_INSPECTION - C1996084 (11) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

January 28, 2016 C-1996-084/Lorencito Canyon Mine RDZ Inspection Topic Summary NOTE: Y=Inspected N=Not Inspected R=Comments Noted V=Violation Issued NA=Not Applicable NA -Air Resource Protection N -Roads N -Availability of Records R -Reclamation Success NA -Backfill&Grading N -Revegetation R -Excess Spoil and Dev. Waste NA - Subsidence NA -Explosives N - Slides and Other Damage N -Fish&Wildlife NA - Support Facilities On-site R -Hydrologic Balance N - Signs and Markers N -Gen. Compliance With Mine Plan N - Support Facilities Not On-site N -Other N - Special Categories Of Mining NA -Processing Waste N -Topsoil COMMENTS A partial inspection was conducted by Rob Zuber of DRMS on January 28,2016. The weather was clear and cold. The ground was partially snow-covered on the north-facing slopes. Vince Massarotti was present for all of the inspection. EXCESS SPOIL and DEVELOPMENT WASTE—Rule 4.09 Placement; Drainage Control; Surface Stabilization: Fills 7, 8, and 9 were inspected; all were generally in good condition. There were no signs of instability or erosion on the faces. HYDROLOGIC BALANCE -Rule 4.05 Drainage Control 4.05.1,4.05.2,4.05.3; Siltation Structures 4.05.5,4.05.6; Discharge Structures 4.05.7,4.05.10; Diversions 4.05.4;Effluent Limits 4.05.2; Ground Water Monitoring 4.05.13; Surface Water Monitoring 4.05.13; Drainage—Acid and Toxic Materials 4.05.8; Impoundments 4.05.6,4.05.9; Stream Buffer Zones 4.05.18: The following ponds were inspected: 6, 7, 8, and 9.None of them were discharging. Their embankments and spillways were in good condition. As mentioned before, a rill next to the emergency spillway for Pond 6 should be repaired. The top of the Pond 8 embankment is bare. However,re-vegetating this area may be difficult due to animal traffic. NECC should consider how this could be accomplished, and if it is worth the effort. Number of Partial Inspection this Fiscal Year: 7 Number of Complete Inspections this Fiscal Year: 2 Page 2 of 6