My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
INSPEC20782
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Inspection
>
INSPEC20782
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 9:21:27 PM
Creation date
11/18/2007 9:36:39 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977493
IBM Index Class Name
Inspection
Doc Date
1/29/2001
Doc Name
Insp Rpt
From
DMG
To
Climax Molybdenum Company
Inspection Date
9/26/2000
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.
/
24
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 />MINE ID # OR PROSPECTING ID#: M-1977-493 <br />INSPECTION DATE: 9-26-00 <br />OBSERVATIONS <br /> <br />PAGE: 2 <br />INSPECTOR'S INITIALS: ACS <br />This inspection was conducted in response to the Operator's request for surety <br />reduction based on completion of reclamation tasks required under the approved <br />reclamation plan for the Climax mine. The surety reduction request was submitted by <br />Climax in accordance with Rule 4.13 of the Hard Rock/Metal Mining Rules and <br />Regulations of the Mined Land Reclamation Board and is being processed by the Division <br />of Minerals and Geology (DMG) as revision SR-03 to Permit No. M-1977-493. For <br />clarification, the previous surety reduction revisions for this permit, numbered SR-O1 <br />and SR-02, are described here: <br />Revision SR-01: Removal of Clinton Reservoir from the reclamation permit area, <br />approved October 5, 1992. <br />Revisioa 5R-02: Conditional acceptance that the approved post-mining land use of <br />developed water regources had been achieved for Eagle Park Reservoir, conditional <br />approval issued August 26, 1998. <br />Please note that revision SR-O1 was not associated with permit amendment AM-02 (the <br />1989 amendment) and that SR-02 was likewise not associated with amendment AM-03, as <br />was suggested in the SR-03 application from Climax. <br />The 7-shaft location was inspected. This is a ventilation shaft that is located at <br />the northeast perimeter of the Storke Complex and just below the Leadville, Colorado <br />and Southern Railroad grade. The Fan House and Compressor Buildings have been <br />demolished and removed. Foundation reclamation is in progress and has included <br />concrete drilling and blasting. The foundations and elevated concrete structures such <br />as equipment pedestals and stem walls will be managed for reclamation through <br />combinations of rubblization, removal, backfilling into cuts and burial either in <br />place or in other suitable locations. The 7-shaft opening was sealed in 1996. <br />7-shaft is a circular 28-foot diameter concrete lined opening. The shaft seal design <br />is for a cast-in-place concrete slab. The design includes bottom forms for-the slab <br />that are bridge decking supported by wide flange beams on 4 foot centers. The cast- <br />in-place slab was designed in general accordance with concrete slab designation "I" <br />described on Standard Drawing No. 3 in °General Bid Specifications," Colorado Inactive <br />Mine Reclamation Program (IMP), 1996. This slab design is suitable for spans up to <br />24 feet wiCh up to 12 feet of fill thickness placed over the finished slab. Since <br />the 7-shaft span is 28 feet, no more than four feet of cover fill may be placed on <br />the finished slab in accordance with the IMP specification. Four feet maximum cover <br />fill will be made one condition of the DMG's acceptance of the slab that has been <br />installed. Apparently, and as reported by Climax, the compressive strength of the <br />cast-in-place concrete in the slab has never been tested. 4,000 psi concrete was <br />specified. The 7-shaft design also deviated from the IMP specifications where the <br />two central wide flange beams extend slightly more than one foot onto the shaft collar <br />concrete rather than the specified two-foot minimum. The 7-shaft design exceeded IMP <br />specifications for slab designation "I" where a 22 inch slab thickness was employed <br />compared to the 20 inch thickness that is specified and where the edges of the slab <br />are doweled into the concrete shaft collar using S foot long #11 bars. <br />The DMG cannot accept the 7-shaft closure as a completed reclamation task for the <br />purpose of determining the bond amount until the following listed items are addressed: <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.