My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
INSPEC03518
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Inspection
>
INSPEC03518
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:58:19 PM
Creation date
11/18/2007 8:10:56 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1979131
IBM Index Class Name
Inspection
Doc Date
8/16/2005
Doc Name
insp rep
From
dmg
To
Fred L Korinek
Inspection Date
8/10/2005
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
ORiGtNAL - POBLIC FILE <br />(Page 2) <br />MINE ID # OR PROSPECTING ID #: ti+-te~a_t3t <br />INSPECTION DATE: 8/.]QLf13 INSPECTOROS INITIALS:' -BK_- <br />OBSERVATION <br />The Division conducted a monitoring inspection of the site on 8/10/05,as <br />part of sites to be inspected during the fiscal years 2005-06, to make sure <br />they are in compliance with the MLRD Rules and Regulations. The site is <br />small 110 sand and gravel operation located approximately three miles North <br />East of Mnazanola Colorado. Present during the inspection was Mr. Fred <br />Kornick, the operator. The site was not active at the time of the <br />inspection. A front-end loader and small screen were noted in the active <br />mining area. According to the operator, because of the screen not meeting <br />MSHA standards, and the money it will take to be in compliance with MSHA, <br />and lack of business, he plans to start reclaiming the small affected area <br />of not more than 4 acres as soon as next month. The high wall which <br />measured approximately six feet extending North to south approximately 200 <br />feet appeared stable. As is the case with these old pre- law mine sites in <br />the county there was no topsoil salvaged. However, the operator had <br />salvaged whatever was available and had also placed along the North side of <br />the permit area stockpile of manure to aid him in his recalamtion efforts. <br />Permit boundary markers and sign in place. The reclaimed area along the <br />South side of the access road showed some sign of grass growth, given the <br />lack of top soil and the drought of the last few years appeared to have <br />hindered normal growth. There were a few processed stockpiled materials <br />located along the South and East side of the pit area. The operator had <br />with in the permit area a permitted well that he plans to utilize to <br />irrigate the reclaimed slopes. Given the shallow ground water in the permit <br />area, there was no standing water in the pit at the time of the inspection. <br />There was no noxious weed infestation noted at the time of the inspection. <br />While in the area Mr. Kornick wanted to know if he can recover as a side <br />product some gold fines from the aggregate using a sluicing type operation. <br />He was notified to submit a Technical revision to his permit explaining the <br />recovery process in detail. The existing warranty is adequate to cover the <br />cost of the recalamtion. However if the disturbance associated with the <br />sluicing operation warrants an added warranty to the permit, the Division <br />will adjust it at that time. <br />I & E Contact Address <br />NAME: MR .FRED L KORINEK CC: <br />OPERATOR: SAME AS ABOVE <br />STREET: .55(l 1 ANF 1.5 <br />CITY/STATE/ZIP: MAN7AN(~I A,S'(~ 81058 Harry Posey (e-mail) <br />cc: T CE <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.