Laserfiche WebLink
Case 3— Fence East of Pit. <br /> The mining operation is adjacent to a fence near the east property line of the site. The <br /> proposed setback for mining is 50 feet from the fence. The mining depth was assumed <br /> to be 112 feet in this area based on bore log information. <br /> Case 4— Fence and Lift Station South of Pit. <br /> The mining operation is adjacent to a fence and lift station south of the pit. The <br /> proposed setback for mining is 40 feet from the fence and lift station. The mining depth <br /> was assumed to be 81 feet in this area based on bore log information. <br /> Case 5 — Sanitary Sewer, Water Line, Fence, Fiber Line, Roadway, Bridge/Ditch, <br /> Structure, Power Poles and Lines, and Building South of Pit. <br /> The mining operation is adjacent to sanitary sewer, water line, fence, fiber line, <br /> roadway, bridge/ditch, structure, power poles and lines, and building adjacent to the <br /> south side of the pit. The proposed setback for mining is 28 feet from the sanitary <br /> sewer, the closest structure. The mining depth was assumed to be 79 feet in this area <br /> based on bore log information. <br /> Case 6 — Water Line, Power Poles and Lines, Fence, Telephone Line, and Oil/Gas <br /> Equipment West of Pit. <br /> The mining operation is adjacent water line, power poles and lines, fence, telephone <br /> line, and oil/gas equipment adjacent to the west side of the pit. The proposed setback <br /> for mining is 31 feet from the water line, the closest structure. The mining depth was <br /> assumed to be 51 feet in this area based on bore log. <br /> The cross-sections located in Appendix B show the estimated phreatic surface <br /> associated with each case, the geometry used in the mining, and the locations of the <br /> man-made structures adjacent to the mining slopes. <br /> METHODOLOGY <br /> The mining embankment configuration shown in the computer analysis represents the <br /> estimated conditions for this site. If mining conditions differ from the estimated <br /> conditions, the slope stability will need to be re-evaluated on a case-by-case basis. The <br /> Bishop Method was used in the computer analysis for determining safety factors. The <br /> procedure searches for circular shear failures and automatically searches for the lowest <br /> safety factor. 20,000 separate failure surfaces were analyzed for each case. The <br /> required minimum safety factors are based on the policy of the Mined Land Reclamation <br /> Board (MLRD) for Factors of Safety for Slope Stability/ Geotechnical Analyses. <br /> J-2 Contracting Company—Sunset Industrial Pit <br /> Slop <br /> J&T Consulting, Inc. e Stability Analysis <br />