R E P O R T T O :

DYSART MINING

Dysart Mining Project – Highwall Mining Pillar and

Subsidence Assessment

DYS3953A_REV2
REPORT TO Nick Lodge
General Manager – Operations
Bengal Coal Pty Ltd
PO Box 13646
Brisbane QLD 4003

SUBJECT Dysart Mining Project – Highwall

Mining Pillar and Subsidence
Assessment

REPORT NO DYS3953A_Rev2

PREPARED BY Stuart MacGregor

DATE 18 February 2014

Craig Stemp
Mining Engineer

Sturt MacGregor
Senior Geological Engineer

Winton J. Gale
Managing Director
REPORT: DYSART MINING PROJECT – HIGHWALL MINING PILLAR AND SUBSIDENCE ASSESSMENT

SUMMARY

SCT Operations Pty Ltd (SCT) has been contracted by Bengal Coal to
conduct desktop mining studies for proposed multi-seam highwall mining at
the Dysart East Project (MDL450), Queensland. Our report has been
prepared to assist with the planned Environmental Assessment Report
currently being compiled by Bengal Coal.

The basis or our scope of work was outlined at a site meeting conducted at
the Bengal Coal office in Beresfield on Thursday January 9 2014 between
Stuart MacGregor and senior Bengal Coal personnel.

Specifically, our report outlines a design methodology and requirements for

multi seam highwall mining, including:

• Panel widths.

• Intra-panel pillar dimensions

• Barrier pillar dimensions.

A key design requirement is to limit surface subsidence to negligible levels.

The mine design achieves the subsidence constraint through partial
extraction of the resource that eliminates overburden caving and provides
for long term stable pillar systems.

Threshold subsidence values for negligible effects can vary depending upon
the type and sensitivity of the surface natural and built environment. For
this project, ground movements are designed to be less than 100mm
vertical subsidence, with associated tilts and strains at less than 5mm/m.
This category of subsidence movement would not be expected to impact the
serviceability of residential structures and is consistent with the lowest
level of impact category Category A – (MSEC 2007).

SCT Operations Pty Ltd - DYS3953A_Rev2 - 26 February 2014 Page i

REPORT: DYSART MINING PROJECT – HIGHWALL MINING PILLAR AND SUBSIDENCE ASSESSMENT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PAGE NO

SUMMARY .............................................................................................. I

TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................. II

1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................... 1

1.1 Project Description, Data Set and Mine Plans ............................ 1

1.2 Scope of Work & Deliverables .................................................... 1

2. PILLAR ASSESSMENT – STAGE 2 AREA..................................................... 3

2.1 Methodology ............................................................................ 4

2.1.1 Pillar Strength ................................................................ 5

2.1.2 Pillar Loading ................................................................. 5

2.1.3 Factor of Safety ............................................................. 5

2.1.4 Pillar Design Guidelines ................................................... 6

2.1.5 Pillar Design Adopted For This Study ................................ 7

2.2 Results ................................................................................... 7

2.2.1 P14 Seam Assessment Example ...................................... 9

2.3 Multi-Seam Aspects ................................................................ 9

3. SUBSIDENCE ................................................................................... 13

3.1 Overview ............................................................................... 13

4. CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................. 15

5. FURTHER WORK ............................................................................... 16

6. REFERENCES ................................................................................... 16

APPENDIX 1 – SEAM THICKNESS ................................................................ 17

SCT Operations Pty Ltd - DYS3953A_Rev2 - 26 February 2014 Page ii

REPORT: DYSART MINING PROJECT – HIGHWALL MINING PILLAR AND SUBSIDENCE ASSESSMENT

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Project Description, Data Set and Mine Plans

Located within MDL450, the proposed mining area in Stage 2 consists of up

to 11 coal seams contained within the Moranbah Coal Measures. Highwall
mining will be conducted progressively in two adjacent active open cut voids.

Figure 1 details the general arrangement of the workings, showing access

from the Stage 2 North and South pits. Figure 2 shows a general section
through the proposed open cut void highlighting the arrangement of highwall
entries (after JBT Consulting).

