My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2016-07-07_INSPECTION - C1981035
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Inspection
>
Coal
>
C1981035
>
2016-07-07_INSPECTION - C1981035
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 6:24:36 PM
Creation date
7/8/2016 8:26:02 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981035
IBM Index Class Name
Inspection
Doc Date
7/7/2016
Doc Name
Inspection Report
From
DRMS
To
GCC Energy, LLC
Inspection Date
7/5/2016
Email Name
RDZ
JRS
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
July 5, 2016 C-1981-035/King Coal Mine RDZ <br />At the King I Mine, the East Pond and the West Pond were inspected, and neither pond was discharging (and there <br />was no sign of any recent discharges). The East Pond was holding a small amount of water; the West Pond was <br />dry. No problems were seen with embankments or other structures. Per Tom Bird, on the staff gage in the West <br />Pond (a PVC pipe) the red line indicates the cleanout level. <br />At the King I Mine, the Clear Water Diversion Ditch was inspected in three locations: in the vicinity of the ponds <br />and historical structures, near the toe of the waste pile, and adjacent to the un -reclaimed portion of the King I <br />Refuse Pile. At the top, the ditch looked stable and larger than the specification. At the bottom, the ditch was <br />shallow but very wide, so it appeared to meet the specification. However, in the middle (near the toe of the Refuse <br />Pile), the ditch appeared to not meet the specification for the ditch size (Map 15 in the Permit Application <br />Package). <br />The Contaminated Water Intercept Ditch next to the Refuse Pile appeared very stable and the size was greater than <br />the specification requirement. <br />SUPPORT FACILITIES - Rule 4.04: <br />A cursory inspection of the King II facilities revealed no problems. <br />ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS/COMPLIANCE <br />No enforcement actions were initiated as a result of this inspection, nor are any pending. <br />Number of Partial Inspection this Fiscal Year: 1 <br />Number of Complete Inspections this Fiscal Year: 0 <br />Page 3 of 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.