year peak flow, assuming the ponds are full (to the spillway invert elevation) at the <br />onset of the design storm. Please provide analyses and designs to demonstrate the <br />spillway has the capacity to pass the peak flow resulting from the 100 year, 24 -hour <br />design storm. (NOTE - The DRMS checked with the Colorado Division of Water <br />Resources (DOWR) Distinct 63 -water commissioner (Tom Brigham) regarding the status <br />of the Dolores River appropriations. DWR's requirement to release retained stormwater <br />within 72 hours is seasonal and is subject to changed) The DRMS suggests the Operator <br />consider a low level outlet be, designed into the pond in case a call is put. on the Dolores <br />River, the Operator can comply with the DOWR requirements. <br />We have revised the retention. pond details to incorporate a spillway capable of passing the <br />100 -year runoff. The bottom of the spillway channel (and bottom of rock) has been set at <br />the elevation of the 10 -year storm storage with rock armoring the outlet channel bottoms <br />and sides (rock is on top of the channel bottom, above the 10 -year elevation). Analysis for a <br />broad - crested weir of the dimensions specified was used to verify the capacity. The weir is <br />capable of passing more than the projected 100 -year event with the pond providing <br />retention of the 10 -year volume. Analysis was completed using the 24 -hour rainfalls <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.