My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
INSPEC14355
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Inspection
>
INSPEC14355
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 9:15:50 PM
Creation date
11/18/2007 9:05:17 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981029
IBM Index Class Name
Inspection
Doc Date
11/16/1995
Doc Name
COAL INSPECTION REPORT
Inspection Date
11/6/1995
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
III. COMMENTS -COMPLIANCE <br />Below are comments on the inspection. The comments include discussion of observations made <br />during the inspection. Comments also describe any enforcement actions taken during the <br />inspection and the facts or evidence supporting the enforcement action. <br />damages in the amount of $170,000.00", and that part of that sum may be sought from <br />individuals in the departments involved." The letter included a list of eleven actions the <br />Division allegedly failed to take, such as restoring water rights, reclaiming the haul road, and <br />restoring the airfield. Each of the items had been brought to the Division's attention at <br />least once over the past 15 years. There were no concerns that had developed since Mr. <br />Eilts provided his wntten consent for total release of the facilities area. Nonetheless, the <br />Division will follow up on this letter to be certain that Mr. Eilts has no objections to the <br />release. <br />The reclaimed pit area of the site was also inspected, and with the exception of some tilling, <br />no problems were noted. Rills, as deep as 6" were observed on the slopes immediately <br />adjacent to the pit area ponds. The operator should monitor these rills and repair them rf <br />their condition worsens. <br />All sediment ponds contained water, but none were discharging. The lower sediment pond, <br />where a lateral ditch intersects the secondary spillway, was inspected. Previous pond <br />inspection reports by Gene Shearer, the contract engmee~ for Sun Coal Company, indicated <br />a problem with that intersection. Mr. Shearer had raised concerns with "c ast~c material" <br />deposited at that intersection. It appeared that water from the lateral ditch would still be <br />directed to the pond, and not bypass through the spillway. No measurements were taken <br />to verify that, though, so the operator should either repair the ditch as directed by Mr. <br />Shearer, or further investigate the situation. <br />Records were inspected at the office of Dan Ellison, in Steamboat Springs. All required <br />records were current and available for inspection. Documentation of records inspected is <br />attached. <br />Meadows No. 1 Mine 2 November 16, 1995 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.