Laserfiche WebLink
(Page 2) <br />MINE ID # OR PROSPECTING ID #: M-1990-021 <br />INSPECTION DATE: 11/15/04 INSPECTOR'S INITIALS GRM <br />OBSERVATIONS <br />This inspection was conducted as part of the normal monitoring program established by the Colorado Division of <br />Minerals and Geology. Virginia Acres is a 112c permitted site located on the north side of the Colorado River in <br />Grand Junction, Colorado. The permiee, Old Castle S W /United and the Colorado State Pazks requested an on site <br />meeting to evaluate reclamation plans. United is donating the land to the state parks and both parties wish to have a <br />clear picture of what is needed to finish reclamation on site prior to releasing the permit. <br />The Virginia Acres pit has not had active mining since approximately late 1994. Reclamation efforts have been <br />noted in past inspections from 1994, 1998 and 2002. These efforts primarily note earthwork and noxious weed <br />control. Current conditions reflect that all sloping and grading have been done according to the approved plans. The <br />inspector noted in 2002 that revegetation efforts if attempted had failed. The site has some tall wheatgrass along the <br />western edge of the permit boundaries but no other beneficial grasses. The reclamation plan calls for only tall <br />wheatgrass and alfalfa. This limited seed mix makes seeding success very difficult. The inspector suggests that the <br />permiee review the seed mix and exroand the variety of sroecies of grasses to augment revegetation efforts. <br />There is an abundance of annual weeds such as kochia and halogeton covering the site. Bank vegetation includes <br />tamarisks that the permiee has recently cut and treated. The slash from the cutting efforts has been left along the <br />banks. Both the Division and Parks fill that the slash should be removed alone with the annual weeds prior to <br />reseeding efforts. Cattails, some willows and bottlebrush aze noted along the banks and level areas. Cottonwoods <br />are noted along the banks, whether by volunteer or planted, the number of trees meets the approved plans. <br />reseeding efforts should have been done in October, but if accomplished quickly may have benefits in the springy <br />The review of annual reports shows that the site should have been reclaimed by now. By rule, a pemutee has 5 years <br />after mining is completed to accomplish reclamation. The Boazd in extenuating circumstances may grant an <br />extension of another 5 yeazs. Based on the reports submitted by United, reclamation should have been accomplished <br />by 1999 and given an extension, by 2004. Staff feels that as long as United aggressively begins finishing up <br />reclamation, the issue will not require intervention from the Division or Board. <br />The Pazks Division wishes to establish another segment of the River Front Trail through the permitted area as well <br />as a "soft" trail around the pond. Staff advises that a Technical Revision (TR) needs to be submitted that outlines <br />the general azea of both trails, which should include the "conceptual path, materials to be used and dimensions". <br />Any permanent structures such as parking lots, buildings etc. will have to be noted in the final reclamation plans <br />prior to a release request or their construction delayed until after the permit is released. The Division cannot release <br />the permit unless The approved plans match actual conditions on site. <br />Staff wishes to caution both Pazks and the permiee that any activities within the permitted azea must conform to the <br />approved reclamation plans for the site. If anything is not specifically noted within those plans, Technical Revisions <br />will have to be submit to address those changes. Currently, slight modifications discussed fall within the TR <br />requirements. However, if major changes are made staff may have to require an amendment, which is far more <br />involved in both time and money. The Division must be kept aroprised of all activities planned for the site to ensure <br />the approved reclamation requirements are met. Failure to keep staff advised of activities may result in additional <br />costs and time that ultimately are bared by the permiee regazdless of who is the landowner. <br />