Laserfiche WebLink
MINESZTE INSPECTION NARRATIVE 3 <br />through the road for drainage. Mss Morrison said that the landowner wants <br />the gravel pad pulled out and the fence in the area re-aligned. Evidently <br />the landowner wants the marsh watercourse to be re-established. I asked <br />her if she knew if the removal of the gate and culvert in that area were <br />also a part of the landowner's request. She said that she did not know. <br />There is evidently some question about what has to be done or can be done <br />in this instance. If this access route to the rail spur was put in by the <br />operator, and is post law it should be reclaimed. The problem should be <br />resolved prior to bond release. <br />The buried slot bin storage in the coal yard, a concrete pit 30 foot deep <br />and 100 foot long, previously mentioned as something that the landowner <br />wants to remain for his use, should also be discussed in more detail. I <br />was told that the structure did have cover over the opening at one time but <br />most of that is gone now. Mss Morrison said that Mr, Eilts proposes to use <br />it as a basement for a house to be constructed there, Again there is some <br />question about safety in this area because of snowmobiles. The proposed <br />future use of the mine is rangeland and wildlife habitat, this is in <br />conflict with the proposal for a house. The mine plan would have to be <br />changed to reflect the proposal. This would also require a demonstration <br />proposal from the operator identifying when the house would be built and <br />how the slot storage will be used in conjunction with the construction. <br />Mss Morrison also said that the landowner wants the coal company to <br />relocate the access road in the area. He apparently, wants it moved from <br />in front to~behind the slot storage. That is something that would have to <br />be approved as part of the mine plan prior to construction while the <br />reclamation plan is still in effect. <br />The comment was made that equipment and materials stored around the shop <br />are still the responsibility of the operator. A number of barrels, empty <br />and partially filled, as well as a couple of drained transformers were <br />noted there. They must be moved to a controlled area for storage. <br />The reclaimed pit was accessed from the south side o£ the mine. We <br />planned to ski into the area for the inspection but snow depths down on the <br />lower elevations were erratic so the decision was made to walk as much of <br />the site as possible. The spring on the outside perimeter of the mine on <br />the south side was tested during an earlier oversight inspection was <br />flowing. I would estimate that the flow was similar to the earlier rate <br />noted but did measure flow nor did I take a grab sample during this <br />inspection. There is no requirement for the operator to monitor this <br />spring. <br /> There was standing water, frozen on the top with enough ice to support my <br /> weight, in both of the sediment ponds, pond 1 and 2, located on the <br /> southern end of the mine. The gate valves on the primary spillways were <br /> closed. The emergency spillways appeared to be stable. There was no <br /> discharge from either pond, There was some question about the size of the <br /> outlet gate for these ponds noted during the records review. The drawings <br />~L___^_.(fl show an 18" gate, apparently it is a drafting error because they are closer <br />"'°"`~' to 10". The North West Impoundment was dry. Mss Morrison said that it had <br />~k~ dsr'grs blown out earlier in the summer. A major diversion carrying disturbed area <br />~~ <br />w flows off of the north east end of the reclaimed area dumps into this pond. <br />a <br />Ju~r Apparently the storm exceeded the approved design. It has been rebuilt per <br />p, G' design requirements. The explosive storage pond had standing water but was <br />/~T not discharging through the spillways. it was reported that frost heave <br /> caused damage to the primary spillway in the winter of '91. It has since <br /> been repaired. i asked if during the repair, if anti-float platform had <br /> been installed to prevent the failure in the future. It was not done. <br /> Ouring the document review, it was noted that an oil violation discharge <br /> was reported for this pond, I asked Mr. Ellison, if he knew where the oil <br /> had come from. He said that he thought that it was from an oil storage <br />