Whilst final mining systems have yet to be determined, highwall entries will
be a nominal 3m in width, unsupported, and extend to a maximum depth of
300m or to the limit of mining defined by lease boundaries. Mining heights
have been calculated based on seam thickness, with stacking arrangements
and general sequencing forming part of future studies.

SCT were provided by Bengal Coal ascii XYZ files from the Vulcan geological
model for the structure roof and floor of the target seams as well as
surface topography. The xyz files have been interrogated by SCT to provide
seam thickness and depth for each of the target seams as well as enabling
mid-burdens to be reviewed.

1.2 Scope of Work & Deliverables

The design brief supplied by Bengal Coal is to provide negligible surface

subsidence. Ground movements are designed to be less than 100mm
vertical subsidence, with associated tilts and strains at less than 5mm/m.
These magnitudes of subsidence are below the threshold for impacts on
serviceability of the majority of natural and manmade structures (MSEC
2007).

The approach adopted here provides for partial extraction of the resource
leaving in place a pillar system that is designed to be long term stable – that
is, the remnant coal pillar framework has sufficient strength to support the
overburden material. No caving of the overburden is anticipated with the
current design, as such, the only ground movements resulting at surface are
due to the limited elastic compression of the pillars.

The area of investigation is the Stage 2 North and South pits contained
within MDL450. A total of up to 11 target seams have been nominated by
Bengal Coal (in descending order):

• P08
• P071/72
• P14
• H162
• H161
• H152

SCT Operations Pty Ltd - DYS3953A_Rev2 - 26 February 2014 Page 1

REPORT: DYSART MINING PROJECT – HIGHWALL MINING PILLAR AND SUBSIDENCE ASSESSMENT

SCT Operations Pty Ltd - DYS3953A_Rev2 - 26 February 2014 Page 2

REPORT: DYSART MINING PROJECT – HIGHWALL MINING PILLAR AND SUBSIDENCE ASSESSMENT

• H151
• D52
• D31
• D302
• D301

Deliverables include a report outlining the methodology to provide required

sizes of intra-panel web pillars and sufficiently sized barrier pillars for a
multiple seam highwall mining operation.

2. PILLAR ASSESSMENT – STAGE 2 AREA

In this section, the methods and limitations for pillar design will be discussed
and results presented.

This assessment is based on parameters obtained over highwall mining in the

Stage 2 North and South pits (as shown in Figure 1). Values used in the
pillar strength and load calculations are based on maximum and minimum
overburden depth over the characterised section. Maximum seam height
and overburden depth used in the calculations were obtained from seam
grids supplied by Bengal Coal.

Table 1 summarises depth and seam thickness for each of the target seams
assessed here.

SCT Operations Pty Ltd - DYS3953A_Rev2 - 26 February 2014 Page 3

REPORT: DYSART MINING PROJECT – HIGHWALL MINING PILLAR AND SUBSIDENCE ASSESSMENT

Table 1: Seam depth and thickness range in the Stage 2 Highwall Mining Area

Seam Min. Max. Av. Min. Max.

Depth Depth Depth Thick. Thick.
ID
(m) (m) (m) (m) (m)
P08 45 125 85 1 2
P071/72 55 140 97.5 0 1.1
P14 80 165 122.5 0.5 1.1
H162 105 190 147.5 0.3 3
H161 125 215 170 0 2.6
H152 140 230 185 0.7 1.3
H151 145 235 190 0.2 1.5
D52 160 250 205 1.4 2.1
D31 165 255 210 1 1.7
D302 175 270 222.5 0.6 1.2
D301 175 275 225 0 1.4

2.1 Methodology

The approach adopted for this assessment has been to provide for long term
stable pillar systems that incorporate stable web-pillars in panel and large
barrier pillars between panels. Panel widths have been limited respective to
depth to assist with bridging of overburden.

