tellmore masocha (b .s c (hons) civil eng)gcs-sa.biz › wp-content › uploads › 2015 › 07 ›...
TRANSCRIPT
-
Report Number: AISP/FBC/P12/10/02
19 June 2012
DRAFT DESIGN REPORT
FORBES COAL NEW DISCARD DUMP
Tellmore Masocha (B.Sc (Hons) Civil Eng)
-
AfriCan Innovative Solutions and Projects CC Draft Design Report
Forbes Coal Draft Design Report ii June 2012
Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................................................................................... II
1 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 AIM OF THIS REPORT .............................................................................................................................................................. 1
2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY........................................................................................................................... 1
2.1 TAILINGS STORAGE FACILITY DESIGN CRITERIA ....................................................................................................... 1
2.2 RETURN WATER DAM CRITERIA ....................................................................................................................................... 2
2.3 CLIMATIC DATA ........................................................................................................................................................................ 2
2.4 DECANT SYSTEM....................................................................................................................................................................... 2
2.5 UNDER DRAINAGE .................................................................................................................................................................. 2
2.6 CLEAN AND DIRTY WATER SEPARATION CANALS ................................................................................................. 3
2.7 SOLUTION TRENCH ................................................................................................................................................................ 3
2.8 ACCESS ROAD ........................................................................................................................................................................... 3
3 BATTERY LIMITS AND CONSTRAINTS .............................................................................................. 3
3.1 SITE DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................................................................................... 3
3.2 CONSTRAINTS ........................................................................................................................................................................... 4
3.3 LEGISLATURE .............................................................................................................................................................................. 4
4 HYDROLOGICAL ASSESSMENT ........................................................................................................... 4
4.1 RAINFALL ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 4
5 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS .................................................................................................... 6
5.1 GROUND WATER ..................................................................................................................................................................... 6
5.2 CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL ............................................................................................................................................... 7
6 DISCARD DUMP DESIGN ........................................................................................................................ 7
6.1 COAL TAILINGS CHARACTERISTICS ................................................................................................................................ 7
6.2 DISCARD DUMP CAPACITY ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................................ 8
6.3 PUSH-UP STARTER WALLS ................................................................................................................................................. 10
6.4 UNDER DRAINAGE ............................................................................................................................................................... 11
6.5 SOLUTION TRENCH ............................................................................................................................................................. 11
6.6 ACCESS ROAD ........................................................................................................................................................................ 11
6.7 CLEAN AND DIRTY WATER SEPARATION CANALS .............................................................................................. 11
6.8 FENCING .................................................................................................................................................................................... 12
-
AfriCan Innovative Solutions and Projects CC Draft Design Report
Forbes Coal Draft Design Report iii June 2012
7 RETURN WATER DAM DESIGN .......................................................................................................... 12
8 POLLUTION CONTROL MEASURES .................................................................................................. 15
9 STABILITY ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................... 15
10 OPERATION ........................................................................................................................................ 16
10.1 SUPERVISION AND MONITORING ................................................................................................................................. 16
10.1.1 By the mine ............................................................................................................................................... 16
10.1.2 By the Operating Contractor .................................................................................................................... 16
10.1.3 Legal Appointments .................................................................................................................................. 16
10.1.4 The Professional Engineer ....................................................................................................................... 16
10.2 OPERATION PROCEDURES ................................................................................................................................................ 16
10.2.1 Slurry Ponds ............................................................................................................................................. 16
