Laserfiche WebLink
West Elk Coal Company, Inc. <br />Post Olfice Box 597 <br />Somerset. Colorado 81434 <br />Telephone 303 929 5015 <br />rce fF...', .!i ~I T' ~~T <br />MAY 2 Y 1986 <br />May 20, 1986 <br />~t~t'~£a1 U1~~3 Fi~`~`~es~i'icYiV <br />C~~ie. D~n_. <br />Susan Mowry <br />Tom Schreiner <br />Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Division <br />1313 Sherman Street <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII <br />I <br />Re: Submission of additional information, Rule 5.04.3(1), for NOV's <br />C-86-041, C-86-042, and C-86-043, Mt. Gunnison No. 1 Mine, <br />CMLRD Permit No. C-007-80 <br />Messrs. Mowry and Shreiner: <br />West Elk Coal Company (1VECC) would like to submit the following <br />information to be considered in determining the facts surrounding the <br />above listed Notices of Violation issued play 9, 1986 by the Division: <br />NOV C-86-041 Lower Refuse Pile Runoff Collection Ditch <br />This NOV was the result of an inadvertent misinterpretation of the <br />Refuse Pile Site Plan by a contractor working on the refuse pile. <br />Dennis Conn of WECC checked the site on Friday, May 2, 1986 and the <br />collection ditch was intact. This would mean that the maximum time <br />the ditch was not in compliance with the plan was from May 2 to May <br />9, 1986. A small amount of water was leaving the ditch. The ultimate <br />discharge of this water was to the North Fork of the Gunnison River. <br />Due to spring runoff, the North Fork of the Gunnison River was and is <br />quite high at this time and is also very poor quality due to high natural <br />sediment loading. The amount of contribution of this discharge, even <br />if high in suspended solids (no sample was taken), would have had a <br />negligible effect on the North Fork of the Gunnison River quality. The <br />small amount of sediment which appeared to be just beyond the north <br />edge of the ditch is a very small amount indeed (approximately 10 <br />regular hand shovel fulls). Inspection further than about 10 feet from <br />the ditch did not reveal anything that looked unusual in the way of <br />sediment. It is questionable whether the material was actually <br />sediment load from the areas above or just the immediate ditch <br />bottom siltation. Therefore, we feel that no environmental damage <br />occurred. The water running in the ditch on Niay 8 and 9, 1986 was <br />runoff from rainfall events that occurred on the 8th and 9th of May. <br />The ditch was cut back into the sediment pond on May 9, 1986 (see <br />letter of May 16, 1986 D. Conn to S. Mowry, T. Schreiner). <br />a r.~c0-eza <br />