INSPEC34413 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

III. COMMENTS -COMPLIANCE Below are comments on the inspection. The comments include discussion of observations made during the inspection. Comments also describe any enforcement actions taken during the inspection and the facts or evidence supporting the enforcement action. This was a partial inspection of the Yoast Mine conducted on July 18 and July 19, 2007 by Mike Boulay of the DRMS. On July 18`" I met with John Maneotis who is a sheep rancher and property owner adjacent to the Yoast Mine. Mr. Maneotis did not request an inspection of his property but did arrange to meet with me to discuss some concerns he had regarding the Yoast Haul Road A and the deadhead route where the 650 dragline was walked across a portion of his property in 1996. It was necessary to access Mr. Maneotis's property in order to clear the 650 dragline beneath the PSCo/WAPA power lines that cross Haul Road A. The deadhead route to walk under the power lines was reclaimed shortly after the deadhead route was utilized. The deadhead route was permitted and is described in detail in Attachment 13-10 of the permit document. Roy Karo of Seneca Coa] Company was present on July 19`h during afollow-up inspection of the locations that Mr. Maneotis had concerns with. Weather conditions were sunny and hot on both days of the inspection. Ground conditions throughout the mine site were dry. On July 18, the DRMS and Mr. Maneotis met at the west side of the permit area along Haul Road A and proceeded to the reclaimed drainage and the area that was disturbed when the dragline was walked across the Maneotis property. Mr. Maneotis expressed concern with the water that has backed up in the reclaimed drainage because his sheep can become stuck in the mud and stagnant pool caused by the silted in drainage. According to Mr. Maneotis the drainage is ephemeral and only flows during spring runoff or as a result of heavy precipitation. Based on the inspection it is evident that the drainage no longer flows properly due to a too shallow Bade and sedimentation in the mid-section of the drainage channel. A photograph of the channel showing the backed up water is provided in Photo No. 1 at the end of this report. The sediment deposition can also be seen at the center of the photograph. As part of the permitting process a reclaimed drainage channel design was approved by the DRMS and is provided in Addendum 13-1 OB of the permit document. The design is for a trapezoidal channel with a mild slope design and D50 riprap of 9 inch. The channel has been inspected numerous times over the past several years as apart of routine inspections of the Yoast Mine and at one point additional riprap and rock check dams were installed along the drainage to control erosion and stabilize the channel. It is evident based on this inspection that the mild slope (1 %) channel design is not appropriate for this drainage. Water is backing up where it is not intended and farther down slope the riprap that was placed is eroding and the channel is skirting around the riprap causing bank erosion. Photo No. 2 shows the location of a rock check dam and an area where bank erosion is occurring. Farther down slope is aloes-water crossing used to gain access to the other side of the reclaimed drainage.