Figure 3 (from CTR001 NSW DPI 2008) shows a generalised section of a

highwall mining pillar and panel framework that outlines key parameters used
in this study. Key concepts include the separation of workings into panels
separated by barrier pillars of sufficient width and strength to isolate
individual panels in terms of overburden bridging.

SCT Operations Pty Ltd - DYS3953A_Rev2 - 26 February 2014 Page 4

REPORT: DYSART MINING PROJECT – HIGHWALL MINING PILLAR AND SUBSIDENCE ASSESSMENT

2.1.1 Pillar Strength

The pillar strength (S) formula adopted in this study is taken from the
modified Mark-Bieniawski formula for strip pillars (Mark and Chase 1997) as
follows:

𝑤 𝑤2
𝑆 = 𝐶 . ��0.64 + 0.54. � − 0.18. �
ℎ 𝐻. 𝑙
Where:

S = Pillar Strength (MPa)

C = Coal Strength (MPa)
w = Pillar Width (m)
h = Pillar Height (m)
l = Pillar Length (m)

2.1.2 Pillar Loading

The pillar or tributary area loading in this assessment can be calculated

using the following formula for a single pillar:

( 𝑤 + 𝑊 ). 𝐻 . 0.025
𝐿=
𝑤

Or for a web-barrier system:

( 𝑊𝑝 + 𝑤𝑏 ). 𝐻 . 0.025
𝐿=
𝑤𝑏
Where:

L = Pillar Load (MPa)

W = Extraction Width (m)
H = Depth of Cover (m)
Wp = Panel Span (m)
Wb = Barrier Pillar Width (m)

2.1.3 Factor of Safety

The factor of safety (FoS) for pillar design can be calculated using the
following formula:
𝑆
𝐹𝑜𝑆 =
𝐿

Where:

S = Pillar Strength
L = Pillar Load

SCT Operations Pty Ltd - DYS3953A_Rev2 - 26 February 2014 Page 5

REPORT: DYSART MINING PROJECT – HIGHWALL MINING PILLAR AND SUBSIDENCE ASSESSMENT

2.1.4 Pillar Design Guidelines

The NSW Department of Primary Industries (NSW DPI) Coal Technical

Reference CTR-001 ‘Annexure B’ was developed with the intention of
providing the industry with key guidelines relating to development of
highwall/auger mining. The following conditions used in this study conform to
the DPI guidelines accepted as best practice.

It is necessary to have sufficient information about the mass strength of

coal when designing pillar systems. Structure within the coal such as cleat
and frictional properties between the coal and roof and floor contacts are
important factors contributing to coal strength. The DPI guidelines
recommend coal strength parameters in Table 2 accepted as best practice.

Table 2: Estimates of Coal Strength from NSW DPI (2008)

Coal Strength
Situation
(MPa)
Strong coal, strong contacts 6

Strong coal, weak contacts 5.1

Weak coal, strong contacts 3.6

Weak coal, weak contacts 3.1

Web pillars are designed to have a relatively low FoS in order to maximise
extraction. The following parameters relate to web pillar design criteria:

• Pillar equations only relevant for w/h > 2.

• Minimum w/h > 1.0.

• A minimum FoS of 1.3.

• A minimum FoS of 1.6 for new highwall operations.

• Greatest overburden depth taken.

Barrier pillars are designed to be permanently stable and withstand the

tributary load generated if all web pillars are to fail. The following
parameters relate to barrier pillar design criteria:

• Minimum w/h >4.

• A minimum FoS of 2.5.

• Greatest overburden depth taken.

SCT Operations Pty Ltd - DYS3953A_Rev2 - 26 February 2014 Page 6

REPORT: DYSART MINING PROJECT – HIGHWALL MINING PILLAR AND SUBSIDENCE ASSESSMENT

Panel spans between barrier pillars are designed to limit subsidence

‘bridging’ and to aid in preventing web pillar collapse. The following
parameters relate to panel span design criteria:

• Maximum W/H < 1.

• H to be determined from the shallowest depth (WP = Hmin).

