Laserfiche WebLink
Page 2 of 2 <br />BRL also notes that the day prior to the inspection and the day of the inspection yielded a total of 1.1" of rain, and <br />notes that this is a significant amount of water. Rules 4.10.1(1)(a) and 4.09.2(7) require surface water runoff <br />controls designed to safely pass the runoff from a 100 yr — 24 hr event. The 100 yr — 24 hr event for the Bowie No. <br />2 Mine is 2.6'; the precipitation received in the 24 hours prior to the inspection was considerably less than the <br />surface water runoff controls should be designed to handle. <br />BRL also asserts that minor accumulation of water along a terrace ditch is not considered a problem during <br />construction of the pile. The water accumulation observed during the inspection was not minor. There were three <br />blocked terrace ditches with standing water; approximately 750', 800', and 500' long. <br />The operator also contends that the design reports contained in the approved permit application package clearly <br />indicate the need to end -dump and dry the gob material prior to placement. The permit application package does <br />not, however, indicate that the end - dumped material will be placed in a manner that will result in oversteepening of <br />the slopes or the impoundment of water on the refuse disposal area. <br />BRL has provided information that accurately depicts the conditions that set off the violation, but I do not believe <br />that BRL has shown that the operation was not in violation of the cited rules and has not demonstrated good cause to <br />vacate Notice of Violation No. C2013004. <br />cc: David Berry <br />Sandy Brown <br />Marcia Talvitie <br />