REPLENISHMENT RATE OF THE RIVER SYSTEM USING THE REVISED

UNIVERSAL SOIL LOSS EQUATION (RUSLE) METHOD IN COMBINATION

WITH SEDIMENT DELIVERY RATIO MODEL

4.1 Introduction on the Methodology Used in Replenishment Rate Calculations

RUSLE is an index method having factors that represent how climate, soil, topography, and
land use affect rill and interrill soil erosion caused by raindrop impact and surface runoff.
In general, erosion depends on the amount and intensity of rainfall and runoff, protection
provided to the soil by land use against the direct forces of raindrop impact and surface
runoff, susceptibility of soil to erosion as a function of intrinsic soil properties and soil
properties modified by land use, and the topography of the landscape as described by slope
length, steepness, and shape.

These influences are described in RUSLE with the equation:

A = R x K x LS x C x P

where: A = average annual soil loss, R = Rainfall And Runoff Erosivity Factor, K = Soil
Erodibility Factor, L = Slope Length And Steepness Factor (Ls) Or Topographic Factor, C
= Cover Management Factor, and P = Conservation Practices Factor. A soil loss (erosion
rate) in tons per hectare per year is computed by substituting values for each RUSLE factor
to represent conditions at a specific site.

4.2 Description of RUSLE Method/Annual Sediment Yield/Sediment Delivery Ratio

RUSLE METHOD

RUSLE is a "lumped" process-type model based on the analysis of a large mass of

experimental data and equations based on fundamental erosion processes where
experimental data are inadequate to define RUSLE factor values. Rather than explicitly
representing the fundamental processes of detachment, deposition, and transport by rainfall
and runoff, RUSLE represents the effects of these processes on soil loss.

The product RK in RUSLE is an estimate of soil loss from unit plot conditions. These two
factors have dimensions and units, whereas the other RUSLE factor are dimensionless
relative to unit plot conditions. A unit plot is 72.6 ft long on a 9 percent steepness, is
maintained in continuous fallow, is tilled up and down hill according to a particular
sequence of operations much like those used in clean-tilled row crops, and is cultivated
periodically to break the crust that forms from rainfall and to control weeds. The soil
surface is left relatively smooth and free of ridges after the last tillage operation in the
sequence.

R factor: The R factor represents the erosivity of the climate at a particular location. An
average annual value of R is determined from historical weather records and is the average
annual sum of the erosivity of individual storms. The erosivity of an individual storm is
computed as the product of the storm's total energy, which is closely related to storm
amount, and the storms's maximum 30 minute intensity. Erosivity range from less than 8
(US customary units) in the western US to about 700 for New Orleans,. All other factors
being the same, soil loss is 100 times greater at New Orleans, Louisiana than at Las Vegas,
Nevada.

Maps of R values have been computed from historical weather records and have been
plotted onto maps and placed in databases used by RUSLE.

K factor: The K factor is an empirical measure of soil erodibility as affected by intrinsic

soil properties. Erosion measurements based on unit plot conditions are used to
experimentally determine values for K.

The factor K is a measure of soil erodibility under this standard condition. Land use, such
as incorporation of organic material into the soil, affects soil erodibility, but such effects
are considered in the C factor. The K factor is influenced by the detachability of the soil,
infiltration and runoff, and the transportability of the sediment eroded from the soil.

The main soil properties affecting K are soil texture, including the amount of fine sand in
addition to the usual sand, silt, and clay percentage used to describe soil texture, organic
matter, structure, and permeability of the soil profile. In general terms, clay soils have a low
K value because theses soils are resistant to detachment. Sandy soils have low K values
because these soils have high infiltration rates and reduced runoff, and sediment eroded
from these soils is not easily transported. Silt loam soils have moderate to high K values
because soil particles are moderate to easily detached, infiltration is moderate to low
producing moderate to high runoff, and the sediment is moderate to easily transported. Silt
soils have the highest K values because these soils readily crust producing high runoff rates
and amounts. Also, soil particles are easily detached from these soils, and the resulting
sediment is easily transported.

This mixture of effects illustrates that K is empirical. It is not a soil property, but is defined
by RUSLE definitions. The definition for K, and for all RUSLE factors as well, must be
carefully observed to achieve accurate results. For example, using K to account for reduced
soil loss from incorporation of manure is not proper and produces incorrect results.