2.1.5 Pillar Design Adopted For This Study

For this report, and as requested by Bengal Coal, a conservative approach

has been adopted for the pillar strength assessment, whereby lower bound
coal strength and roof/floor contacts have been used. The lower bound
values are consistent with those outlined in Table 2 for weak coal, weak
contacts.

The paramters used in this study are as follows:

• Coal Strength Term = 3.1Mpa.

• Pillar Factor of Safety – Web Pillars = 1.6.

• Minimum Pillar Width/Height – Web Pillars >1.

• Pillar Factor of Safety – Barrier Pillars = 2.5.

• Minimum Pillar Width/Height – Barrier Pillars > 4.

2.2 Results

Table 3 summarises the input parameters used in the analysis, the resulting
Factor of Safety (FOS) and extraction percentage obtained. Assessments
were made on each seam based on a combined barrier/web pillar system.

A maximum seam height was taken to produce results shown in Table 3,

however a range analysis was also conducted to provide design curves for
each seam over the projected depth range and seam thickness which are
summarised in Appendix 1.

The results are also summarised in graphical format in Figure 4 which shows
web and barrier pillar width to height ratios as a function of depth. The web
pillars follow a trend line (associated with a FOS = 1.6), with W/H ratios
ranging from 3.3 to 7.5. The barrier pillars follow a trend line ranging from
12 to 44.(associated with a FOS = 2.5).

The general load versus displacement characteristics of various width to

height coal pillar systems are shown in Figure 5, which is taken from an
Australian coal industry research program conducted in part by SCT (ACARP
report C9018 – Systems Approach to Coal Pillar Design). As noted, the web
and barrier pillars are designed to be stable (below yield).

SCT Operations Pty Ltd - DYS3953A_Rev2 - 26 February 2014 Page 7

REPORT: DYSART MINING PROJECT – HIGHWALL MINING PILLAR AND SUBSIDENCE ASSESSMENT

SCT Operations Pty Ltd - DYS3953A_Rev2 - 26 February 2014 Page 8

REPORT: DYSART MINING PROJECT – HIGHWALL MINING PILLAR AND SUBSIDENCE ASSESSMENT

The web pillars themselves will tend to maintain load with increasing
deformation, and for the larger W/H web pillars (W/H >5) they will increase in
strength with increasing deformation.

The barrier pillars are best described as “indestructible” and reflect the
conservative pillar strength and FOS values used here.

For completeness, an example of the design process is outlined in section

2.2.1.

2.2.1 P14 Seam Assessment Example

Contour intervals of seam height and overburden depth were produced using
data from Bengal Coal. The depth and seam thickness range was quantified
over Stage 2 north and south area. Seam thickness for P14 Seam is
illustrated in Figure 6a and depth of cover in Figure 6b. To satisfy the design
requirements contained in this report, at a maximum depth of 165m and
seam height of 1.1m, the P14 Seam has a panel span of 80m consisting of 9
web pillars 5.6m wide supported by barrier pillars 26.5m wide. This results
in an extraction of 28% with a minimum web/barrier system FoS of 2.5.

2.3 Multi-Seam Aspects

Multiple pass (multiple entries in the one seam) and multiple seam highwall
mining has been practiced at numerous sites. The stacking arrangement for
each system will depend upon the size of entry, thickness of seam and the
nature and thickness of the coal and midburden materials.

It is noted that the eight basal seams targeted in the Stage 2 area have
thin (<5m) interburdens, and is also evident in the cross section shown
previously in Figure 2. Table 4 summarises the midburden for the seam
“pairs” from the uppermost to lowermost in the sequence respectively.

At this stage of the study, the stacking arrangement has not been
determined, although a conservative approach for pillar loading has
incorporated full tributary load in the design. It is likely that lower pillar
loading will result in situ, and the final design arrangement will be determined
in future mining studies as part of the trial mining process.

