INSPEC23097 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

III. COMMENTS -COMPLIANCE Below are comments on the inspection. The comments include discussion of observations made during the inspection. Comments also describe any enforcement actions taken during the inspection and the facts or evidence supporting the enforcement action. This was a complete inspection of the Sanborn Creek Mine conducted by Tony Waldron of DMG along with Tom Anderson of Pacific Basin Resources. The mine is actively producing and shipping coal and is permitted to produce 1.3 million tons per year. On August 31, 1995 a Succession of Operator and Transfer of Permit was approved to transfer this mine from Somerset Mining Company to Pacific Basin Resources and change the name from the Somerset/Sanborn Creek Mine to the Sanborn Creek Mine. The inspection began by checking springs that have been identified for monitoring in the Coal Gulch drainage. These springs were originally identified by West Slope Carbon for their Hawk's Nest Mine and when the current mining began in this area, the Sanborn Creek Mine began monitoring these sites. The results of the field monitoring is listed below. Spring # 1- No flow and the area is dry; this area appears to be more of a surface area depression where snowmelt and rain water collects rather than a spring fed area. Spring # 2- No flow and dry; this area may simply be an additional monitoring point located in the same drainage as spring # 4 that is really more of a surface monitoring point as opposed to a spring. Spring # 3- No flow and dry; this may also be an area where surface runoff causes flow in the spring and it simply dries up in the fall, absent precipitation events. Spring # 4- This location was expressing a small but constant flow of good quality water and is typically what would be considered a spring with hydrophytic vegetation surrounding the location indicating that over time there is a steady supply of water. The field readings were as follows: pH= 7.9; Ec= 254; T= 8 degrees celsius; flow was i.2 GPM. Spring # 5- This location was also expressing a very small but constant flow of good quality water and would also be considered a more typical spring. Field parameters were as follows: pH= 7.8; Ec= 144; T= 12.7 degrees celsius; flow was less than 0.1 GPM Both locations for springs 4 and 5 were located in small surface water drainage bottoms that carry a significant amount of surface flow during spring runoff. During the fall of the year the drainage, both up and down gradient from these locations, was dry. This fact coupled with the good water quality indicates that these springs are probably surface alluvial in nature.