10.2.2 Return water dam ..................................................................................................................................... 16
10.2.3 Maintenance ............................................................................................................................................. 17
10.2.4 Inspection ................................................................................................................................................. 17
11 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................... 17
12 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................................................... 18
LIST OF ANNEXURES ................................................................................................................................... 19
ANNEXURE A: DRAWINGS ......................................................................................................................... 19
-
AfriCan Innovative Solutions and Projects CC Draft Design Report
Forbes Coal Draft Design Report iv June 2012
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Magdalena Colliery average monthly rainfall ............................................................................................................................ 5
Figure 2: Magdalena Colliery monthly average maximum and minimum temperatures ................................................................ 6
Figure 3: Discard Dump design input .......................................................................................................................................................... 8
Figure 4: Discard Dump capacity assessment ........................................................................................................................................... 9
Figure 5: Discard Dump stage capacity graphs ...................................................................................................................................... 10
Figure 6: Return Water Dam 1 capacity analysis .................................................................................................................................. 13
Figure 7: Return Water Dam 2 capacity analysis .................................................................................................................................. 14
-
AfriCan Innovative Solutions and Projects CC Draft Design Report
Forbes Coal Draft Design Report v June 2012
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Discard dump footprint centre coordinates ............................................................................................................................. 1
Table 2: Trapezoidal solution trench section ......................................................................................................................................... 11
Table 3: Pollution Controll Measures ...................................................................................................................................................... 15
-
AfriCan Innovative Solutions and Projects CC Draft Design Report
Forbes Coal Draft Design Report 1 June 2012
1 INTRODUCTION
Forbes Coal (formerly Slater Coal) embarked on an expansion program of its operations on Mooidoorn Hoek Farm
No. 3722 near Dundee in KwaZulu Natal resulting in need for additional storage space to complement the existing coal
discard which is almost at the end of its life. African Innovative Solutions and Projects (AISP) CC was appointed by
Forbes Coal (Pty) Ltd to design the coal discard dump in April 2012.
1.1 Aim of this report
The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of the design criteria, design parameters used and the resulting
design process output that will affect the successful operation and subsequent closure of the facility in an
environmentally acceptable manner.
2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This section summarises the design criteria of the coal slurry ponds and its associated storm water infrastructure.
The proposed footprint area is located on the following geographical centre coordinates:
Table 1: Discard dump footprint centre coordinates
Description Latitude (o ‘ “) Longitude (o ‘ “)
Centre of TSF 27o58’52.43” 30o11’45.29”
2.1 Tailings Storage Facility design criteria
The proposed discard dump foot print area is located within the mine’s property boundary. The proposed geometry
was influenced by the existence of underground mine workings to the east of the new discard dump stretching from
the north to the south. The design criteria are as follows:
� Type of facility: coal discard dump.
� Design life of mine estimated at: 22years.
� Tonnage production per year: 640 000t
� Assumed in-situ density: 1.469tm-3.
� Total tonnage in life of mine: 14 080 000t
� Total volume of residue: 9 584 751.5m3.
-
AfriCan Innovative Solutions and Projects CC Draft Design Report
Forbes Coal Draft Design Report 2 June 2012
2.2 Return Water Dam criteria
The return water dam design was designed to adhere to the National Water Act and SANS 10286: 1998 regulations,
and therefore the criteria for the design of the same are as follows:
� Design return period: I:100year
� Design flood: 146.2mm
� Required volume: 14 500m3
� Freeboard: 0.8m
� Depth including freeboard: 4m
The return water dam is designed with a clay / HDPE composite liner in line with statutory requirements for surface
and ground water pollution control.
2.3 Climatic Data
Dundee receives an average of about 791.5mm of rain per year, with most rainfall occurring mainly during midsummer.
Monthly distribution of average daily maximum and minimum temperatures range from about 8°C in mid winter to
28°C in summer. Details of the rainfall and temperature variations of the area are dealt with in Section 0.
2.4 Decant System
It was envisaged that coal will be deposited in “dry” state and as such, no conventional decant system will be designed
for this project. However, momentary rising of the phreatic surface can be expected from seepage especially after a
prolonged low frequence storm. Supernatant water must then be drained off the top of the dump as soon as possible,
and to achieve this purpose, an “emergency type” pump budge will be utilised. The system must be sized to decant a 24
hour 1:100 year storm in not more than 72 hours (three days).
2.5 Under Drainage
Previous site studies have indicated that the water table is high and that there is need for pollution control measures to
ensure seepage does not come into contact with ground water under the impoundment. The topography of the site is
such that seepage flows downhill and an under-drainage system incorporated at the toe will capture all seepage; and
also help with consolidation necessary for strength gain and stability of the discard dump. The system will consist of
perforated or slotted geo-pipes just behind the starter push-up walls connected to out-falling solid pipes discharging
into the solution trench and then to the return water dam.
