My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2008-04-22_PERMIT FILE - C1981017 (15)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Coal
>
C1981017
>
2008-04-22_PERMIT FILE - C1981017 (15)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:28:22 PM
Creation date
4/30/2008 9:53:38 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981017
IBM Index Class Name
PERMIT FILE
Doc Date
4/22/2008
Section_Exhibit Name
Chapter II-B Operation Plan - Permit Area
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.
/
41
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
Chapter II <br />Engineering studies of the site had concluded that it was geotechnically sound <br />(APP. II-B-3) <br />The character and physical properties of the rock tunnel waste were studied in detail by <br />Lincoln DeVore in 1979. Lincoln DeVore also performed the required stability analyses <br />and recommended appropriate construction procedures for the rock waste disposal <br />facility. <br />The studies indicated that the rock waste comprises a fairly good quality rockfill with a <br />minor amount of fines. According to the Unified Classification System, it could probably <br />be classified as a silty gravel (GM) or possibly as a poorly graded gravel-sand mixture <br />with little fines (GO). <br />Lincoln DeVore performed stability analyses of a slope not exceeding 60 feet in height. <br />The analyzed slope had two ten foot wide benches included. The slope between the <br />benches was 2(H):1(V). Other, flatter slopes were analyzed as well. As can be <br />expected, the factors of safety were reasonably high. A minimum factor of safety was <br />found to be equal to 3.5. <br />Based on the results of these analyses, Lincoln DeVore recommended to compact the <br />outer shell of the waste pile to 90% of Maximum Proctor Density. They also <br />recommended to place the waste in lifts not to exceed 12 inches loose thickness. <br />Material located beyond the outer shell of the pile was recommended to be spread in <br />lifts not exceeding two feet in thickness. No compaction was recommended for this <br />• zone of the facility. <br />Prior to disturbance of this area, topsoil and B horizon material were salvaged, <br />stockpiled, and revegetated. <br />Mid-Continent trucked the tunnel spoil material to the disposal area, then spread and <br />compacted it according to the Lincoln DeVore recommendations. Further <br />recommendations of Geo-Hydro in 1984 were also followed. <br />Mid-Continent hired Geo-Hydro Consulting, Inc. (Geo-Hydro) to determine whether <br />construction methods for the rock tunnel disposal site met applicable design criteria, <br />and recommend any necessary changes to construction methods. The Geo-Hydro <br />report was submitted in 1984, and is contained in (App. II-B-3).M <br />Geo-Hydro reviewed all available material related to the construction of the rock tunnel <br />waste disposal facility, reviewed the stability analyses, construction procedures which <br />had been recommended in the pertinent reports, and the applicable regulations of the <br />state. <br />*W.A. Wahler & Associates: Mid-Continent Coal and Coke Company, Laboratory <br />Test Results (1977); Morrison-Knudsen Company: Refuse Disposal Study (1977); <br />Lincoln DeVore: Slope Stability Analysis, Mid-Continent Tunnel Project (1979). <br />45 <br />~. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.