Laserfiche WebLink
iii iiiiuiiiiiii iii <br />999 <br />To: Sandra Brown, Mike Boulay <br />From: Janet Binns /C <br />~_ <br />Date: March 9, 2 1\` <br />Re: Notes on Seneca Blasting record <br />Sandy Brown provided a blasting record from Seneca II W mine dated 12/13/00. We looked at this <br />record in the OSM Blasting and Inspection class in St. Louis, MO, on 3/7/01, as an example of actual <br />logs. <br />The instructors had some concerns with the record. Although the types of delays were recorded on the <br />front of the form, it was not clear from the diagram off the holes where each of the delays were placed. <br />• OSM instructors recommend that location of each delay type be included in the record. <br />• There is no record of downhole delays. This information needs to be included. <br />• Type of material blasted is listed as "Overburden". This description needs to be more definitive; ex. <br />20' Sandstone, 5' Mudstone, 35' weak shale. A sketch of a typical hole profile could provide this <br />detail. <br />• Weight of explosive per hole needs to be more enact. SCC records an average for all the holes. If <br />the hole depths are a range from 29 fr. - 106 ft. each hole would not contain the same weight of <br />explosive. A range would be appropriate instead of a mean. <br />• The blasting record needs to provide the Division adequate information to reconstruct the blast. I.e. <br />how many holes and lbs. Of explosives were detonating within an 8 ms period? Accurate records <br />document compliance by the operator and can show scaled distance values as being within <br />regulatory limits in the event of blasting damage complaints. <br />