Laserfiche WebLink
January 18, 2012 C- 1980- 007/West Elk Mine <br />Inspection Topic Summary <br />NOTE: Y= Inspected N =Not Inspected R= Comments Noted V= Violation Issued NA =Not Applicable <br />N - Air Resource Protection <br />R - Roads <br />N - Availability of Records <br />N - Reclamation Success <br />N - Backfill & Grading <br />N - Revegetation <br />N - Excess Spoil and Dev. Waste <br />N - Subsidence <br />N - Explosives <br />R - Slides and Other Damage <br />N - Fish & Wildlife <br />R - Support Facilities On -site <br />R - Hydrologic Balance <br />N - Signs and Markers <br />R - Gen. Compliance With Mine Plan <br />N - Support Facilities Not On -site <br />R - Other <br />N - Special Categories Of Mining <br />R - Processing Waste <br />N - Topsoil <br />COMMENTS <br />JRS <br />This was a partial inspection of the West Elk Mine conducted by Jim Stark of the Colorado Division of <br />Reclamation, Mining and Safety. Robin Schiro accompanied me on during the entire inspection and Mike <br />Peacock accompanied us on the inspection of the RPEE area. The mine was actively producing and shipping coal <br />at the time of the inspection. The weather was cold and overcast and there was snow on the ground. <br />HYDROLOGIC BALANCE - Rule 4.05 Drainage Control 4.05.1, 4.05.2, 4.053; Siltation Structures 4.05.5, <br />4.05.6; Discharge Structures 4.05.7, 4.05.10; Diversions 4.05.4; Effluent Limits 4.05.2; Ground Water Monitoring <br />4.05.13; Surface Water Monitoring 4.05.13; Drainage — Acid and Toxic Materials 4.05.8; Impoundments 4.05.6, <br />4.05.9; Stream Buffer Zones 4.05.18: <br />- Sediment pond SG -01 was covered with snow but there appeared to be at least six feet of freeboard in the pond. <br />The pond was not discharging at the time of the inspection. the pond embankment appeared to be stable and no <br />erosional problems were noted. <br />- The mine water treatment ponds in Sylvester Gulch contained some water but were not discharging at the time of <br />the inspection. The pond embankments were covered with snow but they appeared to be stable and no erosional <br />problems were noted. <br />- Pond MB 3 contained a small amount of water but was not discharging. The pond embankment appeared to be <br />stable and no erosional problems were noted at the time of the inspection. <br />- The wastewater treatment pond was covered with snow but appeared to be stable. The pond was discharging an <br />immeasurable trickle at the time of the inspection. No erosional problems were noted. <br />- Freshwater ponds 1 and 2 were both full at the time of the inspection. No water was discharging out of the <br />overflow spillways. The embankments were covered with snow but they appeared to be stable and no erosional <br />problems were noted. <br />- The RPE ponds contained a small amount of water and were not discharging. The pond embankments were <br />covered with snow but appeared to be stable. No erosional problems were noted at the time of the inspection. <br />- The roadside ditches were all covered with snow but appeared to be functioning. It is, apparently, the "norm" at <br />the West Elk Mine for the ditches to have a blanket of snow covering them but for the water to be flowing under <br />this blanket. The Division does not have a problem with this practice as long as the water is, in fact, flowing in the <br />ditches and not being dammed -up by the snow and flowing out of the ditch. <br />Number of Partial Inspection this Fiscal Year: 8 <br />Number of Complete Inspections this Fiscal Year: 2 <br />Page 2 of 9 <br />