_INSPECTION - C1981035 ‎(16)‎

• Permit No: C1981035
• IBM Index Class Name: Inspection
• Doc Name: Inspection Report
• From: DRMS
• To: Tom Bird
• Inspection Date: 3/21/2012
• Email Name: MLT
• Email Name: SB1
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

March 21, 2012 C-1981-035/King Coal Mine MLT
would be forthcoming, which would modify the permit to allow the use of CMW for
backfilling the pre-law highwalls and benches at King L The Division also observed in 2011
that CMW hauled to the site from King II continued to be accumulated in the yard area, for
this future purpose.
• On February 8, 2012, the Division was contacted by representatives of GCC to discuss
backfilling of the King I highwalls and benches with CMW. GCC stated that, in fact, the
permit already allowed for such use: on page 4 of Section 2.05.4 —Reclamation Plan. The
text reads as follows: The tipple area highwall, and shop area highwall shown on Map King
I-010 will be back-filled in 2 foot lifts to a slope of 2:1 utilizing mine waste and fill rock. The
benches, however, will be graded and contoured to a 2.5:1 slope gradually sloping to 3:1.
• On February 9, 2012, the Division compiled a response to GCC which documented the
February 8 conversation, and summarized the various Coal Regulations that pertain to the
subject of Coal Mine Waste. (That letter is attached to this report, for reference.) In essence,
the rules do not appear to allow the placement of CMW in a manner that does not satisfy the
various performance standards. By definition (4.10.1(1)), "All coal mine waste shall be
transported and placed in new and existing disposal areas approved by the Division for this
purpose... The disposal area shall be designed, constructed, inspected and maintained: (a) In
accordance with 4.09.1, 4.09.2, 4.10, and 4.11; and (b) To prevent combustion."
• As shown in the permit paragraph quoted above, the Division had previously approved the
use of CMW for backfilling at King I, in concept. However, it appears that the fill may not
have been placed in accordance with the configuration prescribed in the permit. No
documentation has been provided to the Division confirming that 2-foot lifts were used, and
the slopes appear to have been constructed flatter than 2:1 (with the result that both the
footprint and volume of CMW are greater than what the permit describes).
• A more significant issue, however, is that the rules governing disposal of coal mine waste
have not been applied to its use as backfill at King L The backfill disposal area was not
designed, constructed, and inspected as required by the rules.
• A Notice of Violation is being issued for Failure to dispose of Coal Mine Waste in
compliance with the King Coal Permit, No. C-1981-035, and with the Regulations of the
Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board for Coal Mine.
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:
King II- (reference Map King 11007A - Site Culverts & Ditches)
• With the recent warm temperatures and dry weather, much of the snow has melted from the
King II area.
• A small amount of flow was entering the Sediment Pond from culverts C6 and C7, but the
bottom of the Sediment Pond was nearly dry.
• We observed a number of miscellaneous items to be addressed in a comprehensive"spring
clean-up" of the surface water control features: remove weed skeletons from the ditches,
including East and West Clearwater Diversions; repair culvert ends that have been deformed
Number of Partial Inspection this Fiscal Year: 6
Number of Complete Inspections this Fiscal Year: 3 Page 3 of 9