My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
_INSPECTION - C1981014 (41)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Inspection
>
Coal
>
C1981014
>
_INSPECTION - C1981014 (41)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/6/2020 9:37:14 AM
Creation date
5/19/2008 2:47:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981014
IBM Index Class Name
INSPECTION
Doc Name
Inspection Report
Inspection Date
5/13/2008
Email Name
KAG
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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 <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 /> This was a partial inspection conducted by Kent Gorham of the Colorado Division of <br /> Reclamation, Mining, and Safety (Division). This mine is in permanent cessation and <br /> reclamation of most areas is complete. Also in attendance were Southfield landowners, <br /> including Linda Saunders, Ted Coulter, and Paula Coulter. Ground conditions on this day <br /> were wet and muddy. Rainfall occurred during the entire inspection. <br /> Roads <br /> The road ditches on the main access road (County Road 92) adjacent to pond 5 appear to <br /> have been graded again since the last inspection in April. Linda Saunders expressed some <br /> concern regarding the water bar that diverts runoff across the RDA haul road as it climbs the <br /> hill to the RDA. She questioned whether a culvert would be a better alternative than the <br /> water bar. I suggested that most of the runoff diverted is sheet flow from the road surface <br /> itself and that a culvert may not be appropriate. The Division requests that EFMC evaluate <br /> whether the water bar could be removed or modified in such a way to address this concern. <br /> This section of road is also designated as permanent (page 4.03-8, Southfield approved <br /> permit application). <br /> County Road No. 92 <br /> Paula Coulter also expressed some concern about the road surfacing (slick and nearly <br /> impassable), generally from the parking area to the refuse road intersection. Weather <br /> 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.