ENFORCE30963

• Permit No: C1981038
• IBM Index Class Name: Enforcement
• Doc Date: 6/9/1995
• Doc Name: MEMO BOWIE MINE 1 FN C-81-038 NOV C-95-012
• From: DMG
• To: LARRY ROUTTEN
• Violation No.: CV1995012
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

• • III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
999
STATE OF COLORADO
DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY
Department of Natural Resources
1313 Sherman 51., Room 215
Denver, Colorado A0203
Phone: (J03) 866-3567
FAX: p03)A32-A106
June 9, 1995
TO: Larry Routten
FROM: Tony Waldron 'T ~,~)
II~
DEPARTMENT OF
NATURAL
RESOURCES
Roy Romer
Goaernor
lames 5. Lochhead
Ezec uo ve Dneuor
Michael B. Long
RE: Bowie Mine No. 1 (File No. C-81-038) , Notice of Violation G~+'45''pifeCOf
012
This memo is written to provide information to assist you in
conducting the penalty assessment for NOV C-95-012 which was issued
to the Bowie Mine No. 1 on May 12, 1995. The violation was issued
for failure to maintain sediment control structures to comply with
rules 4.05.6 and 4.05.9.
On May 11 and 12, 1995 a complete inspection was conducted at the
Bowie Mine No. 1. During the night of May 11 and into the morning
of May 12 a large amount of rain fell in the Paonia area causing a
substantial amount of water to flow into the mine's sediment ponds.
Upon arriving at the mine i went to check the pond 1-4 series and
discovered that the ponds were not functioning properly as
explained below.
The 1-4 pond series utilized binwall construction for the pond
embankments. The walls were constructed first then the inter-
spaces were filled with soil and compacted. The ponds ability to
hold water tightly has been suspect for sometime, but inspectors
had not been on site when the ponds were receiving and discharging
water in the volumes I observed until this inspection. The
operator had recently taken measures to repair the leaking joints
of the binwalls by shot-creteing the upslope embankment of the
lowest pond (#4). This action mostly succeeded in stopping the
binwall leaking at pond # 4, however, the upper 3 ponds all
exhibiting leaking through their embankments with pond 3 being the
worst.
In addition, all of the primary discharge structures utilize
headgates at the primary outlets to control the discharge. During
this inspection the water level in each pond was at or above the
discharge and none of the headgates were open. However, all of the
headgates were leaking either through a bad seal or at the point
the headgate is attached to the primary discharge pipe. As a result
of the embankments and the primary discharge structures leaking,
the ponds provided no retention time and the discharge was very
dirty. The photographs (located in the file) illustrate these
failures quite vividly.