LS factor: The L and S factors jointly represent the effect of slope length, steepness, and
shape on sediment production. RUSLE represents the combined effects of rill and interrill
erosion. Rill erosion is primarily caused by surface runoff and increases in a downslope
direction because runoff increases in a downslope direction. Interrill erosion is caused
primarily by raindrop impact and is uniform along a slope. Therefore, the L factor is greater
for those conditions where rill erosion tends to be greater than interrill erosion.

Erosion increases with slope steepness, but in contrast to the L factor for the effects of
slope length, RUSLE makes no differentiation between rill and interrill erosion in the S
factor that computes the effect of slope steepness on soil loss.

Slope shape is a variation of slope steepness along the slope. Slope steepness and position
along the slope interact to greatly affect erosion. Soil loss is greatest for convex slopes that
are steep near the end of the slope length where runoff rate is greatest and least for concave
slopes where the steep section is at upper end of the slope where runoff rate is least.

The LS factor is a measure of sediment production. Deposition can occur on concave slopes
where transport capacity of the runoff is reduced as the slope flattens. This deposition and
its effect on sediment yield from the slope is considered in the supporting practices P
factor.

C factor: The C factor for the effects of cover-management, along with the P factor, is one
of the most important factors in RUSLE because it represents the effect of land use on
erosion. It is the single factor most easily changed and is the factor most often considered in
developing a conservation plan. For example, the C factor describes the effects of
differences between vegetation communities, tillage systems, and addition of mulches.

The C factor is influenced by canopy (cover above but not in contact with the soil surface),
ground cover (cover directly in contact with the soil surface), surface roughness, time since
last mechanical disturbance, amount of live and dead roots in the soil, and organic material
that has been incorporated into the soil. These variable change through the year as plants
grow and senesce, the soil is disturbed, material is added to the soil surface, and plant
material is removed. The C factor is an average annual value for soil loss ratio, weighted
according to the variation of rainfall erosivity over the year.

The average annual distribution of erosivity during a year varies greatly with location. In
the US, erosivity is nearly uniform throughout the year in the mid-south region, is
concentrated in the late spring in the western cornbelt, and is concentrated in late fall and
early winter in the Pacific coast region.

Soil loss ratio is the ratio of soil loss from a given land use to that from the unit plot at a
given time. RUSLE computes soil loss ratio values as they change through time with each
half month period using equations for subfactors related to canopy, ground cover,
roughness of the soil surface, time since last mechanical disturbance, amount of live and
dead roots in the upper soil layer, amount of organic material incorporated into the soil, and
antecedent soil moisture in the Northwest Wheat and Range Region.

P factor: The supporting practice P factor describes the effects of practices such as
contouring, strip cropping, concave slopes, terraces, sediment basins, grass hedges, silt
fences, straw bales, and subsurface drainage. These practices are applied to support the
basic cultural practices used to control erosion, such as vegetation, management system,
and mulch additions that are represented by the C factor.
Supporting practices typically affect erosion by redirecting runoff around the slope so that
it has less erosivity or slowing down the runoff to cause deposition such as concave slopes
or barriers like vegetative strips and terraces. The major factors considered in estimating a
P factor value include runoff rate as a function of location, soil, and management practice;
erosivity and transport capacity of the runoff as affected by slope steepness and hydraulic
roughness of the surface; and sediment size and density.
Source: http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/technical/ecs/agronomy.

ANNUAL SEDIMENT YIELD

Sediment yield can be defined as the amount of sediment reaching or passing a point of
interest in a given period of time. It is estimated in tons per year or MCM per year or mm
per year. However, sediment yield from a catchment is estimated as the annual average
sediment yield computed from long-term historical data.

Sediment yield can be quantified using the Sediment Delivery Ratio (SDR), expressed as
the percent of gross soil erosion by water that is delivered to a particular point in the
drainage system.

To compute the annual sediment yield by use of USLE/RUSLE, the computed soil loss
using USLE/RUSLE is multiplied with the sediment delivery ratio of watershed (Shweta
R.).

