Laserfiche WebLink
March 17, 2014 C- 1996- 084 /Lorencito Canyon Mine LDS <br />Inspection Topic Summary <br />NOTE: Y= Inspected N =Not Inspected R= Comments Noted V= Violation Issued NA =Not Applicable <br />NA -Air Resource Protection <br />N -Availability of Records <br />NA - Backfill & Grading <br />R - Excess Spoil and Dev. Waste <br />NA - Explosives <br />N - Fish & Wildlife <br />R - Hydrologic Balance <br />R - Gen. Compliance With Mine Plan <br />N -Other <br />NA - Processing Waste <br />Y -Roads <br />R - Reclamation Success <br />Y - Revegetation <br />NA - Subsidence <br />NA - Slides and Other Damage <br />NA - Support Facilities On -site <br />Y -Signs and Markers <br />Y - Support Facilities Not On -site <br />Y - Special Categories Of Mining <br />Y - Topsoil <br />COMMENTS <br />This was a partial inspection by Leigh Simmons and Sandy Brown of Colorado Division for Reclamation, <br />Mining and Safety, (the Division). The weather was fine but windy. Several permitting actions are in progress, <br />these are detailed under the heading GENERAL MINE PLAN COMPLIANCE. <br />Several issues relating to the mine were discussed in a meeting held at the New Elk mine office on the <br />morning of March 18th. Notes from that meeting are attached to the New Elk inspection report. <br />EXCESS SPOIL and DEVELOPMENT WASTE — Rule 4.09 <br />Placement; Drainage Control; Surface Stabilization: <br />Fills 8, 7 and 9 were inspected. All were stable and well vegetated. <br />HYDROLOGIC BALANCE - Rule 4.05 <br />Drainage Control 4.05.1, 4.05.2, 4.053; Siltation Structures 4.05.5, 4.05.6; Discharge Structures 4.05.7, 4.05.10; <br />Diversions 4.05.4; Effluent Limits 4.05.2; Ground Water Monitoring 4.05.13; Surface Water Monitoring 4.05.13; <br />Drainage — Acid and Toxic Materials 4.05.8, Impoundments 4.05.6, 4.05.9; Stream Buffer Zones 4.05.18: <br />Pond certifications are pending. Until they are available for review the question of whether or not a pond <br />must be cleaned out is a matter of conjecture. The embankments and spillways of all ponds were in good shape. <br />Pond 9b had not been cleaned of sediment. Additional holes had been drilled in the primary spillway riser, <br />but the designed holes had not been exposed. Below the emergency spillway, the silt fence appeared to have been <br />repaired, but was already flapping in the strong wind and will need to be fixed to the stakes again. It appeared as <br />though the pond needs to be cleaned. <br />Pond 8 held a little water, but was well below the discharge level. The erosion outside the downdrain of <br />fill 8 was inspected from the road. NECC will need to take steps to find the cause of the erosion, repair it and <br />reseed the damaged area. <br />Pond 5 held water to a point where 6 sets of weepholes were exposed. <br />Ponds 6, 7 and 9a all held water below the level of discharge. <br />The apparent erosion beside the emergency spillway of pond 6 was inspected. There had been no recent <br />Number of Partial Inspection this Fiscal Year: 6 <br />Number of Complete Inspections this Fiscal Year: 3 <br />Page 2 of 12 <br />