Options for areas of thin midburden separation include the assessment of

the seam “pairs” as one seam to provide overall pillar w/h design
requirements. This assumes little or no confinement afforded to the
midburden pillar (effectively a void) and the pillar height is the overall stacked
arrangement. By way of example:

SCT Operations Pty Ltd - DYS3953A_Rev2 - 26 February 2014 Page 9

REPORT: DYSART MINING PROJECT – HIGHWALL MINING PILLAR AND SUBSIDENCE ASSESSMENT

SCT Operations Pty Ltd - DYS3953A_Rev2 - 26 February 2014 Page 10

REPORT: DYSART MINING PROJECT – HIGHWALL MINING PILLAR AND SUBSIDENCE ASSESSMENT

SCT Operations Pty Ltd - DYS3953A_Rev2 - 26 February 2014 Page 11

REPORT: DYSART MINING PROJECT – HIGHWALL MINING PILLAR AND SUBSIDENCE ASSESSMENT

Table 3: Web-Barrier Pillar System for Long Term Stable Pillars

Max Max Min

Panel Web Barrier
Pillar Cover Cover # Web Web Barrier System Extraction
Seam Span Width w/h > 1 Width
Height Depth Depth Pillars FOS w/h > 4 FOS %
Wp (m) (m) (m)
h (m) H (m) (m)
P14 1.1 165 80 80 9.0 5.6 5.0 1.6 26.5 24.1 2.5 28%
P08 2 125 45 41 4.0 6.6 3.3 1.6 24 12.0 2.5 23%
P071 1.1 140 55 49 6 4.7 4.3 1.6 19.5 17.7 2.5 31%
h162 3 190 105 99 6 13 4.3 1.6 58 19.3 2.5 13%
h161 2.6 215 125 119 7 13.6 5.2 1.6 62 23.8 2.5 13%
h152 1.3 230 140 137 12 8.2 6.3 1.6 46 35.4 2.5 21%
h151 1.5 235 145 137 11 9.2 6.1 1.6 50 33.3 2.5 19%
D52 2.1 250 160 147 9 13 6.2 1.6 66 31.4 2.5 14%
D31 1.7 255 165 157 11 11 6.5 1.6 61 35.9 2.5 17%
D302 1.2 270 175 171 14 9 7.5 1.6 53 44.2 2.5 20%
D301 1.4 275 175 165 12 10.5 7.5 1.6 58 41.4 2.5 17%

SCT Operations Pty Ltd - DYS3953A_REV2 - 26 February 2014 Page 12

REPORT: DYSART MINING PROJECT – HIGHWALL MINING PILLAR AND SUBSIDENCE ASSESSMENT

Table 4: Midburden Range in Stage 2 Mining Area

Max.
Seam Pair Min. Separation
Separation
(overlying/underlying) (m)
(m)
H162/H161 2 20
H152/H151 1 15
D52/D31 0 1
D302/D301 0 1

Depth = 165m
D302 thickness = 0.6m
Midburden = 0.4m
D31 thickness = 0.4m

Therefore overall height = 1.4m (0.6 +0.4 +0.4)

Total web pillar thickness D302/D31 (FOS=1.6) = 6.5m

Further definition and understanding of the strength and load carrying

characteristics of thin midburden forms part of forward work programs and
the trial mining.

3. SUBSIDENCE

3.1 Overview

A key design requirement is to limit surface subsidence to negligible levels.

Threshold subsidence values for negligible effects can vary depending upon
the type and sensitivity of the surface environment, both natural and built.

For this project, ground movements are designed to be less than 100mm
vertical subsidence, with associated tilts and strains at less than 5mm/m.
This category of subsidence movement would not be expected to impact the
serviceability of residential structures and is consistent with the lowest
level of impact category Category A – (MSEC 2007). Table 5 details the
impact categories highlighting the damage thresholds.

