Laserfiche WebLink
III. COMMENTS - COMPLIANCE <br />Below are comments on the inspection. The comments include discussion of <br />observations made during the inspection. Comments also describe any enforcement <br />actions taken during the inspection and the facts or evidence supporting the <br />enforcement action. <br />This was a partial inspection conducted by Tom Kaldenbach of the Colorado Division of Minerals and Geology. <br />Brian Watterson represented the operator during the inspection. With the operator's consent, this report was <br />issued from the Denver office. <br />The ground was dry. The longwall operation was active in panel 15 Right, approaching Fish Creek from the <br />east. <br />HvdroloEic Balance <br />The surface casing was in good condition and a cap was in place on AVF14 monitoring well. Gauging station <br />SW 14 was in good repair. <br />After the inspection I measured the electroconductivity (EC) at four locations in Trout Creek. The <br />measurements were made from county road bridges. As shown on the following map, the EC downstream <br />from the mine was 660 micromhos/cm, significantly below the material damage suspect level of 1,000 <br />micromhos/cm. The operator's representative reported Fish Creek borehole had been dischazging slightly <br />more than 100 cfs in Fish Creek for some time. <br />Support Facilities <br />No problems were found at the northern mining district vent shaft. Topsoil piles were properly marked. <br />Drainage control berms were in place. <br />Subsidence <br />There was no subsidence-caused ponding of water evident in Fish Creek over panel 13 Right in SW 1/4 <br />Section 15-SN-86W. Substantial ponding was noted at this location during the May 2003 inspection, although <br />it was not clear then how much of the ponding was caused by subsidence, and how much was caused by the <br />high spring runoff. Neazby drainages that have been unaffected by mining were flooded by runoff during the <br />May inspection. <br />During this inspection there was no noticeable difference between streambank water levels in Fish Creek over <br />the 13 Right gateroad (minimum subsidence) compared to 13 Right midpanel (maximum subsidence). There <br />also was no indication of subsidence on the ground surface over Panel 13 Right in SW 1/4 Section 15-SN-86W <br />(surface cracks, etc.). This is to be expected as there are no significant rock outcrops, and thick soil and <br />alluvium underlies the azea. <br />The operator's consultant was conducting surveys across Fish Creek over panel 14 Right. The survey results <br />will be submitted as profiles in the next subsidence report. <br />3 <br />