-
AfriCan Innovative Solutions and Projects CC Draft Design Report
Forbes Coal Draft Design Report 3 June 2012
2.6 Clean and Dirty Water Separation Canals
To prevent storm water pollution, cut off trenches will be excavated in phases on the upstream of the facility to divert
“clean” storm water received on the upstream catchment to the stream without passing through the contaminated site.
The positions of the storm diversion trenches will be clearly marked on the detailed layouts.
2.7 Solution trench
The solution trench will be designed to contain flows resulting from the cumulative effects of the following:
(i) Seepage from under drains, plus
(ii) discard dump supernatant water resulting from a 1:100 year 24hour storm, plus
2.8 Access Road
Gravel “dirty” roads sufficiently network the site under any weather conditions. Since the envisaged method of
deposition is upstream mechanical tipping by truck, the impoundment has been designed with five mitre wide berms at
every five mitre vertical lift to enable access by tipper trucks at any point around the dam. Maintenance shall follow
procedures stipulated in the Operations Manual to ensure access under any weather conditions and at any time.
3 BATTERY LIMITS AND CONSTRAINTS
3.1 Site Description
The terms of reference for the design of the coal residue deposit at Mooidoornhoek Hoek Farm No. 3722 are to
design the discard dump within the existing statutory requirements promulgated under various South African Acts as
outlined in section a) and to be capable of satisfying the design criteria stipulated in section 2.1.
The proposed site for the discard dump was chosen by the client, however, best practice industry guidelines were
applied to optimise the selected area. Two options were provided and are presented in the attached layouts giving due
diligence to the following factors:
(i) Environmental considerations: to ensure the chosen area causes the least land degradation and pollution,
and that safety risks are minimised as far as is practical,
(ii) Mine planning: consideration was given to ensure no ore sterilisation or any encroachment of the facility
to future mining plans,
(iii) Economic considerations: all the options considered will be rigorously investigated and the most cost
effective choice recommended to the client.
-
AfriCan Innovative Solutions and Projects CC Draft Design Report
Forbes Coal Draft Design Report 4 June 2012
3.2 Constraints
Constraints considered include the following:
a) Property boundary: the facility is to be wholly located within the property boundary of the mine which is
Mooidoorn Hoek Farm No. 3722,
b) Underground mine workings: there exist underground workings traversing the proposed extension area
ranging from as shallow as 25m below natural ground level to 50m. The Minerals Act and provisions of SANS
10286:1998 prohibits erection of a structure within 100m of underground workings without written
permission from the Minister;
c) An open pit the mine is using as a return water facility is in the middle of the proposed extension area
3.3 Legislature
The detailed design presented in this report was completed in accordance with the requirements of the following
legislation which pertains to the design, construction, operation and management of mine residue deposits:
• The National Water Act (Act 36 of 1968).
• The Minerals Act (Act 50 of 1991).
• Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (Act 28 of 2002)
• The Mine Health and Safety Act (Act 29 of 1996).
• The Mines and Works Act (Act 45 of 1965).
• The Environmental Conservation Act (Act 100 of 1982).
• The Soils Conservation Act (Act 76 of 1969).
Additionally, the following documents were referenced;
• Department of Mineral and Energy (DME) guideline for the compilation of a mandatory code of practice for
mine residue (DME 16/3/2/5-A1)
• South African National Standards (SANS) Code of Practice for Mine Residue (SANS 10286:1998)
4 HYDROLOGICAL ASSESSMENT
The mine lies in the Buffalo Catchment Management area and is drainage region V32.
4.1 Rainfall
Dundee receives an average of about 791.5mm of rain per year, with most rainfall occurring mainly during midsummer.
Figure 1 shows the average rainfall values for the project site.
-
AfriCan Innovative Solutions and Projects CC Draft Design Report
Forbes Coal Draft Design Report 5 June 2012
Figure 1: Magdalena Colliery average monthly rainfall
The monthly distribution of average daily maximum temperatures (Figure 2) shows that the average midday
temperatures for the project area range from 23°C in mid winter (which occurs in June or July) to 28°C in summer.
