My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REP02010
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Report
>
REP02010
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:32:45 PM
Creation date
11/26/2007 10:08:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981044
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Date
3/16/1993
Doc Name
SUBSIDENCE REPORTS REVIEW FROM 6/91 TO 12/92 EAGLE 6 MINE C-81-044
From
DMG
To
CYPRUS EMPIRE CORP
Permit Index Doc Type
SUBSIDENCE REPORT
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.
/
3
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
Recommendation: <br />Please provide the Division with the original elevation <br />figures for the A series of monuments and include this number <br />in the succeeding reports as a column of its own. <br />Also, please provide the Division with the explanation as to <br />why monument A8 has not been monitored since 1991. Data <br />indicate that this monument may be the one in which maximum <br />subsidence has occurred. <br />3. B Series <br />Numbers for the B series report showing the original <br />elevation, do not match from the 6-12/91 to the 1-6/92 <br />report. In particular monuments B3, B4, B5 and B6 are <br />over the predicted Smax limit of 10.5 feet when one set <br />of data is used. <br />Recommendation: <br />Please provide an explanation for the discrepancy of original <br />baseline data in these two reports and the correct Smax for <br />the highlighted monuments above. <br />Should the data illustrate that Smax has been exceeded, the <br />Division recommends that Empire Energy resubmit the predicted <br />amounts to reflect the current conditions. This could be in <br />the form of a minor revision. <br />4. C Series <br />Numbers do not match in the pre-mining elevation columns <br />from the 6-12/91 report to the 1-6/92 and 7-12/92 <br />reports. An average of .5 feet has been subtracted from <br />the previous report totals. Calculations indicate that <br />if the original elevation figures are taken from the 6- <br />12/91 report, that the "total" should be the following <br />(in sequence): 4.5, 4.3, 3.7, 4.4, 4.65, 4.89, 4.7, 4.6, <br />4.25, 4.04, 3.8, 3.4 and 3.5 respectively. <br />Monument C12 on 7-12/92 report in the "total" column <br />should be 3.3 feet, not the 2.1 amount. <br />Recommendations: <br />The operator needs to submit a reason why the point "Amos" was <br />readjusted by 1.5 feet. <br />Please provide an explanation for the discrepancy between the <br />figures given in successive reports. The difference is <br />greater than the .i accepted range and beyond 1.5 foot <br />difference as recalculated by the Amos adjustment. <br />E. D Series <br />Data is correct for the most part, with the one exception <br />of monument D12, which is off by 0.9 feet. Please <br />correct this in succeeding reports. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.