Laserfiche WebLink
<br />v. <br />vi. <br />Recommendations: <br />Operator should identify correct elevations or submit a <br />revision for the predicted Smax amount to exceed 10.5 feet. <br />C Beries <br />This monument series parallels mining advance and overlies the <br />room and pillar workings. <br />Comments: <br />Again, these figures do not match in the pre-mining elevation <br />numbers from 6-12/91 report to the 1-6/92 report nor to the 7- <br />12/92 report. Monuments C5,C6,C7,C9 and C10 do not match Prom <br />6-12/91 to 1-6/92 and monuments C1, C2,C5,C6,C7,C8,C9 and C12 <br />numbers have been altered from 1-6/92 to 7-12/92 report <br />figures in the "previous report" column. The operator has <br />been "shaving off" an average of .5 feet between each report <br />sequence. Calculations indicate that if the original <br />elevation figures are taken from the 6-12/91 report, that the <br />"Total" should be the following (in sequence): 4.5, 4.3, 3.7, <br />4.4, 4.65, 4.89, 4.7, 4.6, 4.25, 4.04, 3.8, 3.4 and 3.5 <br />respectively. <br />Monument C12 on 7-12/92 report, column "total", for 7-12/92 is <br />incorrect as 2.1 feet and should be 3.3 feet. <br />Supposedly the operator has resurveyed this series and <br />indicates that the new control point, "Amos" has adjusted <br />baseline elevations by lowering the numbers by 1.5 feet (see <br />footnote 2; 7-12/92 report). I have added this amount in all <br />the C series before commenting on the above issues. <br />Recommendations: <br />That the operator explain why "Amos" was re-adjusted. <br />That the operator submit a reason for the discrepancy between <br />the figures given is the "previous report" column since those <br />are not the correct ones, aad are beyond the .1 accepted range <br />as implied in the introduction. <br />D Series <br />The D series monuments are directly under the "F" seam entries <br />for the room and pillar workings, therefore Smax experienced <br />should be greater than the C series even though they are <br />parallel. Smax should still be within the predicted 10.5 <br />feet. <br />Comments: <br />Data is consistent and accurate within all three reports <br />reviewed when adjusted for the "Amos" 1.5 foot variation and <br />control point reduction. <br />