My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2019-06-28_REVISION - M1977004 (9)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1977004
>
2019-06-28_REVISION - M1977004 (9)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/5/2025 7:35:53 AM
Creation date
7/1/2019 2:03:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977004
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
6/28/2019
Doc Name
Request For Amendment To Permit
From
Homestake Mining
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
AM1
Email Name
DMC
THM
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.
/
72
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
Homestake Mining Company May 10,2019 <br /> Regular(112d)Operation Reclamation Permit Application Package <br /> 1983). Additional survey monitoring points were added in subsequent years to cover more of the <br /> mine site area and replace monitoring points that became obsolete due to regrading and other <br /> factors. Annual data compilation and review of this data has been performed by various consulting <br /> parties since the initial installations (BGC, 2019b). <br /> 3.4.2.4. Photo Stations <br /> The photo station monitoring program was initiated to document any change to the system of <br /> tension cracks and scarps that define the eastern limit of slope movement of the North Pit's East <br /> Wall for the purpose of detecting any eastward propagation of the surface deformation <br /> (EAI, 2014). The monitoring program operated on a near-annual basis from May 2000 to 2013. <br /> Photographs were collected in 2000, 2003, 2004, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2011, 2012, and 2013. <br /> Change detection analysis is performed by comparing those baseline photographs against other <br /> photographs taken from the same location on subsequent site visits. Photographs for each <br /> station, for each year, are compiled and compared in the Engineering Analytics, Inc. (EAI) <br /> Tension Crack Monitoring and Photo Station Documentation at the Pitch Reclamation Project <br /> report (EIA, 2014). <br /> 3.4.3. Current Slope Movement Conditions <br /> The current state of slope conditions is assessed based on results and observations made over <br /> the course of the slope movement monitoring program (Section 3.3.3)which includes inclinometer <br /> readings, survey monuments, visual assessments of tension cracks and scarps, and over <br /> 35 years of slope movement observations. <br /> 3.4.3.1. Surficial Mapping of Landslide Features <br /> The map of tension cracks and scarps (Drawing 02)along the eastern margin of the North Pit and <br /> South Pit provides a basis for monitoring any change in the surficial extent or rate of slope failure. <br /> Original mapping was completed by Golder (as noted by AAI, 1999) and later updated by <br /> AAI (1999) and SRK (2007). AAI (1999) notes possible minor movement across a tension crack, <br /> but a location or scale of movement is not provided. SRK (2007) reports no visual changes to the <br /> geometry or character of the tension cracks, and no new tension cracks when they updated the <br /> map. <br /> In August 2018, BGC performed a reconnaissance-level field-based visual inspection to assess <br /> the extent of surface deformation caused by slope failure along the eastern margins of the North <br /> and South pit slopes (BGC, 2019c). The findings from the inspection were: 1)the existing map of <br /> tension cracks and scarps appears to delineate the extent for most surface deformation caused <br /> by slope movement (excluding creep), but 2) some tension cracks and scarps were mapped <br /> outside the extent mapped by Golder (1995) as cited by Agapito (1999), AAI (1999) and SRK <br /> (2007) (Figure 3-16). These finding suggests that the scarps either formed since SRK (2007) <br /> updated the map, that these scarps were missed during the previous reconnaissance trips and <br /> site inspections by AAI (2000a) and SRK (2007), or 3)that the scarps are included in the map but <br /> are inaccurately portrayed. Depending on which is true, the implications could include a scenario <br /> EXHIBIT E-RULE 6.4 5(AMENDED RECLAMATION PLAN) Page 45 <br /> HOMESTAKE MINING COMPANY <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.