Laserfiche WebLink
April 26, 2016 C-1981-012/New Elk Mine RDZ <br /> In a previous inspection report,DRMS stated that the ditch on the west side of the SAE that includes Topsoil <br /> Stockpile#2(possibly ditch D11)requires more armor. This ditch was inspected again. While the Division agrees <br /> with NECC staff(Vince Massarotti)that more channel armor is not urgently required, it is highly recommended <br /> that this channel be closely monitored for erosion. <br /> No problems were seen on the bank between the SAE that includes Topsoil Stockpile#2 and the river. The pile of <br /> material on the SAE(near the low point) should be removed. <br /> The sump beneath the DWDA#2 was being cleaned during the inspection. DRMS inspector and Vince Massarotti <br /> discussed that this structure should not be too large or it will need to be designed by an engineer. The term"too <br /> large"is roughly ten large excavator buckets,per DRMS. <br /> Ponds 001A, 006A, 007A, and 08 were all holding water but not discharging. No problems were seen with <br /> spillways or embankments. <br /> The sediment delta in Pond 007A appears to be growing. The water level in this pond was measured(with a <br /> Rangefinder)to be 6 to 7 feet below the dam, indicating that the sediment level cannot be excessively high; <br /> however, a survey is still needed to assess the level. <br /> Other observations with the ponds: <br /> The liner in Pond 001A appears to be intact. <br /> No inflow to Pond 006A was seen. <br /> Where hydromulch has been sprayed on the Pond 007A embankment(where pipe/meter installation activities <br /> created disturbance)vegetation is emerging. <br /> There was too much water in the ponds to assess the sediment levels. <br /> The following culverts were clear of sediment(or at least mostly clear): C13, C27, C48, and C53. The sizes were <br /> checked for C31, C31A, and C48, and all meet the specifications. There appears to be an error in Table 21 with <br /> C61: the diameter is listed as 8 inches. Culvert C11A is shown on Map 13,but does not likely exist. <br /> The following ditches were found to have no erosion or other problems: D5,D12,D14,D15,D32,the D34 series, <br /> and the ditches around the coal silos. Ditch D 18 appears much smaller than the specification in Table 20. Ditch <br /> D 18B appears to not exist although it is on Map 13. <br /> Drop inlets 2 and 3 were inspected and appear to be functional. <br /> No problems were found with the eastern portion of the clear water ditch above the RDA. <br /> DRMS noted in the March inspection report that a gully has formed in the un-reclaimed area of the RDA near the <br /> conveyor. NECC was constructing an additional sump at this location during the April inspection. <br /> The existing sumps above the RDA side ditches appear to be functional and contain significant capacity. <br /> Number of Partial Inspection this Fiscal Year: 9 <br /> Number of Complete Inspections this Fiscal Year: 3 <br /> Page 3 of 12 <br />