Laserfiche WebLink
Inspection Topic Summary <br />NOTE: Y= Inspected N =Not Inspected R= Comments Noted V= Violation Issued NA—Not Applicable <br />N - Air Resource Protection <br />N - Availability of Records <br />R - Backfill & Grading <br />N - Excess Spoil and Dev. Waste <br />N - Explosives <br />N - Fish & Wildlife <br />N - Hydrologic Balance <br />N - Gen. Compliance With Mine Plan <br />N - Other <br />N - Processing Waste <br />N - Roads <br />R - Reclamation Success <br />N - Revegetation <br />N - Subsidence <br />N - Slides and Other Damage <br />N - Support Facilities On -site <br />N - Signs and Markers <br />N - Support Facilities Not On -site <br />N - Special Categories Of Mining <br />N - Topsoil <br />COMMENTS <br />This was a partial inspection of the Keenesburg Strip Mine; operated by Coors Energy Company (CEC); DRMS <br />Permit No. C- 1981 -028. I, Jared Ebert of the Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety conducted the <br />inspection. Mr. Danny Kipp with CEC accompanied me during the inspection. The weather was clear and cool at <br />the time of the inspection. <br />BACKFILL and GRADING — Rule 4.14 <br />Contemporaneous Reclamation 4.14.1; Approximate Original Contour 4.14.2; Highwall Elimination 4.14.1(2)(f); <br />Steep Slopes 4.14.2, 4.27; Handling of Acid and Toxic Materials 4.14.3; Stabilization of Rills and Gullies 4.14.6: <br />On February 5, 2015, the Division conducted a bond release inspection of reclamation Areas 32, 31 and 30 in <br />association with the SL7 Phase I Bond Release application submitted by CEC. During the February 5, 2015 <br />inspection, the Division collected GIS points within the bond release parcels to verify the on the ground <br />topography of these bond release parcels. After processing this data, the Division believed there was an error and <br />the elevations measured were not representative of the actual on the ground topography. Please see the February <br />5, 2015 inspection report for details. This inspection was conducted in order to re- evaluate the post mine <br />topography of Areas 32, 31 and 30. <br />During this inspection, I collected 35 GPS points using a Trimble YUMA GPS unit, the GPS points recorded the <br />elevation of each point. The location of the points collected during this inspection were the same locations of the <br />data points from the February 5, 2015 inspection. The GPS points were located along four transects located <br />within Areas 32, 31 and 30. Also, three GPS points were collected at locations where the on the ground elevation <br />was known (1 -W, 2 -W and AMW -1). Seethe enclosed inspection report maps that depict the location of each of <br />the GPS points collected. <br />When I returned to the office after the inspection, I downloaded the data collected in the field into Pathfinder <br />Office, Version 5.30. After differentially correcting the data, I exported the point data into ARC Map. I then <br />exported the elevation data collected in the field into Microsoft Excel. For each data point collected, the elevation <br />of that data point was listed. Also, for each of the data points, the approved post mine elevation was interpolated <br />from the Appendix Q -1 map from the permit that depicts the approved post mine topography and the CEC <br />reported elevations interpolated from the SL7 Bond Release application Figure 2 Map. Using the three data points <br />collected at locations where the elevation was known, I was able to ascertain the average error of the elevation <br />data I collected in the field. Using this data, I calculated a correction factor of - 1.95032, meaning the data <br />collected in the field on average was 1.95032 feet higher than the actual on the ground elevation. I applied this <br />correction factor to the elevation data collected. With this data, cross sections and summary tables were generated <br />in Microsoft Excel, see Attachment 1 of this report for the results. The cross sections depict the approved post <br />