Table 5: Classification of Impact with Reference to Tilt

Mining
Induced
Impact
Ground Description
Category
Tilt
(mm/m)
A <5 Unlikely that remedial work will be required.
B 5 to 7 Adjustment to roof drainage and wet area floors might be required.
Minor structural work might be required to rectify tilt.
Adjustments to roof drainage and wet area floors will probably be
C 7 to 10
required and remedial work to surface water drainage and
sewerage systems might be necessary.
Considerable structural work might be required to rectify tilt.
Jacking to level or rebuilding could be necessary in the worst
D > 10
cases. Remedial work to surface water drainage and sewerage
systems might be necessary

SCT Operations Pty Ltd - DYS3953A_REV2 - 26 February 2014 Page 13

REPORT: DYSART MINING PROJECT – HIGHWALL MINING PILLAR AND SUBSIDENCE ASSESSMENT

In practical terms, notably higher levels of subsidence (and associated tilts

and strains and curvature) can be tolerated by most surface structures and
either be unaffected and/or still remain serviceable.

The approach adopted here provides for partial extraction of the resource
leaving in place a pillar system that is designed to be long term stable – that
is, the remnant coal pillar framework has sufficient strength to support the
overburden material. This is analogous to first working (bord and pillar) for a
typical underground coal mine.

This approach has been successfully employed in conventional underground

coal mining.
3.2 Results

Following extraction of the highwall entries, ground movement at surface is

predicted to occur resulting from elastic compression of the coal pillars.. As
the pillars are designed to remain intact, elastic compression of the pillars
occurs from the additional vertical load not being carried by the highwall
entries (and not a result of pillar yield).

In addition, the additional loading is confined only to tributary area loading

associated with the immediate void about the pillar. As the overburden will
be supported by a stable pillar system, the additional load carried by the
pillar is only that immediately above the highwall entries adjacent to the
pillar.

The elastic compression associated with pillars of different width to height

ratios has previously been outlined in Figure 5. As noted, the pillar design
here is for pillars to remain intact (long term stable), such that they are
behaving elastically (below yield). The elastic compression can be calculated
from:

Stress/Strain = Modulus
Strain = Stress x Modulus

For a nominal coal modulus ranging between 1.5GPa and 3GPa, the vertical
strain resulting for each 1MPa of additional load for every 1m pillar height
ranges between 0.3mm and 0.6mm. For a net coal thickness of 15m (refer
Table 1) at a total depth of 250m, an additional 4MPa tributary load would
result in elastic compression ranging between 18mm and 36mm.

Additional elastic compression will also occur in the strata immediately above
and below the pillar system but is likely to be significantly less on the basis
of higher modulus strata (5-20GPa) and lower vertical loads at distances
away from the pillar.

Tilts can be related to subsidence.using the following formula (after Holla

1988):

Gmax = 1000 x Smax/H x K3

SCT Operations Pty Ltd - DYS3953A_REV2 - 26 February 2014 Page 14

REPORT: DYSART MINING PROJECT – HIGHWALL MINING PILLAR AND SUBSIDENCE ASSESSMENT

Where:
Gmax = Maximum Tilt (mm/m)
Smax = Maximum Subsidence (m)
H = Depth of cover (m)

K3 is a constant that can vary dependent on the nature of the overburden

and mining system. A value for K3 of 5 provides a conservative estimate
(Holla 1988) in the absence of site specific data.

For the 11 seams assessed here at a net coal thickness of 15m, resulting in
up to 100mm subsidence at 250m, the following tilts would result for
varying depths, consistent with Caterogy A impacts.

Table 6: Predicted tilts for 100mm Threshold Subsidence – Conforms to

Category A Impacts

Depth Smax (mm) Tilt mm/m

100 100 5
150 100 3.3
200 100 2.5
250 100 2

4. CONCLUSIONS

A partial extraction highwall mining system has been assessed for the
Dysart East Project (MDL450) to assist with submission of the
Environmental Assessment Report. The brief from Bengal Coal being to
provide for long term stable pillars and resultant negligible subsidence.
Predicted subsidence levels are less than 40mm for the final highwall
extraction reviewed here, with the upper threshold of 100mm resulting in
surface impacts (based on tilts) falling within the lowest impact category
(Category A after MSEC).

The approach adopted conforms to NSW technical reference CTR001 and

accepted industry practice for pillar design.

