_INSPECTION - C1981025 ‎(12)‎

• Permit No: C1981025
• IBM Index Class Name: INSPECTION
• Doc Name: Inspection Report
• Inspection Date: 3/17/2009
• Email Name: JRS
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

III. COMMENTS - COMPLIANCE
Below are comments on the inspection. The comments include discussion of observations
made during the inspection. Comments in Section IV describe any enforcement actions
taken during the inspection and the facts or evidence supporting the enforcement action.
Page 1/2 North Thompson Creek C-81-025
17 March 2009 e:: —
This was a complete inspection of the North Thompson Creek Mine conducted on 17 March 2009 by
Jim Stark of CDRMS. The mine has been reclaimed and the operator has applied for a final Phase III
Bond Release(a termination of jurisdiction for the site). The Division is still considering this
application. The weather was warm and sunny with some wind and the ground ranged from dry to
muddy to covered with snow, depending on the exposure.
Availability of records: All of the necessary records were available at the Garfield County
Courthouse in Glenwood Springs. Given that the North Thompson Creek Mine is reclaimed and the
records are kept in the courthouse, they are in remarkably good condition. See the records checklist at
the end of this inspection for more details.
Signs and Markers: - The mine ID signs were in place at the portal 1 and portal 3 areas. The signs
contained the necessary information.
Roads: - The mine entrance road was dry at the top, a bit muddy in the middle and covered with
several inches of snow by the long pond. The road was in good condition and appeared to be stable at
the time of the inspection. The road is becoming overgrown with grasses due to lack of use. No
erosional problems were noted on the road.
- The access road to the treatment ponds was dry and it was stable and in good condition at the time of
the inspection. No erosional problems were noted on the road
Hydrologic Balance: -The long pond was in good condition and appeared to be stable at the time of
the inspection. Both the#1 and the#3 portal were discharging at the time of the inspection. The two
discharges combined were approximately 5 gallons/minute. There was a large amount of staining at
the portal discharge point and along most of the length of the pond but it appears to be doing its job of
removing iron from the water.
- The two treatment ponds (T1 and T2)were both full at the time of the inspection. T1 was
discharging to T2 and T2 was discharging to the river. The Pond T2 discharge was also approximately
5 gallons/minute. There discharge was clear and there was no iron staining on the rocks at the
discharge point. The pond embankments were dry, stable and well vegetated and there were no
erosional problems noted.
- Sediment pond P9 contained a small amount of water from T2 and probably snowmelt runoff but was
not discharging at the time of the inspection. The pond embankment was well vegetated and appeared
to be stable. No erosional problems were noted on the embankment.
Backfilling and Grading: - The sinkhole that opened up in 2007 at the#3 portal appears to remain
stable. The area was dry at the time of the inspection. The vegetation growing on the sinkhole has
completely covered the area so that there is no visible sign that it existed. No erosional problems were
noted on the area at the time of the inspection.
- The backfilled#1 portal remained stable and well vegetated at the time of the inspection. No
cracking, settling or erosional problems were noticed at the time of the inspection.