Laserfiche WebLink
NUCLA SWELL FACTOR STUDY <br /> Introduction <br /> A revision to Permit C-81-008 was submitted to CMLRD on November 1, 1986. This revision <br /> was subsequently approved, and contained certain commitments made by Peabody. One such <br /> commitment was to evaluate the swell factor utilized to develop the postmining topography <br /> landform, and determine if that swell factor is reasonable. The results of the evaluation <br /> were to be submitted to CMLRD. <br /> A swell factor study was initiated in the first cut of Area No. 1 in December, 1986. The <br /> methodology and results of this study are presented below. <br /> Methodology <br /> The general methodology utilized in this swell factor study was to calculate the amount of <br /> bank and loose cubic yards of material excavated, then determine the swell factor. The <br /> average-end-area method was used to determine the volumes. <br /> In preparation for the calculations, cross sections depicting the existing topography <br /> (premining cross sections) prior to any mining activity, were surveyed throughout Area No. <br /> 1 as shown on Figure 1. Once mining had progressed sufficiently to develop an adequate <br /> amount of cut and fill material, another set of cross sections (postmining cross section) <br /> were surveyed along the premining cross section to define changes in the topography <br /> resulting from the mining operations. These cross sections are enclosed. <br /> To determine the volumes of material, both sets of cross sections were plotted and <br /> reviewed for reasonableness. Upon review of the cross sections, it was necessary to <br /> define three types of areas. These areas are: fills, cuts, and single areas of both fill <br /> and cut. The areas of fill and cut represent portions of the pit that were excavated and <br /> later filled upon. These areas were included in the fill and cut calculations. The cut <br /> and fill area was then calculated at each cross section. After the areas were calculated <br /> and average distance between each cross section determined, the volume of both cut and <br /> fill was calculated and shown on Table 1. <br />