My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2024-02-20_REVISION - M1982121
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1982121
>
2024-02-20_REVISION - M1982121
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/20/2024 1:45:06 PM
Creation date
2/20/2024 1:35:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1982121
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
2/20/2024
Doc Name
Adequacy Review #2
From
DRMS
To
RMR Aggregates, Inc.
Type & Sequence
TR6
Email Name
ACY
THM
GRM
MAC
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.
/
8
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
Failure Mode and Stability Analyses (Current Conditions) <br /> • Division:It is unclear to the Division which material strength properties were used in the <br /> stability analyses between the empirical values or post-backanalysis values found under Table 2. <br /> Please have KUE provide the Division with clarification on which material strength properties <br /> values reported in Table 2 were used within the stability analyses found within Appendix D. <br /> KUE:KUE has clarified throughout the report that the models were run using the established <br /> empirical values that were corroborated by the backanalysis. <br /> KUE has provided additional discussion and clarification regarding which material strength property <br /> values reported in Table 2 were used within the stability analyses found within Appendix D and <br /> Appendix G. For the long-term steady state analysis as well as the mechanical stabilization discussed <br /> under Section 6 and Section 9 of the Report,strength parameters are taken from the empirical data. These <br /> parameters result in a more conservative approach when analyzing slope stability for long term <br /> stabilization in comparison to the values calculated by the back-analysis. The Division has no additional <br /> comment and this Item has been satisfied. <br /> KUE Stability Recommendations and Associated Stability Analysis <br /> • Division:Similarly to the comment above, it is unclear to the Division which material strength <br /> properties were used in the stability analyses under KUE's recommendations. Please have KUE <br /> provide theDivision with clarification on which material strength properties values reported in <br /> Table 2 were used within the stability analyses found within Appendix D and Appendix G. <br /> KUE:KUE has clarified throughout the report that the models were run using the established <br /> empirical values that were corroborated by the backanalysis.Appendix G values for joint <br /> strength and otherjoint parameters that dictate stabilization are included in Appendix G. <br /> Please refer to the Division's previous comment found under the "Failure Mode and Stability Analyses <br /> (Current Conditions)" section of this Memo. KUE has provided discussion and clarification regarding <br /> which material strength property values were used within the stability analyses found with Appendix D <br /> and Appendix G which satisfies this comment from the Division. The Division has no additional <br /> comments. <br /> • Division: Within Section 8 of the Report, it is unclear to theDivision on whatKUE is defining as <br /> the " in reference to KUE recommendations to remove saidlayer. Earlier <br /> in the Report,KUE labels the <br /> Itwouldappear to theDivision that when referring to the " under <br /> Section 8 of the Report, it is as part of the <br /> " reference. Please have KUE provide additional clarification on whether <br /> the recommendation is to remove just the or the <br /> <br /> KUE: This has been clarified in what is now section 9. The are <br /> specifically identified versus the <br /> KUE has updated Section 9(previously Section 8) of the Report and has provided specific language <br /> defining the in relation to their recommendations for slope <br /> stabilization. The Division has no additional comment and this Item has been satisfied. <br /> • Division: Under Section 6 of the Report,a long-term static stability analysis was conducted using <br /> the post-mining configuration of the for varying bench slope geometries. <br /> A total of three bench slope geometries were analyzed with resulting FOS as provided in Table 4 <br /> Mid Cortinent Limestone Quarry Geotechnical Review Memo February 6,2024 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.