The region is the coldest during June and July when the mercury drops to 8°C on average during the night. Consult
Figure 2 for an indication of the monthly variation of average minimum daily temperatures.
145.60
112.10
76.00
44.10
14.80 12.80
5.60
18.60
36.60
86.10
108.80
130.40
-
20.00
40.00
60.00
80.00
100.00
120.00
140.00
160.00
January February March April May June July August September October November December
Average Rainfall (mm)
AVERAGE RAINFALL [mm]
-
AfriCan Innovative Solutions and Projects CC Draft Design Report
Forbes Coal Draft Design Report 6 June 2012
Figure 2: Magdalena Colliery monthly average maximum and minimum temperatures
5 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATIONS
Geotechnical data as used for this project was adopted from previous reports as contained in the following available
data:
� Technical Design Report - November 2008
� Code of practice – prepared 2008
� Annual Report 2010,
� Annual Report 2012,
� Survey in CSV format.
As an ongoing design and monitoring process, more samples will need to be taken for analysis now, to enable results
comparison and to allow adjustments in both the design and operation accordingly.
5.1 Ground water
Ground water is reported to have been encountered at depths below 6m, and is envisaged not to affect construction
or operation of both the storage and return water systems as both these are designed at a depth not exceeding 5m
below ground level.
28 28 28
26
25
23 23
24
26
27 27 27
17 17 17
14
10
9
8
10
12
14
16
17
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
January February March April May June July August September October November December
AVERAGE HIGH TEMPERATURE [oC]
AVERAGE LOW TEMPERATURE [oC]
-
AfriCan Innovative Solutions and Projects CC Draft Design Report
Forbes Coal Draft Design Report 7 June 2012
5.2 Construction material
The ferricrete specified for the construction of both the slurry ponds’ and return water dam embankments was
reported to have been found in the western portion of the site. There is a reported transition from sandy hill-wash
soils at the top to silty-sand through clayey sand to firm/stiff silts and clays at depth around the site. From the
laboratory results, the clay has low to medium activity.
The suitability of the clay to use as a liner will need to be investigated further. Samples of both the clay and slurry from
the plant will be taken for determination of these geotechnical design parameters.
6 DISCARD DUMP DESIGN
6.1 Coal tailings characteristics
The following design input was used as researched and also as supplied by the client in some instances.
-
AfriCan Innovative Solutions and Projects CC Draft Design Report
Forbes Coal Draft Design Report 8 June 2012
Figure 3: Discard Dump design input
6.2 Discard Dump capacity analysis
The survey data supplied by the client was modelled in the computer package AutoCAD Civil 3D. The stage capacity
graphs are included in Figure 4 and Error! Reference source not found. below for visual identification purposes.
It can be seen from the capacity analysis that the discard dump as modelled cannot sustain the full 22year life span but
just 63% (14years). However, area immediately east of the underground workings can be incorporated to balance the
shortfall of 8years.
