My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
APPCOR10031
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Application Correspondence
>
1000
>
APPCOR10031
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 6:26:27 PM
Creation date
11/19/2007 2:07:23 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1996083
IBM Index Class Name
Application Correspondence
Doc Date
8/4/1996
Doc Name
PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY BOWIE 2 MINE PN C-96-083
From
DMG
To
DAVE BERRY
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.
/
7
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
M w <br />Memo to Dave Berry <br />Bowie No. 2 Geotech Study <br />page 2 <br />hydrologic impacts. Many of these operational topics are addressed in order to <br />prevent the development of problems which might preclude reclamation of the <br />mined property to a beneficial use. The Division cannot approve any mine <br />permit until the applicant has demonstrated that the mine site disturbances can <br />be successfully reclaimed. Unravelling, meta-stable backfilled slopes do not <br />represent successful reclamation and will not be judged by the Division as <br />meeting the required mandate to return the mine site to a beneficial use. <br />My earlier geotechnical adequacy comments generally expressed my concern <br />that insufficient geotechnical information had been provided within the <br />application to demonstrate that the site could be reclaimed in a stable <br />configuration. The Maxim Technologies study, while it presents considerable <br />viable geotechnical information, does not solve this basic inadequacy. With a <br />change in emphasis, however, I suspect that the majority of the necessary <br />preliminary geotechnical information has been collected with which to <br />preliminarily address my concerns. <br />Specific Comments <br />Page 6 <br />In discussing the ancient landslide which covers the majority of the <br />proposed surface facilities area of the Bowie No. 2 Mine, the author <br />hypothesizes; "The ancient slide was probably triggered by a strong <br />earthquake and flowed as a viscous mass on the relatively weak shale <br />beds above and below the Rollins Sandstone and moved for a distance of <br />about 1 /4 mile during a time of a much wetter climate." Insufficient <br />evidence or rationale is presented within the report to warrant such a <br />sweeping morphology conclusion. Furthermore, the conclusion suggests <br />that a significant acceleration due to "a strong earthquake" was <br />necessary to overcome intrinsic strength and trigger the slide. The report <br />identifies two modern failures on the mine site which it hypothesizes <br />were caused by moisture and/or over steepening by erosion. Based upon <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.