Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~~I ~I~~I~~I~~~~~~I~ <br />999 <br />STATF, OF COLORADO <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Department of Nalu ral Resources <br />131 3 Sherman SL, Room ? I S <br />Denver, Colorarlu AU?03 <br />Phone: 13D3) A66 3561 <br />FA%: 13031 A32-0106 <br />DATE: September 1, 1999 <br />TO: Dan Mathews <br />FROM: Jim Pendleton <br />~~. <br />~~. <br />c, <br />I.L <br />RE: Roadside lylibe - Ob~efvations from August 25, 1999 Site Visit <br />No: C-81-041) <br />DIVISION O F <br />MINERAL S <br />GEOLOGY <br />RECLAMATION <br />MINING•SAFETY <br />ern o..~n, <br />Governor <br />GrepE W~Ichcr <br />Exec uu~e Dveclor <br />Michael B. Lonq <br />Di,isinn Dirr~lor <br />Following our field visit to the Roadside Mine of last Wednesday, August 25, 1999, I thought I'd <br />document a few observations for the file. <br />Refuse Disposal Area #1: <br />We walked the RDA#1 with Mr. Stover. The old seeps on the second facial bench continue to <br />exist. They have declined in flow to represent moist areas, with seasonal discharge to the pond. <br />Repeated drilling has established to both the Division's and OSM's satisfaction that these seeps <br />represent lateral movement of infiltration along super-compacted bench top horizontal lifts. <br />Infiltration results from rainfall, snow melt, and the deposition of high-moisture content wash <br />plant refuse on the surface of the pile. Further, repeated computer stability analyses have <br />demonstrated that the RDA#1 remains structurally stable, in spite of the existence of these seeps. <br />I observed no evidence of any instability on the face of the RDA#1. <br />The Division has raised a question regarding the potential impacts upon RDA#1 stability <br />resulting from the placement of wash plant refuse from Bowie No. 2 Mine run-of-mine coal on <br />the RDA#l. Jim Stover of J. E. Stover & Associates, consultant to both Powderhorn Coal Co. <br />and Bowie Resources, Ltd., has responded that the refuse should not impact the pile because of <br />it's placement atop the pile. As I informed you earlier, I agree with Mr. Stover, with the <br />following conditions: (l) The Bowie #3 waste placement is limited to one five-foot thick lift: and <br />(Z) no subsequent waste is placed atop the Bowie #2 wash refuse. If subsequent placement is <br />proposed, by Powderhom or any successor to the permit, the pile will be reanalyzed to <br />demonstrate it's compliance with the regulatory requirements for structural stability. <br />Finally, if temporary cessation of this operation were to occur, I recommend that the Division <br />require that subsoil and topsoil be placed on the facial slopes as yet untreated. <br />