Laserfiche WebLink
April 30, 2014 C- 1981 - 014 /Southfield Mine RDZ <br />Inspection Topic Summary <br />NOTE: Y= Inspected N =Not Inspected R= Comments Noted V= Violation Issued NA =Not Applicable <br />N -Air Resource Protection <br />R - Roads <br />N - Availability of Records <br />R - Reclamation Success <br />N - Backfill & Grading <br />N - Revegetation <br />NA - Excess Spoil and Dev. Waste <br />R - Subsidence <br />NA - Explosives <br />N - Slides and Other Damage <br />N - Fish & Wildlife <br />R - Support Facilities On -site <br />R - Hydrologic Balance <br />N - Signs and Markers <br />N - Gen. Compliance With Mine Plan <br />N - Support Facilities Not On -site <br />N -Other <br />NA - Special Categories Of Mining <br />R - Processing Waste <br />N - Topsoil <br />COMMENTS <br />A partial inspection was conducted by Rob Zuber of DRMS on April 30, 2014. The weather was seasonably <br />warm and clear. The ground was dry over all of the mine site and loadout. For part of the inspection, George <br />Patterson of EFCI was present at the mine site. In addition, a water truck driver, Lester Gribble, was present. The <br />portion of the inspection with EFCI included a test of well MWNW. This test aimed to determine if the <br />obstruction in the well (documented elsewhere in the records for the Southfield Mine) precludes free flow of water <br />from the surface of the well, past the obstruction, and into the mine workings. The test is described in the <br />Hydrologic Balance section of this report. <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 />Well MWNW was tested to determine if the obstruction(s) in the well hinder the flow of water into the <br />workings. The test showed that water can flow freely through the well bore and into the workings. (Previous <br />inspections by the Division, using a bore hole camera, indicate that the well casing is intact above the obstruction.) <br />The steps taken by George Patterson were as follows: <br />- Mr. Patterson showed the inspector his calculations to determine the volume in the well casing above the known <br />obstruction (a block of wood) at approximately 353 feet below the top of the well casing. His calculations looked <br />accurate and indicate that the volume above this point is 538 gallons. (Note that the obstruction is known to be <br />approximately 20 to 30 feet above the floor of the working. Thus the volume of the well below the obstruction is <br />less than 10% of the volume above the obstruction. ) <br />- Mr. Patterson used a probe to determine if the well was dry at the obstruction. He lowered the probe to the <br />block of wood, and the probe did not register that it hit water. <br />- Mr. Gribble connected a 3" flexible hose to the tank on the truck and placed the open end in the well casing. <br />The valve was open and flow from the truck tank began. Mr. Patterson started timing the operation with a stop <br />watch. Only a small amount of water (less than a quart, based on the inspector's judgment) spilled onto the <br />Number of Partial Inspection this Fiscal Year: 8 <br />Number of Complete Inspections this Fiscal Year: 4 <br />Page 2 of 8 <br />