Laserfiche WebLink
August 17, 2016 C-1996-084/Lorencito Canyon Mine RAR <br /> <br /> <br />Number of Partial Inspection this Fiscal Year: 2 <br />Number of Complete Inspections this Fiscal Year: 0 <br /> <br /> Page 3 of 9 <br /> <br />o The mine site identification sign at the entrance to the Lorencito site appeared intact, displaying all <br />required information: mine name, operator name, address, phone number and DRMS permit number and <br />contact information. <br /> <br />ROADS Rule 4.03, <br />Construction 4.03.1(3), 4.03.2(3); Drainage 4.03.1(4), 4.03.2(4); Surfacing and Maintenance 4.03.1(5) and (6) <br />4.03.2(5) and (6). <br />o The roads into and around the facility were inspected. Some road sections require grading, however <br />overall it appeared that the operator was maintaining roads in good working order. <br />o No fugitive dust was being generated. <br />o Most culverts were clear and functioning properly with the exception of: <br />1. Severed Culvert at C1, maintenance item #1 <br /> <br /> Photo 1. Severed culvert C1. <br /> <br />HYDROLOGIC BALANCE- Rule 4.05 <br />General Requirements 4.05.1; Effluent Standards 4.05.2; Divergence and Conveyance of Overland Flow 4.05.3; <br />Diversions 4.05.4; Sediment Control Measures 4.05.5, 4.05.6; Discharge Structures 4.05.7; Impoundments <br />4.05.9; Ground Water Monitoring4.05.13; Underground Mine Entry 4.05.10; Surface and Ground Water <br />Monitoring 4.05.13; Stream Buffer Zones 4.05.18: <br /> <br />Ponds 9 and 9A were inspected and holding water. Generally embankments and spillways appeared in good <br />condition. Some erosional features exist on site. Treatment of these features includes filling gullies with branches <br />and installing straw bales or wattles. <br />o Pond 9 or, the North Pond, held significant pollen laden water but was not discharging at time of <br />inspection (photo 6). The armored channel directing flow to the pond and perimeter ditch (D3) around fill <br />9 appeared to be in good repair and functioning adequately. <br />o Culverts observed were clear of debris, and appeared to be functioning adequately. (exceptions noted in <br />maintenance list). <br />o Sumps observed held water and most had recently been cleaned out. <br />o No offsite impacts were observed at time of inspection. <br />o No large bare areas or significant erosion problems were observed at the time of inspection with the <br />exception of: <br />2. Eight week old gully restoration at Pond 9 (photo 3) and maintenance item #3. <br />3. Errosion south of shrub plot exhibited breaching and undercutting of wattles, (photo 4). <br />