_INSPECTION - C1981014 ‎(17)‎

• Permit No: C1981014
• IBM Index Class Name: Inspection
• Doc Name: Inspection Report
• From: DRMS
• To: George Patterson
• Inspection Date: 7/25/2013
• Email Name: JHB
• Email Name: DIH
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

July 25,2013 C-1981-014/Southfield Mine JHB
(DWR)to find out what requirements DWR would have if the landowners desire to keep MW-NW as a permanent
well.
Ms. Saunders was concerned about the identification tag on MW-NW with Colorado DWR Number 1205400. I
informed Ms. Saunders that her questions regarding this "tag"need to be directed to DWR.
DRMS records indicate that EFCI applied for a dewatering well permit with CDWR in 1991 under permit 412508.
This dewatering well application was denied by CDWR in 1991.
Pond 4 was dry at the time of the inspection. Pond 5 was dry but had a flush of annual sunflower blooming in the
bottom of the pond.
GENERAL MINE PLAN COMPLIANCE:
NOV CV-2013-002 remains unabated. EFCI has requested a formal hearing regarding the fact of the
violation and the civil penalties. The formal hearing is scheduled for the August 14,2013 Mine Land Reclamation
Board meeting.
PROCESSING WASTE/COAL MINE WASTE PILES —Rule 4.10 and 4.11
Drainage Control; Surface Stabilization; Placement:
The inspection went to the west side of the coal refuse pile (RDA),by the Thompson Ranch gate.
Precipitation in the area has improved the vegetative stand on the west and south sides of the RDA. Although the
vegetative cover on these portions of the RDA remains more open than the north and east sides of the RDA,there
were no signs of rilling or erosional nick points.
Ms. Saunders continued to voice concern over the lack of trees on the RDA. Transplanted shrubs and trees
continue to survive on the RDA. Data in the permit of the RDA area prior to disturbance indicates that this area
was mapped as grassland, and few trees were measured in this area in the baseline sampling. The RDA has four
feet of cover over the refuse material. It is not desirable to have deep rooted species penetrating into the refuse
below the cover material.
Ms. Saunders expressed concern over small drainage patterns on the east side of the RDA in the "dip"area of the
pile. This is a shaped low spot that allows drainage off the top of the RDA into the permanent collection ditch.
The drainage patterns of concern were 1-3 inches in depth,with gentle sides, and of short duration of 15-20 feet.
This area was well vegetated. The Division does not see these drainage features to be cause for concern. The
Division has observed these features during previous inspections and noted them in inspection reports. These
drainage patterns appear stable.
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):
Number of Partial Inspection this Fiscal Year: 1
Number of Complete Inspections this Fiscal Year: 0
Page 3 of 9