My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2010-06-03_REVISION - M1977211
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Minerals
>
M1977211
>
2010-06-03_REVISION - M1977211
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:12:45 PM
Creation date
6/4/2010 11:55:43 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977211
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
6/3/2010
Doc Name
Submittal
From
Castle Concrete Company
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
TR15
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.
/
16
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
3. As the rubble field in the middle of the failure gets more saturated we have experienced greater <br />movement. <br />4. The wait and see option may not be the best option. <br />In Exhibits 8 and 9 you can see the movement since the first of the year. There was a slight acceleration just <br />prior to the blast in February but as you can see there have been only slight increases in the movement. The <br />graphs in Exhibits 10 and 11 show the movement of the quarry with regard to the prisms located on the north <br />edge of the scarp and the rubble field below. As you can see the designated prisms, 21, 22, and 24 are <br />moving and this movement has accelerated in prism 20 until the boulder finally lost stability, rolled and the <br />prism was lost. Prism 21 was lost when a rock from above fell and moved the prism enough that it is not <br />able to be located by the monitoring equipment. However, prisms 22 and 24 are slowing in their movement <br />and prisms 19 and 25 along with 26, 27, 28, 29 and 30 shows only the noise of the instrument.. <br />In 1986 after a smaller slide occurred, the findings of MSHA were that the only way to ever stabilize the <br />limestone was to remove it from the face of the granite. The original layback; plan of 2000 was to <br />incorporate this idea within the reclamation plan to provide a more stable gradual slope at the end of the <br />mining activities. This will still be the ultimate goal of the amended reclamation plan <br />With that said, Castle Concrete would propose being allowed to go back into the Pikeview Quarry and <br />continue its investigative work. This work will include backfilling and compacting material in the north end <br />of Area H so as to better fortify the toe of the slide. Work would commence from the most stable north end <br />and proceed south to where the bench in Area H with an elevation of 7140 feet exists. It will also include <br />some blasting and removal of limestone from the face of the decomposed granite as well as for stabilization <br />of existing areas that continue to move. <br />Exhibit 13 shows the southern boundary of the work on the north end of the quarry. The southern end of the <br />7140 elevation bench is depicted by the red line. The shaded area at the toe of the north end in Exhibit 13 <br />shows the area to be backfilled to fortify the toe. This area would be backfill.ed to the elevation of between <br />7200 and 7225 which would match the existing production floor elevation to the east of Area H <br />During the investigative process Castle Concrete will also need to blast and remove some limestone to <br />determine the best mining practice for the south end of the quarry and to determine the stability of the granite <br />beneath the limestone. In all instances Castle Concrete would request that it be allowed to process the <br />material removed during the investigation to facilitate have a clean work area within the investigative area. <br />This pertains specifically to the north end of the quarry along with the south end where we will be <br />investigating the best way to remove the limestone from the slope once it is removed from the granite. <br />For safety purposes the area designated by numbers 21, 22, and 24 in Exhibit 12, and highlighted in yellow <br />at the top of Exhibit 13, needs to be stabilized through blasting as it continues to move. Likewise more <br />attempts at stabilizing the area referenced by the numbers 13, 15, and 18 in Exhibit 12 will be undertaken. <br />This will allow Castle to continue the needed analysis for preparation of the required amendment.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.