_INSPECTION - C1981044 ‎(30)‎

• Permit No: C1981044
• IBM Index Class Name: INSPECTION
• Doc Name: Inspection Report
• From: DRMS
• To: Moffat County Mining, LLC
• Inspection Date: 7/19/2011
• Email Name: JRS
• Email Name: SB1
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

July 18, 2011 C-1981-044/Williams Fork Mines JRS
Inspection Topic Summary
NOTE: Y=Inspected N=Not Inspected R=Comments Noted V=Violation Issued NA=Not Applicable
Y -Air Resource Protection R -Roads
N -Availability of Records R -Reclamation Success
Y - Backfill &Grading N - Revegetation
N - Excess Spoil and Dev. Waste N - Subsidence
N - Explosives N - Slides and Other Damage
Y - Fish& Wildlife N - Support Facilities On-site
R - Hydrologic Balance R - Signs and Markers
N -Gen. Compliance With Mine Plan N - Support Facilities Not On-site
R -Other N - Special Categories Of Mining
N -Processing Waste R -Topsoil
COMMENTS
This was a partial inspection of the Williams Fork Mines conducted by Jim Stark of the Colorado Division of
Reclamation, Mining and Safety(Division). Brian Watterson of Moffat County Mining(MCM)accompanied me
on the inspection. The mine is not producing coal but has been performing reclamation activities and monitoring
activities. As of 1 July 2011 the Division changed the Williams Fork Mines' status from"Temporary Cessation"
to Active. The Division will be conducting two partial and one complete inspection each calendar quarter. The
main focus of this inspection was to assess the success of the recent weed spraying at the site. The weather was
clear and hot and the ground was dry.
HYDROLOGIC BALANCE -Rule 4.05 Drainage Control 4.05.1, 4.05.2,4.05.3; Siltation Structures 4.05.5,
4.05.6; Discharge Structures 4.05.7, 4.05.10; Diversions 4.05.4; Effluent Limits 4.05.2; Ground Water
Monitoring 4.05.13; Surface Water Monitoring 4.05.13; Drainage—Acid and Toxic Materials 4.05.8;
Impoundments 4.05.6,4.05.9; Stream Buffer Zones 4.05.18:
- MCM has replaced the Mine No. 5 dewatering pump and the dewatering ponds(5-P5, 5-P6 and 5-P7) and all of
the ponds were full and were discharging(from 5-P7). The discharge flows into the Williams Fork River and
appeared to be clear. The pond embankments were well vegetated and stable. There was one problem on the pond
5-P7 embankment, as noted below. There were no erosional problems noted on any of the pond embankments and
no other problems noted. In the middle of the pond 5-P7 embankment, north side,there were two large burrows
and two areas along the inslope of the pond embankment that have been dug out(right by the burrows). These
burrows were each approximately one foot in diameter and at least one foot deep. These burrows and dug out
areas will need to be repaired. If the burrows continue to be a problem, MCM may need to perform additional
rodent control.
ROADS—Rule 4.03 Construction 4.03.1(3)/4.03.2(3) Drainage 4.03.1(4)/4.03.2(4) Surfacing and
Maintenance4.03.1(5)and(6)/4.03.2(5)and(6)Reclamation 4.03.1(7)/4.03.2(7):
- The small gully/erosion feature on the haul road south of the 7-North Angle well is still there. Brain indicated
that they were contracting with Bower Brothers Construction to get this area repaired. MCM needs to repair this
road before winter to avoid it becoming a bigger problem.
Number of Partial Inspection this Fiscal Year: 1
Number of Complete Inspections this Fiscal Year: 0
Page 2 of 6