My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
INSPEC08098
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Inspection
>
INSPEC08098
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 9:07:40 PM
Creation date
11/18/2007 8:34:50 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981018
IBM Index Class Name
Inspection
Doc Name
Inspection Report
Inspection Date
3/23/2005
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.
/
6
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
III. COMMENTS -COMPLIANCE <br />Below are comments on the inspection. The comments include discussion of observations <br />made during fhe inspecfion. Comments also describe any enforcement actions Taken during <br />the inspection and the facts or evidence supporting the enforcement action. <br />Page 1/2 Deserado C-81 <br />23 Mar OS <br />This was a complete inspection of the Deserado Mine conducted by Jim Stark of <br />CDMG. Scott Wanstedt of BME accompanied me on the inspection. The mine was <br />actively producing coal at the time of the inspection. The weather was warm and <br />partly cloudy and the ground was dry. <br />Availability of Records: All of the necessary records were available at the mine <br />office. See the records checklist at the end of this report for more details. <br />Signs and Markers: All of the necessary signs (including the mine ID signs, permit <br />boundary signs, refuse pile ID signs, subsoil stockpile signs and topsoil stockpile signs) <br />were properly displayed and in good condition. <br />Roads: The access road to the mine site is a paved road. The road was well <br />maintained and in good condition. <br />- The haul road to the refuse piles (RP-1, RP-2/3/4 and RP-5a) was well maintained <br />and in good condition. The road appeared stable and there were no signs of <br />erosional problems. <br />-The conveyor corridor road was well maintained and stable. There were no <br />erosional problems noted with the road. <br />-The road to return shaft 3 was well maintained and appeared to be stable at the <br />time of the inspection. There were no erosional problems noted on the road. <br />Hydrologic Balance: -Pond RP-1 was wet at the bottom at the time of the inspection. <br />The pond embankment was well vegetated and there were no erosional problems <br />noted. <br />- Pond RP-2/3 contained water approximately five feet below the discharge pipe at <br />the time of the inspection. Both of the cells at fhe pond inlet were. The pond <br />embankment was well vegetated and appeared to be stable. There were no <br />erosional problems noted on the pond embankment. <br />- Pond RP-4 Contained water several feet below the discharge pipe. The pond <br />embankment was well vegetated and appeared to be stable. There were no <br />erosional problems noted on the pond embankment. <br />- Pond RP-5a contained water several feet below the principle spillway. The pond <br />was not discharging and did not appear to have discharged. The pond <br />embankment was well vegetated and appeared to be stable. There were no <br />erosional problems noted on the pond embankment. <br />- Pond SS-1 contained water at the time of the inspection but was not discharging. <br />The pond embankment was well vegetated and appeared to be stable. There were <br />no erosional problems noted on the pond embankment. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.