Client: FORBES COAL
Project: NEW COAL DISCARD DUMP DESIGN
Description: CAPACITY DETERMINATION
Project No.: P12 - 10
Date: 23-Apr-12
Author: AiSP - TM
1.00 GENERAL INFORMATION
1.01 Name of Mine FORBES COAL
1.02 Postal Address of Mine
1.03 Telephone Number (Area code in Brackets)
1.04 Magisterial District
1.05 Dept of Mineral and Energy Affairs Region
1.06 Nearest Town Dundee
1.07 Distance to Town 22 km
1.08 Direction from Town North North-West
1.09 Name of person responsible for residue deposit to Minerals Act Regulations
1.10 Number of deposit
1.11 Common name of deposit Coal Discard
1.12 Name of closest river/stream to the deposit
2.00 DESIGN PARAMETERS
2.01 Reserves 14 080 000 t
2.02 Specific Gravity 2.65
2.03 Production Rate 53 333 tpm
2.04 % to tailings dam: 100%
2.05 Supply 640 000 t/year
2.06 Insitu Density 1.47 t/m3 - (average)
2.07 Lifetime 22.00 years
2.08 Side Slope (Overall) 1.00 vertical to
3.00 horizontal
2.09 Max Rate of Rise 4.50 m/year
2.10 Solids Concentration by Mass Cw 100.00 %
2.11 Mass flow rate Ms 73.06 t/h
2.12 Start of deposition 2012 year
2.13 Mean annual precipitation 791.5 mm/y
2.14 Mean annual evaporation 1670.5 mm/y
2.15 Evaporation correction factor 84% %
2.16 1 in 100 year 24 hr rainfall 146.2 mm
DISCARD DUMP DESIGN - INPUT
-
AfriCan Innovative Solutions and Projects CC Draft Design Report
Forbes Coal Draft Design Report 9 June 2012
Figure 4: Discard Dump capacity assessment
Elevation
(masl)
Cumulative
Volume
(m3)
Incremental
Volume
(m3)
Surface
Area
(m2)
Surface
Area
(ha)
1255 - 0.00 - 0.00
1260 8 788.41 8788.4135 3 515.37 0.35
1265 74 860.76 66072.3435 22 913.57 2.29
1270 221 058.68 146197.9228 35 565.60 3.56
1275 415 584.88 194526.196 42 244.88 4.22
1280 632 370.11 216785.239 44 469.21 4.45
1285 901 955.59 269585.4793 63 364.98 6.34
1290 1 257 518.30 355562.708 78 860.11 7.89
1295 1 682 927.22 425408.9148 91 303.46 9.13
1300 2 198 219.04 515291.819 114 813.27 11.48
1305 2 788 204.77 589985.739 121 181.03 12.12
1310 3 392 739.11 604534.3363 120 632.71 12.06
1315 3 991 033.11 598294.001 118 684.89 11.87
1320 4 570 507.02 579473.9083 113 104.67 11.31
1325 5 120 537.19 550030.1715 106 907.40 10.69
1330 5 636 823.56 516286.3658 99 607.15 9.96
1335 5 986 090.29 349266.7288 40 099.54 4.01
Project No.: P12 - 10
Date: 23-Apr-12
Author: AiSP - TM
DAM CAPACITY
Client: FORBES COAL
Project: NEW COAL DISCARD DUMP DESIGN
Description: CAPACITY DETERMINATION
1250
1260
1270
1280
1290
1300
1310
1320
1330
1340
- 1 000 000 2 000 000 3 000 000 4 000 000 5 000 000 6 000 000 7 000 000
Ele
vati
on
(mas
l)
Volume (m3)
Dam Capacity
1250
1260
1270
1280
1290
1300
1310
1320
1330
1340
- 20 000 40 000 60 000 80 000 100 000 120 000 140 000
Ele
vati
on
(m
asl)
Surface Area (m2)
Dam Surface Area
-
AfriCan Innovative Solutions and Projects CC Draft Design Report
Forbes Coal Draft Design Report 10 June 2012
Figure 5: Discard Dump stage capacity graphs
6.3 Push-up starter walls
An initial box-cut of 750mm deep must be cut into the in-situ material over twice the width of the embankment crest
for anchorage. The clay material on the walls will be compacted to 98% Proctor Density within 2% of the optimum
moisture content. Care must be taken during compaction that the clay is compacted in layers not exceeding 200mm,
Under all circumstances, the optimum moisture content must be maintained as per specifications.
tons From To
years 2012 2026
t/m3
Description: CAPACITY DETERMINATION
640 000
Deposition Rate
(tons/year)
Date
8 960 000
Tonnage Stored (106 tons)
Tim
e (years
)
STAGE / CAPACITY CURVES
1.469Assumed in-situ dry density:
Client:
Project:
FORBES COAL
Cre
st E
levation (m
asl)
NEW COAL DISCARD DUMP DESIGN
Tonnage Delivered (106 tons)
23-Apr-12
Rate of Rise (metres/year)
Project No.: P12 - 10
Tim
e (years
)
Rate of Rise (metres/year)
Cre
st E
levation (m
asl)
14Delivery period:
Outer wall side slopes: 1V:3H
Total tonnage delivered:
Date:
Author: AiSP - TM
1 260
1 270
1 280
1 290
1 300
1 310
1 320
1 330
1 340010203040
1 260
1 270
1 280
1 290
1 300
1 310
1 320
1 330
1 3400 2 4 6 8 10
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14010203040 0
2
4
6
8
10
12
140 2 4 6 8 10
-
AfriCan Innovative Solutions and Projects CC Draft Design Report
Forbes Coal Draft Design Report 11 June 2012
6.4 Under drainage
Internal under drainage is of vital importance to minimising of ground water pollution hence the environmental safety.
