INSPEC00204 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• (Page 2) • MINE ID # OR PROSPECTING ID # M-83-084 INSPECTION DATE 12-26-95 INSPECTOR'S INITIALS GSC This was a follow-up to the Division's 9-28-95 monitoring inspection conducted in response to a citizen complaint. An operator's representative was not present during the inspection and the pit was not active during the time of the inspection. The following observations were made to determine if the corrective actions outlined in the 9-28-95 inspection report have been completed. PV-1: The active pit looks the same ae it did on 9-28-95. ~ It is roughly 'L' shaped and contains an unknown depth of water in the bottom. The dimensions were measured with a wheel and depths estimated with a hand level. The western portion of the pit consists of the deep, water filled, excavation and two benches. The lower bench was actively being mined during the 9-28-95 inspection. No activity was taking place during this inspection and the equipment had been removed from the pit. The average depth of this part of the pit, measured with a level from the top of the upper bench, was estimated at 60.' The area was measured at 207'x 400' = 1.9 acres. The eastern part of the pit includes a deep water filled excavation, and one bench. The depth ranges from about 100' on the south to 60' on the north and east. The area was measured at approximately 500'x400• = 4.6 acres. The total acreage of the pit is approximately 6.5 acres. Ae was noted in the 9-28-95 inspection, this may be a possible violation to the approved mining plan in that the active pit has exceeded the maximum allowable size of 2.1 acres. Overburden stockpiles are located on the southern and southwestern aides of the pit. Also, an area measuring approximately 260'x90' has been stripped and graded south of the pit. Power is run from the main line along highway 9 to the washing facility. There are four power lines, each measuring approximately 2,200,' and three transformers on-site. The reclamation bond needs to reflect the coat to remove these. Since nothing on the transformers was observed to identify these as non-PCB transformers, they will be assumed to contain PCB for bond calculation purposes until the operator can supply verification from the manufacturer that these do not contain PCB. PB-1 sad PB-2: The processing plant and settling ponds appeared to be the same since the 9- 28-95 inspection. The revised map of disturbance and bond calculations have not been received at this time. PB-3: Refuse consisting of scrap iron, wood, tires and used equipment observed in the equipment and machinery storage areas still needs to be properly disposed. Snow covered much of the ground in areas where stained soil had been previously observed. Several fuel storage tanks were also observed in this area and at the process area. A spill containment berm made of soil surrounds one tank in the equipment area. The berm has been eroded in areas and needs to be repaired. Any other tanks to be used for fuel or oil storage need to be enclosed in spill containment structures. Tanks not in use do not require berme. PB-4: The diesel generator and pump are still located adjacent to the Middle Fork of the South Platte River. The fuel tank has been removed and no evidence of fuel or oil stains was observed. The area where stained soil had been observed on 9-28-95 appeared to be covered with fresh dirt and gravel. PB-5: Storm Water Permit: The operator indicated in a letter to the Division on 12-22-95 that an application for a storm water permit is being prepared. Although copies of the September 28, 1995 inspection report were received by the Water Quality Control Division and the Office of the State Engineer, the operator may not have received the original. Another copy was sent certified on December 12, 1995. The Division contacted Mr. Zigan on January 2, 1996 to establish corrective action dates for the possible violation and problems listed below. Mr. Zigan explained he would visit the site on January 3, 1996 and would call the Division no later than January 4, 1946. He did not call on that day and several follow up attempts he made were unsuccessful. Therefore, the Division has established new dates for completion of the corrective actions with consideration given for adverse conditions on-site due to the snow cover.