ENFORCE32869

• Permit No: C1996083
• IBM Index Class Name: Enforcement
• Doc Date: 4/15/1999
• Doc Name: GOB PILE BOWIE 2 MINE PN C-96-083 BOWIE RESOURCES LIMITED CERTIFIED MAIL NO Z 434 941 460
• From: DMG
• To: BOWIE RESOURCES LIMITED
• Violation No.: CV1999004
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

111111 1111111111111 .
_ STATE OF COLOiZADO
DIb ISION OF h11NERALi AND GEOLOGY
D,~pdrtmem of Narurel Resources
I ; ! } $1`e!mdr. Sl, ROJm ? I S
D,~mer, Culur~Ju AO'_Ul
DIVISION O F
Nn~,n~. t;a}. en,;-BSn~ M l N E R A L 5

GEOLOGY
A nl 1~
1999 RECLAMATION
,
[' HINING•S AFETY
B~II gw<ns
Mr. William A Bear, Jr. C,oeernor
Bowie Resources Limited Grvq E. tValcher
E.ecutire Dheuor
Bowie No. 2 Mine atlchael B. Lone
P.O. BOX 483 Dwishm Duectnr
Paonia, Colorado 31428
Re: Gob Pile, Bowie No. 2 Mine, Permit No. C-96-083, Bowie Resources Limited
Certified Mail No. Z 434 941 460
Deaz Mr. Bear:
The Division has reviewed the February 24, 1999 geotechnical report by Lambert and Associates that
was submitted to the Division by Jim Stover. Based on our review of the report, the Division believes
that the report shows that portions of the refuse pile were not compacted to achieve 90 percent of the
Proctor density, as is required in Rule 4.10.4(3)(b). The Division also believes that one of the causes of
the compaction deficiency may have been that subsoil had been added to overly wet coal refuse during
the placement process. This addition of subsoil had been done without first demonstrating that the new
material properties could result in a stable pile, as is required in Rules 4.10.1 and 4.09.2(3)(a). Finally,
the Division believes that compaction testing should have been performed on the approximately 20 feet
of refuse material placed at the bottom of the refuse pile, while that portion of the pile was being built,
as is required under Rules 4.09.1(11)(a) and 4.10.2(2)(b). Therefore, the Division is issuing Notice of
V iolation No. CV-99-004 for failure to construct the permanent coal mine waste bank according to the
regulations and the approved designs.
The Division bases its determination concerning inadequate compaction on the geotechnical data from
boring number 3 of the Lambert and Associates report. In that data, there were three samples which
achieved relative compactions of 80 percent, 87 percent and 84 percent of the Proctor standard.
Although the other six samples in boring number 3 met or exceeded the relative compaction level of 90
percent, the fact remains that the compaction test results from the boring hole on the outslope of the
refuse pile show that a portion of the refuse pile did not achieve compaction that would be in
compliance with the regulations and with the permit application designs.
The Division bases its decision concerning the unapproved addition of subsoil with coal refuse on the
Division's field inspection of February 2, 1993, on the results of the logs of the test borings in the
February 24, 1999 Lambert and Associates report and on information provided in the permit
application. Examination of Volume IV of the permit application shows that the geotechnical stability