My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
INSPEC09399
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Inspection
>
INSPEC09399
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 9:10:35 PM
Creation date
11/18/2007 8:41:00 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981012
IBM Index Class Name
Inspection
Doc Date
7/8/1997
Doc Name
OSM INSPECTION REPORT
Inspection Date
6/10/1997
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.
/
10
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
feet. The static water level was measured at 99.6 feet in TH-203 on the third terrace. <br />Water level measurements inGuded about 4' for the aboveground casings. According <br />to DMG, continual presence (but no discharge) of water in pond 008 might be evidence <br />of flow through the pile's underdrain, the source of which could be the water in the pile <br />as detected in the two piezometers. In that case, the underdrain is working as intended. <br />A small amount of water ponded on the west end of the first terrace probably was due to <br />the insufficient side slope as reflected by the field measurements described above. <br />Additionally, the confluence of the second terrace with the westem side slope was <br />partially blocked with mounded soil material. <br />Runoff on the RDA's operational top surtace breached a bean at the southwestern end <br />of the outslope and eroded a gully down to the third terrace. Coal refuse was deposited <br />on the third terrace to a small extent. This situation probably occurred because <br />drainage from most of the top surface is directed toward the RDA's southwestern <br />comer. No water was ponded on the top surtace; previous compliance and stability <br />concerns caused by ponding resulted in the surface's present grade to maintain positive <br />drainage. However, as a result, the southwestern side of the top surtace and the <br />westem side ditch convey a disproportionately large amount of runoff from the RDA's <br />top surface. A small seep was noted at the westem end of the third lift's outslope about <br />15 feet from the westem side ditch and abouttwo-thirds of the way up from the second <br />terrace. The soil was wet and small amounts of water ponded in depressions but water <br />was not flowing. The seep could be the result of continuing drainage problems on the <br />third terrace stemming from heavy drainage off the top surface's westem side. Mr. <br />Thompson was aware of the seep. <br />Other field measurements were taken of the RDA's side ditches and the upstream <br />diversion. Six measurements taken in the east, north, and west segments of the <br />upstream diversion yielded an average depth of about 2.86 feet and an average top <br />width of about 17.5 feet. No water was flowing in the upstream diversion. <br />Measurements taken of the westem side ditch on each of the three lifts showed an <br />average depth of about 1.38 feet and an average top width of about 16.3 feet. As noted <br />above, the westem side ditch receives much of the pile's surtace drainage, and the <br />Reno mattresses show the wear. Some erosion of the outer berm of the westem side <br />ditch on the west side of the second lift was noted. According to DMG, this segment of <br />the side ditch was maintained recently. Measurements taken of the eastern side ditch <br />on each lift showed an average depth of about 1.4 feet and an average top width of at <br />least 15 feet. The Reno mattress ditch lining showed rock displacement within the <br />gabions in a number of locations in the east and west side ditches. No water was <br />flowing in the east or west side ditches. <br />The first, second, and third lift outslopes of the RDA were top dressed and revegetated. <br />Depth of non-toxic cover was not checked during this review, however. As noted <br />above for the MWDP, operators are encouraged by DMG to document depth of cover <br />placement during waste bank reGamation and are cautioned to expect some verification <br />of cover depth in the absence of such documentation. In the absence of such <br />6 1997 New Elk Special Focus <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.