Annual Sediment Yield = Annual Soil Loss x Sediment Delivery Ratio (SDR)

Y = A x SDR
(where the unit of Y is Metric-tons per year)

SEDIMENT DELIVERY RATIO

Sediment delivery ratio (SDR) is expressed as a percent and represents the efficiency of the
watershed in moving soil particles from areas of erosion to the point where sediment yield
is measured. Several models were used reflecting different methods including drainage-
area, runoff-rainfall, and slope-gradient methods to estimate SDR for the study area. The
drainage area method is considered as the most widely acceptable method to estimate the
SDR of a watershed (Da Ouyang et al., 1997).

Three models based on the drainage area are presented to estimate SDR. The preparer
used the Vanoni (1975) Model. Vanoni used the data from 300 watersheds throughout the
world to develop a model by the power function. This model is considered a more
generalized one to estimate SDR.

SDR = 0.42 A -0.125

(where A = drainage area in square miles )

4.2.1 Rainfall and Runoff Erosivity Factor (R)

The R factor represents the erosivity of the climate at a particular location. An average
annual value of R is determined from historical weather records and is the average annual
sum of the erosivity of individual storms. Due to the differences in climate in the
Philippines, it is suggested that the equation R be selected based on the Koppen-Geiger
Climate Classification.

Catanduanes is classified as Af Climate Classification. Based from the work of Kassam

(1992) and Agele et al. (2013) Malaysia the following formula is derived for Af Climate
Classification.

R = 117.6 x (1.00105AAP)
Where: AAP is the Annual Average Rainfall
 Koppen-Geiger Climate Classification Map of the Philippines

4.2.2. Soil Erodibility Factor (K)

Soil Erodibility Factor or K Factor (tons/hectare) is a significant influencing factor of

RUSLE. It shows the resistance of soil against erosion due to impact of raindrops and the
rate and amount of run-off produced for that rainfall impact under a standard condition
(Ghosal and Bhattacharya, 2020). Soil erodibility depends upon geological and soil features
like texture, inherent material, and porosity, etc. (Schwab et al., 1994). The researcher
conducted five (5) soil sampling from the watershed of Pajo River Channel.
Various bases have been used such as particle size distribution, organic content, structural
class, soil permeability, soil color and type. These are Grain Size Distribution, Organic
Content, Structural Class, Permeability Rate of Soil: (Wischmeier and Smith, 1978; Foster
et al., 1981).

K = [ 27.66 x 10-8 x M1.14 (12 – a) + 0.0043 (b-2) + 0.0033 (c-3) ]

Where: M = silt (%) + very fine sand (%) x (100 – clay (%)
a = organic matter (%)
b = structure code in which
1 – very structured
2 – fairly structured
3 – slightly structured
c = permeability code

To determine the soil classification of the samples, the researcher used the Adopted soil
textural triangle/pyramid from Thien 1979, USDA Natural Resource Conservation
Service - Soils.
To classify and determine the sediments by grain size and sieve size, the researcher used
the Wenthworth (1992) Grain Size Classification.

For the Structure Code and Permeability Code, the researcher adopted the classification of
Thien (1979). The classification are as follows:

4.2.3. Slope Length and Steepness Factor (LS)

The slope length and steepness factor (LS-factor) describes the combined effects of slope
length (i.e., flow length) and slope gradient (i.e., grade or relief); it represents the ratio of
soil loss per unit area on a site to the corresponding loss from a 22.1-m- (72.6-ft-) long
experimental plot with a 9% slope. Slope length is defined as the distance from the point of
origin of overland flow to the point where the slope decreases sufficiently for deposition to
occur or to the point where runoff enters a defined channel (wet or dry). The slope
steepness is the segment or site slope, usually expressed as a percentage. Although the LS-
factor has traditionally been expressed as two parameters in the USLE, it is universally
computed as a combined term.

LS Factor or Topographic Factor Based on the work of Wischmeier and Smith (1957):

❑( )
LS= ❑ ( 0.065+ 0.046 s+ 0.0065 s )
2

Where:
 = flow path length/stream length (m)
 = 22.13 (SI units) or 72.6 (English Units)

m = 0.2 for s<1

0.3 for 1≤s≤3
 0.4 for 3≤s≤5
0.5 for 5 ≤ s ≤ 12
0.6 for 12 ≤ s ≤ 21
s = average slope gradient (%)

4.2.4. Cover Management Factor (C)

Cover of any kind can help protect the soil surface from raindrop impact and can force
runoff water to take a longer, more tortuous path as it moves downslope, slowing the water
and reducing its kinetic energy.

