Laserfiche WebLink
PERMIT #: M-1992-051 <br />INSPECTOR’S INITIALS: TC1 <br />INSPECTION DATE: August 6, 2014 <br /> <br /> <br />Page 3 of 7 <br />1. A Technical Revision, along with the required $216 fee to increase the maximum allowed <br />disturbed area; <br />2. Documentation demonstrating the actual disturbed area is no more than the required 35 acres; <br />or <br />3. Request an acreage reduction of at least 2.7 acres for an area that is reclaimed in accordance <br />with the approved reclamation plan and will not be used for any mining activity in the fut ure. <br />b) A review of the approved reclamation plan (Exhibit E, Section 3.1.1(i), enclosed for your reference) <br />states “The pit floor will be leveled and 6” – 12” plate of pit run material will be left.” It is unclear <br />from the approved reclamation plan how this pit run material is “left”. Is it to be moved from a <br />stockpile on site, ripped from the pit floor and graded, or imported? This uncertainty makes accurate <br />assessment of the proper bond difficult and is. The Division has assumed pit run material will be <br />ripped ad graded in place with a dozer. <br />c) The previous inspection was performed on 9/22/2006. A problem was cited for “post mining land <br />use is not clear for the site”. The problem was resolved. <br />d) The anniversary date is August 11. Annual reports and fees are current through 2015. The reported <br />affected area for 2015 was corrected from 77.4 acres in 2014 to 30 acres in 2 015. Note this differs <br />from the Division’s 37.7-acre disturbed area estimate. <br />e) The post-mine land use is industrial. <br /> <br />Bond: <br />The unit costs associated with the financial warranty have not been updated since the permit conversion to a <br />112c was approved in 1997. The financial warranty held by the Division is $21,100 for a phased bond in which <br />no more than 35 acres are to be disturbed at one time. The Division revised the original bond calculation by <br />updating the unit costs, assuming “plate” material would be ripped in place and rough graded with a dozer, then <br />finish graded with a motor grader; and added previously omitted mobilization costs. The resulting bond <br />estimate was $38,140 (see Attachment A, detailed bond calculations). The site is therefore underbonded, and <br />this is cited as a problem on page 1 of this report. The Operator must accept the new bond estimate or submit <br />a Technical Revision, along with the required $216 fee to clarify the Division’s assumptions with respect to the <br />reclamation plan and revise the 1997 Exhibit L bond estimate as indicated above under items (a) and (b) of <br />“Other Records”. <br /> <br />Summary and Recommendations: <br />1. The Operator should contact the Fremont County extension Agent for assistance in controlling tamarisk <br />and Russian olive before it becomes a problem. <br />2. Mining practices should be adjusted such that no highwalls are excavated at slopes steeper than the <br />approved 2H:1V in order to avoid potential future bond increases for highwall flattening. If the Operator <br />wishes to adjust the mining practice to excavate at a slopes steeper than 2H:1V, a Technical Revision <br />must be submitted to modify the mine plan, and adjust the financial warranty liability. <br />3. The Operator must comply with the two Corrective Actions by their respective Due Dates. These are <br />for inadequate bond and having a disturbed area greater than the maximum allowed 35 acres. <br /> <br />Please contact Tim Cazier (303-866-3567, ext. 8169) if you have any questions regarding this report. <br /> <br /> <br />