My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
INSPEC04856
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Inspection
>
INSPEC04856
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:59:35 PM
Creation date
11/18/2007 8:18:51 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1980224
IBM Index Class Name
Inspection
Doc Name
NOTICE OF INSPECTION & INSPECTION REPORT
Inspection Date
5/8/1985
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.
/
5
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
<br />INSPECTION REPORT - Page 3 <br />File No. 80-224 <br />Date: May B-9, 1985 <br />10. A natural gas pipeline was exposed by, and evident in, one of the <br />erosional gullies. <br />11. An underground irrigation pipe was broken, issuing water from the <br />surface of a road leading down to the asphalt batch plant. <br />a. The water was flowing down the road, over a gravel-armored retaining <br />wall, where some fed into a pipe leading to a sump, and some continued <br />as overland flow. <br />b. That water continuing as overland flow passed through asphalt <br />issuing from a leak in the asphalt plant retort. The water continued <br />downslope causing erosion; both sediment and oil were transported <br />downslope, where they entered a concrete irrigation ditch. <br />c. Sump-water discharges into the irrigation ditch from an outlet pipe, <br />after flowing through an erosianal gully thus formed. <br />12. Mr. Jim Ary was made aware of the oil-laden erosion-causing water-flow <br />into the irrigation ditch. He immediately graded part of the eroded <br />area, and bermed the area down-grade of the sump-intake pipe, at the <br />inspectors' request. <br />13. Asphalt was leaking from the asphalt plant during its operation. <br />14. Asphalt and sediment were present IN, and adjacent to the concrete-lined <br />irrigation ditch. <br />15. After reviewing the McKenzie Pit file, it became apparent that the 1985 <br />Annual Report, fee, and map were not submitted on, or after the January <br />6, 1985 anniversary date. Also, the 1984 annual fee was submitted, but <br />the annual report and map were not provided. <br />RECOMMENDATIONS <br />It is suggested that a qualified professional or registered engineer be hired <br />to aid with the following corrective actions required: <br />1. The reclaimed area should be "repaired". Topsoil should be stripped <br />where the areas will be reworked. <br />a. Further compaction and backfilling near the crest of the slope might <br />reduce the differential settling and increase the stability of the <br />backfilled material. An engineer might better address this concern. <br />b. Reseeding, fertilizing, mulching and irrigation as proposed in the <br />Permitted Reclamation Plan, should be re-implemented to help reduce the <br />gully erosion potential. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.