C factor developed by USDA-SCS (1972)

4.2.5. Conservation Practice Factor (P)

Conservation practices and management factors constitute soil conservation or erosion

control practices. Soil erosion rates may be considerably reduced with the observation of
one or a combination of a number of practices. Such practices include contour farming,
terracing and mulching.

For conventional purposes, the value commonly used for conservation practices and
management factor (P) is 1.0. This means that this factor is considered null in order to
 focus the estimation of soil loss in other factors of the equation

4.3. Results and Discussion

4.3.1. Rainfall and Runoff Erosivity Factor (R)

To compute for the Rainfall and Runoff Erosivity Factor (R) the researcher gathered data
from the nearest Philippine Atmospheric, Geophysical and Astronomical Services
Administration (PAGASA) Station located at San Isidro Village, Virac, Catanduanes.

4.3.1.1. Rainfall data

For the Climatological Normals of the Province of Catanduanes, the data from Virac Synop PAGASA Station
from 1991-2020 are tabulated below
 4.3.1.2. R calculation

R = 117.6 x (1.00105AAP)
Where: AAP is the Annual Average Rainfall
For AAP Virac Synop = 3,188.2

R = 117.6 x (1.001053188.2)
R = 3,338.05

4.3.2. Soil Erodibility Factor (K)

K = [ 27.66 x 10-8 x M1.14 (12 – a) + 0.0043 (b-2) + 0.0033

(c-3) ]

Where: M = silt (%) + very fine sand (%) x (100 – clay (%)
a = organic matter (%)
b = structure code in which
1 – very structured
2 – fairly structured
3 – slightly structured
c = permeability code
4.3.2.1. Soil Data and Analysis

The researcher conducted sampling inside the Pasao Watershed taken within upper 30cm
soil cover, randomly taken at spread locations on the upper portions of the watershed that
feeds the river where application area is located. As per sample results majority of the
sand samples were coarse materials. To classify the sample using the Adopted soil
textural triangle/pyramid from Thien 1979, USDA Natural Resource Conservation
Service - Soils, the researcher only used the fine particles of the sample.Sample results
are tabulated as follows:

Pasao Watershed Sample 1

Percentage
Wenthwort Sieve Sizes Percent Percentage
by Volume
h Size Class (mm) Passing by Volume
of Fines
9.5 96 27.48
PEBBLE 4.75 85 24.33
2.36 74 21.18
1.18 57 16.32
0.6 23 6.58
SAND 0.425 7 2.00 99%
0.3 5 1.43
0.15 1.85 0.53
CLAY/SILT 0.08 0.52 0.15 1%
349.37 100.00

Using the Adopted soil textural triangle/pyramid from Thien 1979, USDA Natural
Resource Conservation Service - Soils. The classification Pasao Watershed Sample 1
based from plotting is Sand.
 - Plotting Based from the Sample Results

Pasao Watershed Sample 2

Percentage
Wenthwort Sieve Sizes Percent Percentage
by Volume
h Size Class (mm) Passing by Volume
of Fines
9.5 95 27.50
PEBBLE 4.75 82 23.74
2.36 70 20.26
1.18 55 15.92
0.6 25 7.24
SAND 0.425 10 2.89 100%
0.3 6 1.74
0.15 2 0.58
CLAY/SILT 0.08 0.48 0.14 0%
345.48 100.00

Using the Adopted soil textural triangle/pyramid from Thien 1979, USDA Natural
Resource Conservation Service - Soils. The classification Pasao Watershed Sample 2
based from plotting is Sand.
 - Plotting Based from the Sample Results

Pasao Watershed Sample 3

Percentage
Wenthwort Sieve Sizes Percent Percentage
by Volume
h Size Class (mm) Passing by Volume
of Fines
9.5 97 27.65
PEBBLE 4.75 88 25.08
2.36 76 21.66
1.18 55 15.68
0.6 21 5.99
SAND 0.425 8 2.28 100%
0.3 4 1.14
0.15 1.44 0.41
CLAY/SILT 0.08 0.41 0.12 0%
350.85 100.00

Using the Adopted soil textural triangle/pyramid from Thien 1979, USDA Natural
Resource Conservation Service - Soils. The classification Pasao Watershed Sample 3
based from plotting is Sand.

