Laserfiche WebLink
INSPEf_TjON REPORT Page <br /> general in area, it includes the pond cleaning drying pad and storage <br /> for accessory mine equipment: and a building . None of these sites had <br /> standing water but the grade was such that it would accumulate if the <br /> opportunity did arise . <br /> The sixth violation was issued for the failure a post mine <br /> identification sign at the entrance to the permit area from public <br /> roads . A sign for the mining complex is posted off of State Route <br /> 133 were it intersects with Forest Service road into the mine but it <br /> Is not posted where the permit area intersects the Forest Service <br /> road . The sign along the highway has been there for some time but it <br /> Is not posted in the right place . The seventh violation was written <br /> for the failure to maintain access roads . Two areas were noted in <br /> this violation . The first, is the erosion noted on the south fail <br /> road . According to company personnel, they had a storm III late July <br /> early August that caused severe erosion on the road . Gullies were <br /> noted in several places on the edge of the road and down the slope <br /> from one switchback to another . <br /> The second area in this violation, is the road drain on the two <br /> mine road near the old training station that carries disturbed area <br /> water from the toe ditch of the road to the two mine ponds . A gully <br /> was noted at the nick point in the road with pieces of culvert in the <br /> gully as it descended the road fill to the first pond . The question <br /> was asked about the possibility of a pipe being there but it was <br /> washed out during the July storm. That was not verified <br /> satisfactorily in my mind but despite that, the downfall should be <br /> armoured or should have a culvert to prevent further erosion and <br /> unnecessary loading of the ponds . <br /> The eighth violation was written for the failure to salvage topsoil <br /> from the construction on the Sutey beltline extension road . There <br /> was some comment about the possibility of salvaging some of the soil <br /> from the road construction but it was evident that all was not saved <br /> because aspen tree trunks were covered road fill along part of the <br /> route and bushes were noted in fill on another part of the road . As <br /> to the amount of loss and extent, it is not clear without further <br /> investigation but the loss of some is apparent. . <br /> The ninth violation of the TDN was written for the failure to <br /> obtain a valid permit prior to conducting surface coal mining <br /> operations . It is apparent from mine maps that portions of the mine <br /> access roads to each of the portals both active and inactive have <br /> been left out of the permit . This was not noted until I researched <br /> mine maps for the permit boundarys in relation to the requirement for <br /> the mine identification signs . I asked Jim Stevens if the maps in <br /> question with boundarys not inclusive were current . Fie said that the <br /> boundarys as noted on my map were probably one in the same as the <br /> ones on file at the Divisions office because of the date of drawing ~� <br /> and the identical map numbers . These maps do not include all <br /> portions of the mine roads . <br /> CLOSING COMMENTS <br /> A number of violations were noted during the inspection that were <br /> abated prior to the closeout of the inspection . The operator showed <br /> initiative to record violations and took steps to abate them with the <br /> manpower and time alloted in the interim. This is acceptable but <br />