My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
_INSPECTION - C1982057 (44)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Inspection
>
Coal
>
C1982057
>
_INSPECTION - C1982057 (44)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/8/2020 11:23:23 AM
Creation date
12/18/2008 2:01:14 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982057
IBM Index Class Name
INSPECTION
Doc Name
Inspection Report
Inspection Date
12/10/2008
Email Name
JRS
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.
/
6
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 /> Seneca II-W C-1982-057 <br /> Pg 1/2 10 December 2008 <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 complete inspection of the Seneca II-W Mine conducted by Jim Stark of CDRMS. Dennis <br /> Jones of SCC accompanied me on the inspection. Most areas of the mine have been reclaimed but <br /> there have been no phased bond releases at the site. The weather was cold and sunny and the <br /> ground was covered with several inches (and more)of snow. Many of the mine areas were <br /> inaccessible at the time of the inspection due to the snow. <br /> Availability of Records: All of the necessary records were available at the mine's office, which is <br /> located in a trailer at the Hayden Gulch Loadout. One item of note is that the insurance certificate in <br /> the files was expired. Jay James of SCC called the corporate office and they e-mailed copies of the <br /> mine's new insurance certificate. A copy was placed in the file. Please see the DRMS Availability of <br /> Records checklist at the end of this report for more information. <br /> Signs and Markers: There are two entrances to the mining areas at the Seneca II-W Mine along <br /> Routt County Road 53. Both of these entrances had the appropriate mine ID signs with the necessary <br /> information. Additionally, there are two ponds (Pond 009 and Pond 015)along a county road. Both of <br /> these entrances have the appropriate mine ID signs as well. <br /> Roads: Road G was covered with some packed snow but appeared to be well maintained and stable. <br /> No ruts erosional problems were noted on the road at the time of the inspection. The road was <br /> inaccessible about%2 mile after Pond 005. <br /> - Road A was covered with packed snow. The road appeared to be well maintained at the time of the <br /> inspection. No ruts or erosional problems were noted on the road. <br /> - Road J was covered with packed snow at the time of the inspection but appeared to be well <br /> maintained and stable. No ruts or erosional problems were noted on the road. <br /> - Road K and the other roads on the interior of the mine/pit areas were inaccessible at the time of the <br /> inspection. <br /> Hydrologic Balance: Pond 005 contained water approximately two feet below the top of the <br /> discharge pipe and was not discharging at the time of the inspection. The pond embankment was <br /> covered with some snow but it appeared to be well vegetated and stable. No erosional problems were <br /> noted on the pond embankment at the time of the inspection. <br /> - Pond 006 was full and was discharging at the time of the inspection. The outfall was inaccessible to <br /> check the discharge. The pond embankment was covered with some snow but it appeared to be well <br /> vegetated and stable. No erosional problems were noted on the pond embankment at the time of the <br /> inspection. <br /> - Ponds 016 and 016A were both full and discharging at the time of the inspection (Pond 016A was <br /> discharging into Pond 016). The discharge appeared to be clear. Both pond embankments were <br /> covered with some snow but they appeared to be well vegetated and stable. No erosional problems <br /> were noted on either pond embankment at the time of the inspection. There is a small slide on the <br /> south inslope of pond 016 (it appeared to be less than 10'x10'). The material from this slide is all <br /> contained in the Pond. Dennis Jones indicated that SCC was not considering doing any work on this <br /> small slide as it is all contained in the pond and it is not large enough to change the impact the pond's <br /> volume. <br /> - Ponds 009, 015 and 017 were all inaccessible at the time of the inspection due to snow. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.