As such a reticulation of drains was provided on the inside toe of the push up starter wall right through the dam
perimeter. The under-drainage will facilitate the following:
• Collect leachate to the solution trench and then onto the return water dam,
• Minimise ground water pollution,
• Maintaining a low phreatic surface hence reduce pore pressure on the pond embankment walls especially the
downstream ones,
The drainage system comprises 110mm diameter perforated geo-pipes (Drainex) within the drainage catchment of each
basin connected to 110mm diameter solid imperforated pipes (Kabelflex). Leachate collected in these is discharged into
the solution trench which in turn discharges into the return water dam through a silt trap.
6.5 Solution trench
The solution trench was sized to carry the following:
(i) Drain flows, and
(ii) Supernatant water drainage.
Table 2: Trapezoidal solution trench section
Item Description Quantity
1 Side slope: 1v:?h 1.5
2 Bottom width 1000mm
3 Depth 1000mm
6.6 Access road
Access to the entire coal discard storage facility will be provided by means of a 4m wide gravel crest access roads at
each 10m vertical lift of the dump. The crest access was designed of gravel (G4 –G6) material readily available on site
and suitable for use as pavement material, and can with stand loads by any mine vehicular plant under any weather
conditions. Maintenance will follow specifications stipulated in the Operations Manual.
6.7 Clean and Dirty water separation canals
Storm water diversion canals will be constructed in phases so as to reduce the volume of storm water being handled at
any particular point in time. The clean and dirty water separation canals will be clearly marked on the detailed layouts.
-
AfriCan Innovative Solutions and Projects CC Draft Design Report
Forbes Coal Draft Design Report 12 June 2012
6.8 Fencing
Allowance was made in the bills of approximate quantities to cater for fencing around the storage facility to prohibit
access by unauthorised people.
7 RETURN WATER DAM DESIGN
The return water dam was sized to contain flows as follows:
(i) A 24hour 1:100 year storm event onto the discard dump, and
(ii) Storm water caught within the return water dam.
Spillage will be permitted not more than once in 100years.
Due to the topography of the site, two return water dams were designed: one for a capacity of 8 000m3 and the other
for a capacity of 7 500m3. These volumes were modelled from the supplied survey data onto the available space using
AutoCAD Civil 3D to produce a layout as shown on the drawings. Capacity analysis was then conducted to establish if
the design requirements were fulfilled and the results are shown in Figure 6 and Figure 7.
Under normal operations, the volume of water in the return water dam will be kept not more than 4 000m3.
As discussed in 6.1, clay liner will be compacted to 98% Proctor Density at +/- 2% of the optimum moisture content,
and G4-G6 embankment at 98% MoD AASHTO at +/-2% of the optimum moisture content.
