My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV103226
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV103226
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 1:14:01 AM
Creation date
11/22/2007 1:04:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1994082
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
1/18/2002
Doc Name
REVIEW OF PERMITTEES RESPONSES TO ADEQUACY LETTER OF DEC 28 2001 SENECA COAL CO THE YOAST MINE DMG
From
DAN HERNANDEZ
To
MIKE BOULAY
Type & Sequence
MR16
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.
/
6
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
As mentioned above, it is recommended that Seneca Coal Company utilize a revised Scaled <br />Distance Factor of 35 for distances of 301 to 5000 feet. It is additionally appropriate that the <br />permittee propose the two additional Scaled Distance Factors (for less blasting within 300 <br />feet of ,and for over 5000 feet from, protected structures), rather than give us a set of tables. <br />I therefore recommend the following additional adequacy question: <br />6. The Division has reviewed the data submitted in Appendices V and VI. <br />However, the Division believes that it is more appropriate, for the purposes of <br />the permittee's DMG permit, that the permittee identify in the text of its permit <br />all three proposed Scaled Distance Factors, in a format similar to the table in <br />Rule 4.08.4(10). <br />As mentioned in our new Adequacy Question #5 above, the Division believes <br />that the regression analysis developed for the data from only Shot Number 1, <br />which developed a Scaled Distance Factor of 34.85 at 1.0 ips, should be the <br />analysis used in calculating the Scaled Distance Factors at 0.75 ips and 1.25 ips. <br />Please provide, with appropriately revised text, these two new proposed Scaled <br />Distance Factors, ensuring they are derived from the 95% confidence level <br />equation developed from the Shot Number 1 data (PPV=326.4 X (SD)^ t'6' ). <br />7. Responses to Adequacy Question #7 <br />The spacing (distance between shot holes generally measured in a direction parallel to the <br />longest tree face) of the three [es[ blasts was 28 feet. The permittee, in its proposed permit <br />text, indicates that it intends to using a spacing distance of 35 feet between blast holes. <br />Increased spacing distance can, though not always, cause increased energy confinement, <br />which in tum can increase ground vibration. The permittee acknowledged this, and stated <br />that "close attention should be paid to seismic monitors at the nearest residences to ensure <br />compliance". I therefore recommend the following comment to the permittee: <br />7. Seneca Coal Company's response to this item included the following sentence: <br />"If the spacing is increased from 28 feet, close attention should be paid to <br />seismic monitors at the nearest residences to ensure compliance". Please revise <br />this sentence to read, "If the spacing is greater than 28 feet, close attention will <br />be paid to seismic monitors at the nearest residences to ensure compliance", and <br />place this sentence in text that will be placed into the DMG permit. <br />8. Response to Adequacy Question #8 <br />The Division requested the permittee propose some level of seismic monitoring at the three <br />nearby residences when utilizing their proposed modified Scaled Distance Factors. The <br />permittee has committed to continuous monitoring at two of the three residences, stating that <br />monitoring at the third residence won't be necessary as it lies just beyond one of the <br />structures they will monitor. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.