2005-11-21_INSPECTION - M1978208

Home Browse Search

(Page 2) MINE ID # OR PROSPECTING ID #: ~-t97R-7q~ INSPECTION DATE: nrt 17 7(x,5 INSPECTOR=S INITIALS: uHa 1. This inspection was conducted to follow up on the need for a technical revision and associated bonding to accommodate a revised mining/reclamation plan. The operation is approved to disturb 9.9 acres. The operation was succeeded on 7/7/2000 from L.N. Properties Inc to Aspen Enterprtses. The Division lists Aspen Enterprises as the operator, William Peterson as the PermN Contact, William Peterson as the Permfffee and Operator Contact, and Juliet Moores as the Inspecflon contact. These contact persons should know that correspondence such as annual fee report reminders are sent fo the Permittee or Operator Contact while Inspection reports are sent to the Inspecflon contact. The permff contact, the person DMG addresses during original permit applicaton or revision submfftals, receives no correspondence offer to approval of the permff application/revision. This report is being sent to both the Operator contact and the Inspection contact. 2. The boundaries of the operation are evident by use, but are confounded by use of multiple facilities other than the mine operations. Mining is well Into excavation In the southeastern sector of the property. A verbal proposal and a stabilffy assessment for this exeavaflon was shared in 2002 wffh this Inspector, but the excavation is not yet generally approved by the Division. 3. The original mining plan called for a set of 6 benches and highwalls, each of O.SH:1 V slopes, and residing east of the proposed floor of the operation. The permff application indicates thaF post mining land use would be "developed Into o commercial and light indusMal area with uses for retail trade." The permittee is reminded thaF county zoning may have a different designaflon that more applies to actual permtted commercial/indusMal uses, but for reclamation purposes, the Division considers that most of the excavated landscape is to support paved or landscaped construcffon sffes. The benches and outslopes alone are expected to be reclaimed with topsoil and vegetation, per the reclamation plan and bond. 4. Stability studies that were shared with this inspector in 20021ndicate that the property can be excavated to slopes greater than 0.5:1, and some of this exeavaflon has apparently begun already. Topsoil excavation has been completed for most of the benches, and is stored along the western and northern parts of the permff boundary. Bedrock comprises very competent units of the Idaho Springs formation consisting of bioflte granffe gneiss, granffe, amphiboltte and intermediate schist with quartz, plagioclase, and biotite. The reclamation bond has not been recalculated since the operaflon was first permitted, as ff was anticipated that most of the area would house developed commercial buildings. Inflation and the need for a revised reclamation plan indicate the need to re- visitthe bond in context of a technical revision, yet not received, covering the proposed steeper slopes. Before establishing a proper financial surety amount, the Division must receive the technical revision for the proposed configuration in order to calculate the bond. 5. Including the scales, the office, access roads, the active quarry, and the crushing area, the operation surrounds two or three other businesses including a gym, a human waste holding area, and a small storage yard for propane tanks. The latter two businesses are not cited in the approved permff, and even though their presence may be satisfactory to the landowner, they must be included within the permff boundary. As these shuctures are permanent manmade shuctures wffhin 200 feet of the operaflon, the operator must secure damage waiver agreements with the owners of these structures, and should indicate what access agreements are in place for those facllffies. 6. Access to gym and the human waste handling or holding operaflon appears to be at least partly through the approved permitted mining facllffies. It is not clear whether these facllffies, which include large mobile tanks and a score or so of ports-potties are within the permff area or not. If within the permffted facllffies, this Inspection notes that the sewage facilties appear to be leaking. Ground around the larger tanks appears to have been perpetually damp, and the leakage appears to be seeping Info the sfreambed north of the tanks because, except for the area near the waste containers, the stream is currently dry both up an down gradient. The area stinks like a hog farm. A copy of this report will be sent to the CDPHE and Corps of Engineers for their information. 7. A garbage dump measuring about 15' x 25' x 5' is located between the large sewage holding tanks and the dozen or so portable toilets. I( this is wffhin the permitted operations area, it needs to be removed.