My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE49539
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
500000
>
PERMFILE49539
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:51:27 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 2:05:08 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981016
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
12/11/2001
Doc Name
Air Pollution cont., Subsidence Control Plan, Reclamation Plan, Violations
Section_Exhibit Name
APPENDIX XXVI Section XXVI.2 to Appendix XXIX Section XXIX.2
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.
/
107
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
E. SCEL+AF & ASSOCIATeS Page 1 <br />• SUBSIDENCE CO;~TROL CF~CK <br />At the request of Mr. Al Amundson of Western Slope Carbon, Inc. a check of <br />the subsidence control points set by this film in 1978 was conducted on <br />July 7, 1979 in the area above the East Mine, <br />The following information lists any significant changes fmm our original <br />survey and other information ve feel should be mentioned concerning this <br />program. <br />(1) At the time of our original survey we noticed several areas along <br />the steeper slopes ~~here the topsoil had slipped down due to <br />natural movement of the soil, The growth of brash and trees <br />indicated the slips had occurred several years prior to our <br />survey, <br />(2) Due co the fact the ground is very tmstable on the steeper slopes <br />we placed most of our control points along the tops of the ridges <br />or in the bottom of the valley to minimize showing the natural <br />movement that might occur in the area. <br />(3) In our resurvey of the 14 original control points we found 12 of <br />the 14 points to have no significant changes other than instnaaent <br />• limitations, light refraction or slightly bent targets due to <br />wildlife traffic (e,g. elk, deer or hunters), The two control <br />points labeled F and G shoo some movement which could possibly <br />be natural as they are on the steeper slope of a ridge point. <br />(4) At the time of the resurvey we again walked over the accessible <br />control azea and found no new slipping or cracking that might <br />indicate any significant movement in the area. <br />(S) On the following page is a list of the vertical and horizontal <br />angles and the differences they represent between the initial <br />survey and the resurvey. <br />• <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.