Laserfiche WebLink
" Prevention of the recovery of significant mineral resources. <br />Impact <br />4.4-1 The proposed project would expose workers and project facilities to seismic hazards. <br />Noactive faults have been identified o1the site (qGH. 1993). The major aeionnin risk associated <br />-- <br />withthe project is ground shaking resulting from earthquakes occurring mndistant faults. Based <br />on the data presently <br />' <br />The K8odU5ad WYenca]|i Intensity of \/||+ identified for the project area indicates the maximum level <br />of damage that may be expected (refer toTable 4.4.2). Potential impacts to the workers and <br />facilities include worker oufgtv, damage to struntureu, breach of solid waste containment, soil <br />!� <br />|iquefantion, seismic ground settlement and lateral spreading along project slopes. <br />Workers would be subject to danger from failing or moving structurem, equipment, or motahm|o. <br />Structures and other solid waste handling facilities would be subject to damage ceuaoU by <br />structural, slope orfoundation failure. The project geotechnical report (RGH.1QA3) indicates that <br />no subsurface conditions were observed that would suggest the presence of materials susceptible <br />to seismically induced settlement, liquefaction or lateral spreading. The report also indicates that, <br />0� <br />under certain conditiono, some of the project slopes that are steeper than 2:1 (horizontal to <br />vertical) could be un����|� during seismic loading (refer )nnp�n� 4.4'B\. <br />` ' <br />Mitigation <br />4/4-1 Due to the potential for strong ground shaking at the Site, the design and construction of the <br />project facilities shall be in strict accordance with ounom8 standards for earthquake -resistant <br />construction. Seismic damkln shall be in compliance with the Uniform Building Code (seismic <br />zone 4), as apooUUed in the project geotechnical report /RGH. 1983\. Site operations shall be <br />conducted according to applicable Occupational Safety and Health Administration standards. <br />A post -earthquake inspection plan could be developed to allow potential damage incurred as a <br />result ofstructural, u|ope, orfoundation failure during e seismic event to be quantified and <br />!� <br />repaired omsoon aspractical after the event. <br />There is no realistic way iOwhich the seismic shaking hazard can be ovoided, however, design <br />of the structures in accordance with regulations is expected to satisfactorily mitigate the effects <br />ofground shaking. <br />These mitigations would reduce the potential seismic impacts too|esa-than-oignificantlevel. <br />Impact <br />4.4-2 Excavated and fill slopes at the proposed project site could potentially fail, causing injury, <br />damage Xofacilities, or burying solid waste material. <br />Stability analyses of the existing and proposed olooao at the project site URGH. 1993\. indicate <br />that slopes inclined at 2:1 orflatter will satisfactorily fill a|opom are pnzpadv <br />constructed). For slopes steeper than 2:1, certain conditions including high ground water <br />Aoonng1imoeo induced during heavy precipitation) and lurching (aaiannioaUy induced) could result <br />in slope failures. <br />Project documentation does not indicate whether or not fill slopes were placed during the <br />reclamation of the former quarry pit, and whether these slopes were properly constructed. <br />ER -93- -81 ' <br />