- Plotting Based from the Sample Results

Pasao Watershed Sample 4

Percentage
Wenthwort Sieve Sizes Percent Percentage
by Volume
h Size Class (mm) Passing by Volume
of Fines
9.5 94 27.32
PEBBLE 4.75 80 23.25
2.36 71 20.64
1.18 55 15.99
0.6 26 7.56
SAND 0.425 9 2.62 99%
0.3 5 1.45
0.15 3 0.87
CLAY/SILT 0.08 1.05 0.31 1%
344.05 100.00

Using the Adopted soil textural triangle/pyramid from Thien 1979, USDA Natural
Resource Conservation Service - Soils. The classification Pasao Watershed Sample 4
based from plotting is Sand.

- Plotting Based from the Sample Results

Pasao Watershed Sample 5

Percentage
Wenthwort Sieve Sizes Percent Percentage
by Volume
h Size Class (mm) Passing by Volume
of Fines
9.5 92 27.55
PEBBLE 4.75 78 23.36
2.36 68 20.36
1.18 52 15.57
0.6 24 7.19
SAND 0.425 11 3.29 99%
0.3 6 1.80
0.15 2 0.60
CLAY/SILT 0.08 0.93 0.28 1%
333.93 100.00

Using the Adopted soil textural triangle/pyramid from Thien 1979, USDA Natural
Resource Conservation Service - Soils. The classification Pasao Watershed Sample 5
based from plotting is Sand.
 - Plotting Based from the Sample Results

4.3.2.2. Sediment Size Distribution

A total of fivc (5) samples was submitted for laboratory analysis at the Provincial
Engineer’s Office, Salugan, Camalig, Albay. The grain size analysis results showed that
the sample was composed of coarse particles and fines particles particularly pebble, sand,
silt and clay. Mostly, the majority of the soil samples consists of pebble materials. A
particle size distribution plot was prepared to analyze the sediment distribution in the
permit area.

Particle Size Distribution

100
90
80
Percent Passing

70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
9.5 4.75 2.36 1.18 0.6 0.425 0.3 0.15 0.08

Sample 1 Sample 2
Sieve Size
Sample 3 Sample 4
Sample 5

Average Percentage of Sand, Clay and Silt of The 5

Samples Taken from the Pasao Watershed

Percentage of Percentage Percentage

Sample
Volume of of Volume of Volume of
No.
Sand of Clay Silt
1 99 0.5 0.5
2 100 0 0
3 100 0 0
4 99 0.5 0.5
5 99 0.5 0.5
Average 99.4 0.3 0.3
4.3.2.3. Structural Class

For the Structure Code, the researcher adopted the classification of Thien (1979). The
classification are as follows:

Since majority of the samples are classified as Sand, the researcher used the Structure
Code of 3.

4.3.2.4. Permeability

For the Permeability Code, the researcher adopted the classification of Thien (1979). The
classification are as follows:
 Since majority of the samples are classified as Sand, the researcher used the Permeability
Code of 1.

4.3.2.5. K Calculation

For computation of a (organic matter), since the use of this Geological Assessment is
for Commercial Sand and Gravel Permit and not for agricultural purposes the researcher
used the value of 0 as there is no significant organic matter in sand and gravel materials.

Data from percentage of silt, sand and clay is derived from Table of Average Percentage
of Sand, Clay and Silt of The 5 Samples Taken from the Pasao Watershed under 4.3.2.2.
Sediment Size Distribution.

K = [ 27.66 x 10-8 x M1.14 (12 – a) + 0.0043 (b-2) + 0.0033 (c-3) ]

Where: M = silt (%) + very fine sand (%) x (100 – clay (%)
a = organic matter (%)
b = structure code in which
1 – very structured
2 – fairly structured
3 – slightly structured
c = permeability code
 M = 0.3 + 99.4 x (100 – 0.3)
M = 9, 910.48
a=0
b=3
c=1

K = [ 27.66 x 10-8 x M1.14 (12 – a) + 0.0043 (b-2) + 0.0033 (c-1) ]

K = [ 27.66 x 10-8 x (9, 910.48) 1.14 (12 – 0) + 0.0043 (3-2) + 0.0033 (1-1) ]
K = [ 27.66 x 10-8 x (35,937.51) (12) + 0.0043]
K = 0.0000002766 x 431,250.12 + 0.0043

K = 0.1235 ~ 0.12

4.3.3. Slope Length and Steepness Factor (LS)

Using the ArcGis Software, the researcher digitized the whole stream length and come up
with a total of 5,676.89 meters.

