My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
INSPEC28243
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Inspection
>
INSPEC28243
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 9:31:48 PM
Creation date
11/18/2007 10:15:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981014
IBM Index Class Name
Inspection
Doc Name
Inspection Report
Inspection Date
11/13/2002
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.
/
8
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 A_ f,_r,Q ~,~y~ ~~y <br />~~ Y~ ,~ ~,~~ ova ~~ <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 />This was a Phase I Bond Release inspection for the Southfield Mine conducted by Jim <br />Stark of CDMG. Sandy Brown of CDMG, George Patterson of EFCI, Randy Pair of <br />OSM, representatives of The Corley Company (Dr. Doug Corley, Andrea Corley, Carin <br />Corley, Anne Corley and Daryl Mergen~, Roy Roper of NRCS, Linda Saunders, Irene <br />Coulter, and Paula Coulter accompanied me. Phase I bond release is being <br />requested in the facilities area (including ponds 1 and 2 and the Magpie Creek <br />Permanent Diversion), the refuse pile, pond 3, the south fan, the explosives bunker <br />and the Newlin Creek topsoil stockpile. These facilities are shown on Map 1 of the <br />bond release application. EFCI applied for a Phase I Bond Release on 24 October <br />2002. The application was deemed complete on October 31, 2002. <br />Facilities Area: <br />- All of the structures have been demolished and removed except for the truck <br />tunnel and the lab building. There two structures have been permitted as permanent <br />facilities. The access road to the lab building and the Newlin Creek gate are also <br />permitted as permanent structures. <br />- Portal Area -The post-mining topography of the backfilled portal area is the <br />same as that proposed by EFCI. The slope of the portal area is between 9% and 130 <br />as measured during the inspection. These slopes are in compliance with the <br />approved the post-mining topography map. All of the drainage from the portal area <br />flows into pond 5. There did not appear to be any low spots in the regraded portal <br />area that would allow water to pool. <br />EFCI buried concrete debris in the portal area and in the regraded Pond 1 area. <br />Using a backhoe provided by Mr. Patterson, two test pits were dug at the portal area <br />to check cover depths. Ms. Saunders selected the location for the first pit and I <br />selected the location for the second pit. The first pit was dug approximately 66 feet <br />above the drainpipe for the portals (this is the location where the concrete retaining <br />wall for the shop/office/warehouse was located). The first pit was dug with a <br />backhoe to the depth of four feet. No coal fines or other demolition debris was <br />found. I thought one rock chunk resembled granite, although Ms. Saunders thought <br />it might be a piece of concrete. The second pit was dug approximately 150 feet <br />below the drainpipe for the portals (this is the location of the beginning of the <br />concrete apron to the portals). The second pit was dug with a backhoe to the depth <br />of four feet. No concrete, coal fines or other demolition debris was found. <br />There were some questions regarding the four-inch drainpipe that was installed in the <br />portals. This drainpipe was installed to allow discharge of water from the mine in the <br />unlikely event the mine fills with water. The discharge end of the drainpipe was <br />supposed to have a valve and was to be clearly marked. At this point in time it is not <br />capped or clearly marked. Dr. Corley was concerned the open hole would allow <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.