Laserfiche WebLink
March 19, 2019 C-1981-015/Fruita No 1 & 2 CCW <br /> <br /> <br />Number of Partial Inspection this Fiscal Year: 0 <br />Number of Complete Inspections this Fiscal Year: 3 <br /> <br /> Page 2 of 5 <br /> <br /> <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 />N - Availability of Records <br />N - Backfill & Grading <br />N - Excess Spoil and Dev. Waste <br />N - Explosives <br />R - Fish & Wildlife <br />R - Hydrologic Balance <br />Y - Gen. Compliance With Mine Plan <br />N - Other <br />N - Processing Waste <br /> <br />N - Roads <br />R - Reclamation Success <br />N - Revegetation <br />N - Subsidence <br />N - Slides and Other Damage <br />N - Support Facilities On-site <br />N - Signs and Markers <br />N - Support Facilities Not On-site <br />N - Special Categories Of Mining <br />N - Topsoil <br /> <br /> <br />COMMENTS <br /> <br />This was a complete inspection of the Fruita No. 1 and 2 Mine conducted on March 19, 2019. The inspection was <br />completed by Clayton Wein of the Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety (the Division). The mine is a <br />revoked site: therefore, no company representative was present for te inspection. T he weather was clear with a <br />temperature of 55 degrees F. The ground conditions were dry. <br />FISH and WILDLIFE – Rule 4.18: <br /> During the inspection of the mine site, a couple of deer were spotted on the hillslope below the reclaimed <br />haul road (Photo 1). <br /> <br />HYDROLOGIC BALANCE - Rule 4.05 <br />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; <br />Diversions 4.05.4; Effluent Limits 4.05.2; Ground Water Monitoring 4.05.13; Surface Water Monitoring 4.05.13; <br />Drainage – Acid and Toxic Materials 4.05.8; Impoundments 4.05.6, 4.05.9; Stream Buffer Zones 4.05.18: <br /> The sediment pond was muddy at the bottom and was not impounding any water (Photo 2). The <br />embankments of the pond were well vegetated and stable. There were no erosion al issues observed. The riprap <br />channel below the reclaimed portals bench was in good condition. The channel was dry during the inspection. <br />There was no evidence of erosional features or concerns with stability. <br /> <br />RECLAMATION SUCCESS - Rule 4.15, Rule 3: <br /> The reclaimed haul road was well vegetated and stable (Photo 3). The gullies along the lower portion of <br />the haul road, noted in previous inspections, had not enlarged. There were no new erosional features and the <br />reclaimed area was stable. The reclaimed portals bench was stable with well-established vegetation on it (Photo <br />4). The gully in the middle of the bench had not enlarged since the previous inspection (gully noted in previous <br />inspections). No new erosion had occurred. Vegetation at the site was beginning to green. <br /> <br />