My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REP21317
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Report
>
REP21317
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 11:54:44 PM
Creation date
11/27/2007 3:07:03 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980007
IBM Index Class Name
Report
Doc Date
9/22/1995
Doc Name
Upper Refuse Pile Designs - J. Pendleton comment letter
From
DMG
To
CHRISTINE JOHNSON
Permit Index Doc Type
Waste Pile/Fill 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.
/
5
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
<br />Memo to Christine Johnston <br />MCC Upper Repuse Pile <br />page 3 <br />Page 10 <br />The text states; "Section 4.09.1 of the Regulations of the <br />Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board for Coal Mining states <br />that excess spoil shall be placed to ensure a long-term static <br />safety factor of 1.5. To meet this requirement, a static <br />earthquake loading of 0.05 g has been applied during the <br />stability analysis." To avoid any confusion, the URP is a <br />coal mine waste bank. Underground development waste is no <br />longer categorized with excess spoil, but is now included <br />under the definition of coal mine waste. As such the URP is <br />subject to compliance with Rule 4.10, which includes <br />compliance with Rule 4.09 by reference, except when more <br />stringent requirements are imposed by Rule 4.10. Rule <br />4.10.4(2) requires all coal mine waste banks to achieve a <br />minimum static safety factor of 1.5. Further, Rule 4.10.4(3) <br />requires all coal mine waste banks to be compacted to a <br />minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density in lifts of <br />not more than 24 inches in thickness. <br />Impacts of Subsidence <br />The URP was originally included in the permit application by <br />revision in 1984. On page 35 of the 1984 permit revision <br />application, Anaconda stated: <br />"Effect of Mining on Refuse Pile Stability <br />The refuse pile will be located above the main entries <br />which must remain stable for the life of the mine. There <br />are no plans for secondary mining (pillar extraction <br />panels) near this part of the main entries. The <br />extraction of the primary mining will not induce any <br />subsidence. Therefore, underground extraction will have <br />no effect on the refuse disposal pile." <br />Subsequent modifications to the mine plan have resulted in <br />subsidence of the URP site. In fact, several subsidence <br />cracks have been documented within the proposed footprint of <br />the pile. <br />The application will have to discuss the implications of mine- <br />induced subsidence for the pile. These implications include <br />the implications for the strength of the overburden materials <br />upon which the pile will be founded. Will multi-seam mine- <br />induced subsidence effect the material strength of the <br />materials? Should these impacts be reflected in the material <br />strengths or failure modes addressed within the stability <br />analyses? These implications also include design <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.