_INSPECTION - C1981041 ‎(41)‎

• Permit No: C1981041
• IBM Index Class Name: INSPECTION
• Doc Name: Inspection Report
• Inspection Date: 5/20/2009
• Email Name: MPB
• 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 also describe any enforcement actions taken during the inspection
and the facts or evidence supporting the enforcement action.
This was a complete inspection of the Roadside Portals Mine conducted on May 20, 2009 by Mike
Boulay of the Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety Grand Junction Field Office. Tonya
Hammond of Snowcap Coal Company(SCC) was present during the entire inspection. Weather
conditions were sunny and warm. Ground conditions were dry.
Availability of Records
The availability of records was checked on the afternoon of 5/20. All required records were on file and
available for review at J.E. Stover& Associates offices. No problems were noted with the records
review. Tonya Hammond does an excellent job at maintaining and updating the records file. The
records are organized and easily accessible. See the attached Availability of Records checklist.
Roads
Roads were dry and in good condition. Road ditches and road culverts were generally well maintained
throughout the various mine site locations and support facility areas.
Hydrologic Balance
All site Sedimentation Ponds including 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13 and UTL I and 2 were inspected. All
ponds were dry, with exception of UTL 2 and Pond 8. Pond 8 receives a small amount of discharge
from the North Collection Ditch at the South Portals area which originates from the South Portals
French Drain. UTL 2 usually has a greater amount of water during this time of year which is the result
of alluvial groundwater inflow from the Colorado River. Pond embankments, inlets and discharge
structures were all stable and no problems were noted at any of the sediment pond locations. Drainage
and diversion ditches were stable and dry with no significant erosion or other problems noted.
One objective of this complete inspection was to look at various silt fence locations throughout the
permit area that had been included in Technical Revision No. 58 (TR-58) for the purpose of removing
them. With TR-58 SCC demonstrated that vegetation had become established to the extent that the silt
fences were no longer required to treat the run-off from small isolated disturbed areas. SCC utilized
SEDCADTM 4 to evaluate the effectiveness of the vegetation to act as a grass filter. Grass filter
designs are presented in TR-58 for each silt fence that SCC intends to remove. Upon approval of TR-
58 these designs will be incorporated in to the PAP in Appendix 14-6. All of the silt fence locations
were stable with no significant erosion occurring. In most cases the vegetation was well established.
At a few of the locations, vegetation was sparse but these sites were relatively flat and there was no
evidence of excessive sediment deposition at the silt fence and virtually no erosion occurring. Based
on the site inspection and the design information presented in TR-58, SCC has successfully