Laserfiche WebLink
• compaction and stability. If it is desired to then switch back to including the fine <br />refuse combined with coarse, we do not believe there will be detrimental effects. <br />INSPECTION AND TESTING <br />Compaction Testing <br />Our review of compaction data from current and previous investigation <br />indicates that satisfactory compaction has been achieved since about 1992. This <br />correlates with the beginning of the Lincoln DeVore testing records reviewed. <br />Investigations previous to this indicated marginal to inadequate compaction. We do <br />not believe this represents a significant problem regarding RDA stability. It appears <br />two main factors are responsible for the increase in compaction. Additional drying <br />equipment was installed in 1991 and 1992 which could have a significant effect. The <br />• working surface has also increased significantly in size without a similar increase in <br />the rate of refuse placement. This allows the material to be spread thinner which will <br />significantly affect the compaction achieved. <br />We recommend that compaction testing be performed quarterly. If <br />unsatisfactory results are indicated (a significant proportion of tests less than 90%) <br />then we recommend retesting about a month later. Occasional test results below <br />90% compaction are not considered evidence of unsatisfactory condkions. As <br />previously discussed, testing should be performed towards the face of the RDA, <br />outside of the uncompacted zone shown on Fig. 8. The records of compaction <br />should include approximate location and elevation information. <br /> <br />27 <br />