-
AfriCan Innovative Solutions and Projects CC Draft Design Report
Forbes Coal Draft Design Report 13 June 2012
Figure 6: Return Water Dam 1 capacity analysis
RETURN WATER DAM 1 CAPACITY
Client: FORBES COAL
Project: NEW COAL DISCARD DUMP DESIGN
Description: CAPACITY DETERMINATION
Project No.: P12 - 10
Date: 23-Apr-12
Author: AiSP - TM
Elevation
(masl)
Cumulative
Volume
(m3)
Incremental
Volume
(m3)
Surface
Area
(m2)
Surface Area
(ha)
1272.8 - 0.00 1 909.44 0.19
1273 393.09 393.089 2 021.45 0.20
1274 2 711.48 2318.39 2 615.33 0.26
1275 5 651.96 2940.4795 3 265.63 0.33
1276 9 270.94 3618.9795 3 972.33 0.40
1276.6 11 789.67 2518.728 4 423.43 0.44
1272.5
1273
1273.5
1274
1274.5
1275
1275.5
1276
1276.5
1277
- 1 000 2 000 3 000 4 000 5 000 6 000 7 000 8 000 9 000 10 000 11 000 12 000 13 000
Ele
vati
on
(mas
l)
Volume (m3)
Dam Capacity
1272.5
1273
1273.5
1274
1274.5
1275
1275.5
1276
1276.5
1277
1 500 2 000 2 500 3 000 3 500 4 000 4 500 5 000
Ele
vati
on
(m
asl)
Surface Area (m2)
Dam Surface Area
-
AfriCan Innovative Solutions and Projects CC Draft Design Report
Forbes Coal Draft Design Report 14 June 2012
Figure 7: Return Water Dam 2 capacity analysis
RETURN WATER DAM 2 CAPACITY
Client: FORBES COAL
Project: NEW COAL DISCARD DUMP DESIGN
Description: CAPACITY DETERMINATION
Project No.: P12 - 10
Date: 23-Apr-12
Author: AiSP - TM
Elevation
(masl)
Cumulative
Volume
(m3)
Incremental
Volume
(m3)
Surface
Area
(m2)
Surface Area
(ha)
1247 - 0.00 - 0.00
1248 250.27 250.2748 500.55 0.05
1249 1 388.16 1137.88155 1 775.21 0.18
1250 4 111.75 2723.58965 3 671.97 0.37
1251 9 019.35 4907.60475 6 143.24 0.61
1251.5 12 499.83 8388.088575 7 512.15 0.75
1246.5
1247
1247.5
1248
1248.5
1249
1249.5
1250
1250.5
1251
1251.5
1252
- 1 000 2 000 3 000 4 000 5 000 6 000 7 000 8 000 9 000 10 000 11 000 12 000 13 000 14 000
Ele
vati
on
(mas
l)
Volume (m3)
Dam Capacity
1246.5
1247
1247.5
1248
1248.5
1249
1249.5
1250
1250.5
1251
1251.5
1252
- 1 000 2 000 3 000 4 000 5 000 6 000 7 000 8 000
Ele
vatio
n (m
asl)
Surface Area (m2)
Dam Surface Area
-
AfriCan Innovative Solutions and Projects CC Draft Design Report
Forbes Coal Draft Design Report 15 June 2012
8 POLLUTION CONTROL MEASURES
A synergistic effect can be achieved by combining different controls together. Inclusion of the features in the table
below is likely to give rise to the lowest pollution potential for the slurry ponds, taking not only the capital and
operating costs into account, but also the contingent liability associated with potential water contamination.
Table 3: Pollution Controll Measures
Control Type Description
Clean water diversion � The design will include clean water diversion systems for surface water
inflow from drainage systems within the natural catchment basins and
precipitation runoff. The clean water systems were sized to ensure it is
not likely to spill into any dirty water system more than once in 100 years
(SANS 10286:1998).
� Appropriate erosion protection and energy dissipation measures will be
included in the design (if necessary) for long-term closure requirements
Under-drainage and reuse of
contaminated water
� The design includes the implementation of an under drainage system to
collect seepage for re-use as process water.
� The return water dam was sized to contain seepage from the under
drainage systems and not to spill into any clean water system more than
once in 100 years (SANS 10286:1998).
9 STABILITY ANALYSIS
A conservative overall slope of 1v:3h (11.3o) known to produce factors of safety above 1.5 for similar slurry ponds
projects was adopted. The South African statutory required factor of safety is 1.3 hence the dam slopes are expected
to be stable.
The free draining nature of tailings is expected to cause a positive effect on consolidation and the strength gain of the
tailings hence enhanced stability. By induction, it is envisaged that the dam will be stable.
The heights of the dam walls average 2.5 above the natural ground level, which reduces the potential for failure.
