Laserfiche WebLink
• morphology has been extensively modified by weathering. The landslide areas mapped <br />on Exhibit 6-1 were examined on black-and-white photography flown in 1992, 1997, and <br />1998. The 1992 photos were flown at scales of 1:27,000 and 1:60,000, the 1997 photos <br />were flown at the scale of 1:27,000, and the 1998 photos also were flown at the scale of <br />1:27,000. Natural color aerial photos flown in 1988 at the scale I: 12,000 were also <br />examined. These were the photos used in the earlier study (AI, 1994). <br />The comparative study of the data available indicate that no unusual problems <br />exist with respect to ground stability. In particular there are no questions that require <br />drilling for answers. <br />2.02 Conclusions <br />The following conclusions were reached from the investigation. <br />A) Landslides, with one minor exception (Landslide D) were not found in the <br />mining area, or in any places that will present unusual problems. This was the <br />only landslide out of the 17 mapped on Exhibit 6-1 that appeared to have any <br />validity, and that was questionable as a landslide. <br />B) Surface photographs of areas from which topsoil has been stripped do not <br />show any evidence of instability. <br />C) A photogeologic review of the areas in which landslides were mapped on <br />Exhibit 6-1 (SCC, 1995), and related field examination reinforce the earlier <br />conclusion (AI, 1994) that <br />"Geologic mass-wasting such as landslides, soil creep, rockfall, and debris <br />avalanches were not observed in the area and none are expected if reasonable <br />standazds of care are maintained during construction and maintenance <br />activities.,, <br />• <br />