Laserfiche WebLink
III. COMMENTS -COMPLIANCE <br />Below are comments on the inspection. The comments include discussion of observations <br />made during the inspection. 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-81-018 <br />27 Sept 2004 ~ <br />This was a Complete inspection of the Deserado Mine conducted by Jim Stark of <br />CGMG. 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 />sunny and the ground was dry. <br />Availability of Records: All of the necessary records were available in the mine <br />office. See the records check-list 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-l, 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. The operator was grading the road at the time of the inspection. <br />-The conveyor corridor road was well maintained and stable. There were no <br />problems noted with 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 />- Fond RP-2/3 contained a small amount of water at the time of the inspection. Both <br />of the cells at the pond inlet contained water (the east cell was about 1 /3 full and <br />the west cell was full. The pond embankment was well vegetated and appeared to <br />be stable. There were no erosional problems noted on the pond embankment. <br />- Pond RP-4 contained a small amount of water at the time of the inspection. It was <br />nol discharging and did not appear to have discharged. The pond embankment <br />was well vegetated and appeared to be stable. There were no erosional problems <br />noted on the pond embankment. <br />- Pond RP-5a contained a small amount of water at the time of the inspection but <br />was not discharging, nor did it appear to have discharged. The pond embankment <br />was well vegetated and appeared to be stable. There were no erosional problems <br />noted on the pond embankment. <br />- Pand SS-1 contained a small amount of water at the time of the inspection but was <br />not discharging. The pond embankment was well vegetated and appeared to be <br />stable. There were no erosional problems noted on the pond embankment. <br />