❑( )
LS= ❑ ( 0.065+ 0.046 s+ 0.0065 s )
2

Where:
 = flow path length/stream length (m)
 = 22.13 (SI units) or 72.6 (English Units)

m = 0.2 for s<1

0.3 for 1≤s≤3
 0.4 for 3≤s≤5
0.5 for 5 ≤ s ≤ 12
0.6 for 12 ≤ s ≤ 21
s = average slope gradient (%)

4.3.3.1. Slope Gradient Computation

Based from the computation from the Digital Elevation Model generated from the drone
survey and using ArcGis Software, the computed s value (slope gradient) is 2%. Below is
the Slope Gradient Map computed from ArcGis Software. So for the value of m, 0.2 is
used since 2% or 0.02 is s < 1.

4.3.3.2. LS Calculation

❑ ( )
LS= ❑ ( 0.065+ 0.046 s+ 0.0065 s )
2

 - 5676.89 meters

 - 22.13

m - 0.2

s - 0.02

( )
0.2
5676.89
LS= ¿
22.13

LS = 3.03 (0.065 + 0.00092 + 0.0000026)

LS=0.20

4.3.4. Cover Management Factor (C)

 Based from the C factor developed by USDA-SCS (1972) and visual inspection of the
permit area, the permit area is located at a barren land and water body. For computation
of RUSLE, the researcher used the value of 1.000 for the computation to arrive at a
definite value.

C factor developed by USDA-SCS (1972)

4.3.4.1. Land Use Data/ Imagery Data

Attached is the map of National Mapping and Resource Information Authority (NAMRIA)
for basis of Cover Management Factor.

4.3.5. Conservation Practice Factor (P)

For conventional purposes, the value commonly used for conservation practices and
management factor (P) is 1.0. This means that this factor is considered null in order to
focus the estimation of soil loss in other factors of the equation.

4.3.6. Average Annual Soil Loss (A)

A = R x K x LS x C x P

where: A = average annual soil loss, R = Rainfall And Runoff Erosivity Factor, K = Soil
Erodibility Factor, L = Slope Length And Steepness Factor (Ls) Or Topographic Factor, C
= Cover Management Factor, and P = Conservation Practices Factor. A soil loss (erosion
rate) in tons per hectare per year is computed by substituting values for each RUSLE factor
to represent conditions at a specific site.

4.3.6.1. A Calculation

A = R x K x LS x C x P
R = 3698.66
K = 0.12
LS = 0.20
C=1
P=1
A = 3698.66 x 0.12 x 0.20 x 1 x 1
A = 88.77 Metric tons/hectare/year
A = 88.77 * 2.5699 hectares
A = 228.13 Metric tons/year
4.3.7.1. Y Calculation

Annual Sediment Yield = Annual Soil Loss x Sediment Delivery Ratio (SDR)

Y = A x SDR
(where the unit of Y is Metric-tons per year)

Y = 228.13 x 0.50
 Y = 114.065 metric tons per year

4.3.8. Sediment Delivery Ratio (SDR)

Three models based on the drainage area are presented to estimate SDR. The preparer
used the Vanoni (1975) Model. Vanoni used the data from 300 watersheds throughout
the world to develop a model by the power function. This model is considered a more
generalized one to estimate SDR.

SDR = 0.42 A -0.125

(where A = drainage area in square miles )
Based from digitizing the whole drainage area using the ArcGis Software, the computed
total area is 616,090 square meters which when converted to square miles is 0.24 square
miles.
4.3.9. Calculated Annual Replenishment Rates and Expected Volume of Sediments to
be Replenished over the Permit Application Area Replenishment Rate Calculation

Annual Sediment Yield = Annual Soil Loss x Sediment Delivery Ratio (SDR)

Y = A x SDR
(where the unit of Y is Metric-tons per year)

A = 21,995.78
SDR = 0.21
Y = 21,995.78 x 0.21
Y = 4,619.11 Metric-tons per year
The Calculated Annual Replenishment Rates and Expected Volume of
Sediments to be replenished over the Permit Application Area JG Quarry is
4,619.11 metric tons per year. Using the specific gravity of 1.631 gm/cm 3 for
the conversion from tons to cubic meter, the computed volume is 2,832.07
cubic meters per year.