2019-08-29_PERMIT FILE - M2019028 (3)

Home Browse Search

Case 7 - At a setback of 50 feet, the resulting safety factor of 1.57 exceeds the MLRB minimum requirement of 1.50 for an embankment adjacent to a critical structure. The resulting safety factor of 1.31 is above the MLRB minimum requirement of 1.30 for an embankment subject to earthquake loading. Using a normal water surface elevation in the reservoir provides greater safety factors, 2.93 under static loading and 1.98 under earthquake loads. The proposed setback of 50 feet from the irrigation ditch and gas line easement is satisfactory. Case 8 - At a setback of 50 feet, the resulting safety factor of 1.52 exceeds the MLRB minimum requirement of 1.50 for an embankment adjacent to a critical structure. The resulting safety factor of 1.31 is above the MLRB minimum requirement of 1.30 for an embankment subject to earthquake loading. Using a normal water surface elevation in the reservoir provides greater safety factors, 2.58 under static loading and 1.75 under earthquake loads. The proposed setback of 50 feet from the irrigation ditch and gas line easement is satisfactory. Case 9 - At a setback of 60 feet, the resulting safety factor of 1.63 exceeds the MLRB minimum requirement of 1.50 for an embankment adjacent to a critical structure. The resulting safety factor of 1.30 is equal to the MLRB minimum requirement of 1.30 for an embankment subject to earthquake loading. Using a normal water surface elevation in the reservoir provides greater safety factors, 2.42 under static loading and 1.78 under earthquake loads. The proposed setback of 60 feet from the power line is satisfactory. Case 10 - At a setback of 60 feet, the resulting safety factor of 1.54 exceeds the MLRB minimum requirement of 1.50 for an embankment adjacent to a critical structure. The resulting safety factor of 1.30 is equal to the MLRB minimum requirement of 1.30 for an embankment subject to earthquake loading. Using a normal water surface elevation in the reservoir provides greater safety factors, 3.01 under static loading and 2.05 under earthquake loads. The proposed setback of 60 feet from the irrigation ditch is satisfactory. Case 11 - At a setback of 60 feet, the resulting safety factor of 1.64 exceeds the MLRB minimum requirement of 1.50 for an embankment adjacent to a critical structure. The resulting safety factor of 1.30 is queal to the MLRB minimum requirement of 1.30 for an embankment subject to earthquake loading. Using a normal water surface elevation in the reservoir provides greater safety factors, 2.99 under static loading and 2.03 under earthquake loads. The proposed setback of 60 feet from the gas line easement is satisfactory. J-2 Contracting Company-DPG Pit J&T Consulting, Inc. Slope Stability Anaalysis