Laserfiche WebLink
Geotechnical Responses to Cazier's Comments <br />March 11, 2011 Memorandum <br />d. Submittal(s) that clearly state the proposed location of each portal headwall after <br />exposure of actual ground conditions. Each submittal shall show the proposed portal <br />headwall station, ground conditions including both soils and rock at the proposed <br />headwall using terminology consistent with that used in other attachments and exhibits, <br />the rock cover over the crown, and the total cover over the crown. <br />Response <br />The May Day No. 1 collapse portal work plan proposes the sequences how the portal will <br />be repaired and evaluated. The design and work plan will be implemented as approved by <br />the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA). <br />Comment <br />7. Figure T-3a indicates a fault line that is part of the May Day Idaho Fault System intersects <br />the May Day No. I Portal. The existence of a fault suggests geologic hazards are present and <br />should initiate higher factors of safety for structures designed to stabilize the Portal No. 1 <br />highwall and protect the mill inside. Please address the Division's concerns about the fault in <br />the geologic hazard investigation/assessment (see Items 1, 3 and 6 above). <br />Response <br />The attached letter by Dr. Gonzales, dated March 31. 2011, was been prepared to address <br />the Division's concerns. <br />J. Erich Rauber, Colorado P.E. 26447 <br />Principal, R. Squared. <br />5/25/2011 <br />4