-
AfriCan Innovative Solutions and Projects CC Draft Design Report
Forbes Coal Draft Design Report 16 June 2012
10 OPERATION
10.1 Supervision and Monitoring
10.1.1 By the mine
In terms of South African legislation, the General Manager is ultimately responsible for the correct and safe operation
of the coal slurry dams. However, these responsibilities are delegated to competent persons within the Mine’s
management structure. A senior manager must be tasked with the duty to oversee the operation of the coal slurry
dams. He could be assisted by an experienced foreman who can monitor the operations on a daily basis.
10.1.2 By the Operating Contractor
The contractor must have an experienced and competent supervisor to manage the teams doing the deposition. The
distribution of the slurry must be uniformly maintained all round the dam.
10.1.3 Legal Appointments
All managerial and supervisory personnel are to be appointed in accordance with the provisions of the Minerals Act.
The duties at each level are to be clearly set out in a letter of appointment.
10.1.4 The Professional Engineer
The Mine shall appoint a professional engineer who will be required to inspect the coal slurry dams from time to time.
He shall satisfy himself that the facility is in a safe and stable condition. If not, he shall specify remedial action to be
implemented by the Mine.
10.2 Operation Procedures
10.2.1 Slurry Ponds
Once uniform deposition all around the coal slurry dam has been established, the following points are to be observed:
� The beach zone must be managed so that the pool will lie at the penstock inlet.
� No pools must be allowed to develop anywhere else in the basin.
10.2.2 Return water dam
This is to be operated such that it is kept virtually empty at all times thus maintaining sufficient capacity to store 1:100
year design storm run-off from the slurry dams without spilling. The pumps and return water pipeline must have
sufficient spare capacity to empty the dam within a reasonable period after a storm inflow.
-
AfriCan Innovative Solutions and Projects CC Draft Design Report
Forbes Coal Draft Design Report 17 June 2012
10.2.3 Maintenance
The slurry dams, return water dam and the effluent trench must be inspected on a regular basis and deficiencies
rectified immediately. Items to watch out for and to be repaired according to standard practice are inter alia:
� Erosion gullies
� Pipe burst
� Rat holes
Other deficiencies observed and which must be reported to the Professional Engineer without delay are:
� Signs of seepage on the slopes
� Sloughing
� Movement or slips
� Blocked drain outlets
The Professional Engineer will determine the remedial measures to be implemented by the Mine to rectify the
deficiencies and to prevent a recurrence.
10.2.4 Inspection
Regular inspections shall be undertaken by the Professional Engineer, Coal Discard Manager, Coal Discard Foreman and
the Contractor in accordance with the Mine’s standard procedure.
11 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
It is recommended that:
� The overall factors of safety at all the analyzed sections are above 1.3 indicating satisfactory conditions.
� Monthly monitoring of the technical data and hazard management system should be carried out.
� Under drain from selected waste rock or filter stone must be constructed to collect and direct rainwater
seepage that percolates through the discard facility, from the base areas to the solution trenches.
� Tonnages transported to the slurry dams must be recorded on a daily basis.
� Freeboard should be measured and evaluated against the statutory requirement and must be monitored.
� A code of practice and operating manual should be prepared to ensure that the facility is designed, operated
and rehabilitated in a responsible manner.
� Daily rainfall and evaporation must be recorded at the coal slurry dam.
-
18
12 REFERENCES
1) Design Report: 2008.
2) A Guide to Tailings Dams and Impoundments, ICOLD, Bulletin 106, 1996.
3) Tailings Dams Design of Drainage, ICOLD, Bulletin 97, 1994.
4) Reference Number: DME 16/3/2/5_A1, Guideline for the compilation of a Mandatory Code of
Practice ,3 May 2000
5) SANS 0286: 1998, The South African Code of Practice – Mine Residue
6) The following South African Acts:
(i) The Minerals Act (Act 50 of 1991).
(ii) The Environmental Conservation Act (Act 100 of 1982).
(iii) The Mine Health and Safety Act (Act 29 of 1996).
(iv) The Mines and Works Act (Act 45 of 1965).
(v) The Soils Conservation Act (Act 76 of 1969).
(vi) The National Water Act (Act 36 of 1968).
-
19
LIST OF ANNEXURES
-
20
ANNEXURE A: DRAWINGS