Laserfiche WebLink
III. COMMENTS -COMPLIANCE m ~, ~~~ C--g 3 Q~ <br />P~yI~ J ~r y,,~ f a} ~~ <br />Below are comments on the inspection. The comments include discussion of observations <br />made during the inspection. Comments also describe any enforcement actions taken during <br />the inspection and the facts or evidence supporting the enforcement action. <br />Bond Compliance Inspection: The following two pages of spreadsheet are the data <br />from the bond compliance portion of the inspection and the corresponding data <br />from the current reclamation cost estimate (15 February 2001). There are some minor <br />discrepancies that are listed below that need to be addressed by both the Division <br />and the Operator. Since the Terror Creek Loadout permit will expire on 23 August <br />2003, the Divisions feels that would be an appropriate time to address them since the <br />Division will be updating the reclamation cost estimate at that time. <br />There is a difference in the length of power lines on site versus that in the <br />reclamation cost estimate. If any of the power lines are to stay it needs to be <br />addressed in the permit. <br />2. There is a discrepancy in the number of tanks on the ground. There were <br />seven at the time of the inspection and only four in the reclamation cost <br />estimate. Two of the tanks are small (approximately 350 gallons) and one of <br />the tanks is large (approximately 25,000 gallons). Additionally, a diesel storage <br />tank appears to be 6,500 gallons (on-the-ground) versus the 4,000 gallons in the <br />estimate. <br />3. The amount of railroad track on the ground is 2,448' more than in the <br />reclamation cost estimate (4,098' versus 1,650'). Along with this, the ballast <br />that needs to be removed is 1,633 LCY more than in the reclamation cost <br />estimate (2,733 LCY versus 1,100 LCY). <br />4. The dimensions of the stoker oil building are smaller in the reclamation cost <br />estimate than they are on the ground (a 10' difference in length) which makes <br />a difference of 844 cubic feet of building demolition and 128 square feet of <br />concrete removal. <br />5. The steel beams used in the truck dump are not accounted for in the <br />reclamation cost estimate. <br />b. The dimensions of the trailer by the office and shop are smaller in the <br />reclamation cost estimate than they are on-the-ground. This difference gives <br />an underestimation of 3,390 cubic feet of structural demolition. <br />The dimensions of the truck scale are smaller in the reclamation cost estimate <br />than they are on the ground. This leads to the concrete demolition being <br />underestimated by 177 square feet. <br />