Laserfiche WebLink
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 inspection <br />and the facts or evidence supporting the enforcement action. <br />Item 031 should be amended to include backfilling/grading of the two small area exemption sediment traps ~, <br />at the North Decline. <br />to 53 has been satisfactorily completed for Phase 1 bond release, and can be deleted from the amended <br />t estimate. <br />It~can be amended as follows, based on the bond release inspection: <br />• All s nd~costs for South Fan can be deleted (work satisf completed). <br />• Roadside Portal con eals satisfactorily completed, but outby seals not backfilled. <br />• Cameo portal openings have been acto ' ackfilled.~/~" <br />satisfactorily completed. <br />• Although N/W intake portal has been sealed and backfilled, it is recommended that the <br />associated reclamation costs be retained in the amended estimate, because of settling crack 0 ~L <br />noted during the inspection along the crest of the backfill, which was only recently repaved, <br />and which could be indicative of potential backfill instability. <br />~" <br />• 99b. Demolis ~ conveyor from Transfer Point #2 to #3. Th' ost item should be amended to <br />reflect the fact that~th~ metal conveyor structure and b ave been removed, but the concrete <br />supports (footers) remaut~~everal exposed foot were measured 8 feet long by 18" wide, <br />by 19" thick. Tonya Hammo aid thickn varied from 9" to 19". The footers are spaced <br />approximately 9 feet apart (perpen ' to conveyor corridor) along the entire length of the <br />segment from Transfer 2 to Trans , a county road). The conveyor ran through a large <br />culvert beneath the Xcel Ca~ Station coal hau cess road in this segment, whichwill <br />remain in place. The dollar amount associated with demo r ~ segment of conveyor in <br />the current estimate-is~$24,180.00, but the cost of footer removal is not'sepazated out from <br />metal strut demolition. It is not clear whetherregrading cost is included in the demolition <br />cost or ;there is not a separate task for conveyor corridorregrading. <br />99b. Demolish Conveyor from Tra~tsfer Point #3 to #4. At the b Inning of this segment, the <br />conveyor ran through an 8' diameter hea .guage steel culve .The outlet end of the culvert <br />where it emerges from beneath the road fill ends for roximately 200 feet, passing over <br />the channel of lower coal creek. There is no reas t this exposed section of the culvert <br />would need to remain in place for thepostmine u ys not clear that cutting and removal of <br />this culvert section was factored in the conve remove k item, nor was it addressed <br />elsewhere in [he estimate. A similar, thou shorter, culvert meat exists midway along the <br />segment where the conveyor passed un r the rail spur and UTL I road. This culvert <br />would be removed as a component of road reduction and rail spur reclamation. A ntrmber of <br />the concrete footers in the vicini Hof this culvert have been dislodged, bui remain on site in <br />the immediate vicinity. Alon~ remainder of the segment, the footers remain in place. The <br />Item 089 has been satisfactorily comp leted-fromZhe amended cost estimate. ~ <br />Items 99a through 99d (structural demolition) can be modified as follows: <br />9 ~~ <br />~~ <br />