This report does not address specifically the stability of the unsupported
openings or the ability to achieve full design depths. The stability of the
unsupported entries has been implicitly captured in the pillar design
assessment by providing conservative estimates of:

• In situ strength of the coal seam AND the roof and floor strata.

• Web Pillar factor of safety (FOS > 1.6).

• Partitioning panels with large (W/H/4) barrier pillars and a high FOS
(> 2.5).

• Panel widths designed to limit cascacing pillar failure (W/D <1)

SCT Operations Pty Ltd - DYS3953A_REV2 - 26 February 2014 Page 15

REPORT: DYSART MINING PROJECT – HIGHWALL MINING PILLAR AND SUBSIDENCE ASSESSMENT

5. FURTHER WORK

As part of future mining studies, a course of optimisation of pillar sizing to

improve resource recovery can be conducted concurrent with more detailed
mine planning studies. The ongoing capture of site specific data from
exploration and field scale testing can be used as input to empirical,
analytical and numerical modeling studies.

6. REFERENCES

SCT (2013), “DYS3953: Stage 1 Assessment Prelim Investigation HW

Mining Development”, Dated 28 March 2013.

Holla, L. (1991). ‘Evaluation of Surface Subsidence Characteristics in the

Western Coalfield of New South Wales’.

ACARP report C9018 – Systems Approach to Coal Pillar Design). January

2005.

Fama, M., Shen, B. and Maconochie, P., (2001), ‘Optimal Design and
Monitoring of Layout Stability for Highwall Mining’, ACARP Project C8033
Final Report dated December 2001.

Mark, C. and Chase, F., (1997), ‘Analysis of Retreat Mining Pillar Stability
(ARMPS)’, in proceedings New Technology for Ground Control in Retreat
Mining, NIOSH IC9446.

Mine Subsidence Engineering Consultants (MSEC), 2007. ‘Introduction to

Longwall Mining and Subsidence’.

Mine Subsidence Engineering Consultants (MSEC), 2007. ‘Mine Subsidence

Damage to Building Structures’.

Mine Subsidence Technological Society (MSTS) – www.mstsociety.org

NSW DPI (2008), ‘For a Notification of Highwall Mining and Auger Mining (As
a High-Risk Activity)’, NSW DPI Mine Safety Operations Coal Technical
Reference CTR-001 dated August 2008.

SCT Proposal (2012), ‘Proposal to Conduct Geotechnical Works Associated

with Highwall Mining Study and Future Trial at Dysart’, dated 7 March 2012.

Zipf, R. and Bhatt, S., (2004), ‘Analysis of Practical Ground Control Issues in
Highwall Mining’, NIOSH, 23rd International Conference on Ground Control in
Mining 2004, pp 210–219.

SCT Operations Pty Ltd - DYS3953A_REV2 - 26 February 2014 Page 16

REPORT: DYSART MINING PROJECT – HIGHWALL MINING PILLAR AND SUBSIDENCE ASSESSMENT

APPENDIX 1 – SEAM THICKNESS

SCT Operations Pty Ltd - DYS3953A_REV2 - 26 February 2014 Page 17

REPORT: DYSART MINING PROJECT – HIGHWALL MINING PILLAR AND SUBSIDENCE ASSESSMENT

SCT Operations Pty Ltd - DYS3953A_REV2 - 26 February 2014 Page 18

REPORT: DYSART MINING PROJECT – HIGHWALL MINING PILLAR AND SUBSIDENCE ASSESSMENT

SCT Operations Pty Ltd - DYS3953A_REV2 - 26 February 2014 Page 19

REPORT: DYSART MINING PROJECT – HIGHWALL MINING PILLAR AND SUBSIDENCE ASSESSMENT

SCT Operations Pty Ltd - DYS3953A_REV2 - 26 February 2014 Page 20

REPORT: DYSART MINING PROJECT – HIGHWALL MINING PILLAR AND SUBSIDENCE ASSESSMENT

SCT Operations Pty Ltd - DYS3953A_REV2 - 26 February 2014 Page 21