Laserfiche WebLink
• (Page 2) • <br />MINE ID ~ OR PROSPECTING ID ~ W-77-393 <br />INSPECTION DATE 4 28 95 INSPECTOR'S INITIALS ACS <br />OBSERVATIONS <br />This inspection was conducted to observe the reclamation in progress at +:he Jenkins Site. <br />A large-scale reclamation project at the Bite was initiated by Varra Companies to rectify <br />compliance problems identified in the Division's 2/21/95 inspection report. Representatives <br />for the City of Boulder present for this inspection were Jim Schmidt with tt:e City of Boulder <br />Open Space, and Dwight Kimsey with Wright Water Engineers, consultant to the: City of Boulder. <br />An area on Coal Creek, just west of the concrete culvert e, was inspected first. The location <br />of the concrete culverts is depicted on the mine plan maps as a road crossing of the creek. <br />On the south aide of the creek at this location, rock and concrete rubble has been piled on <br />the bank. This material needs to be pulled back from the creek and removed to the rubble <br />pile situated east of the culverts. Care should be taken when removing this material not to <br />disturb the native soils beneath. A seed bed can then be prepared in the native soils, and <br />the area seeded with the approved mix. Jim Schmidt expressed a concern that soil had been <br />pushed into the creek in the area west of the culverts. Upon inspection, it could be seen <br />that tracked equipment had recently operated in the creek bed at this location. It should <br />be noted that Coal Creek was flowing as of the date of this inspection (4~J28/95), but had <br />been dry at the time of the Division's 4/14/95 and 2/21/95 inspections. ]:t did not appear <br />that any Boil or rubble had been pushed into or placed in the creek. Thi.e assessment was <br />based on the observation of undisturbed vegetation growing in the creek bead. However, the <br />City of Boulder has a video tape taken of activities in this area, and the Division may <br />reevaluate these observations pending review of the tape. The operator me:y not place soil <br />or rubble in the creek bed without specific Division approval, and would undoubtedly also <br />have to obtain approval under Federal laws governing dredge and fill. <br />A test pit was hand excavated to a depth of 20 inches in the area west of the culverts and <br />south of the creek. The soils map in the permit indicates that the native soils at this <br />location are Calkins Sandy Loam. This would be an excellent soil to eprea.d over disturbed <br />areas for purposes of reclamation, however, the teat pit and related observations indicate <br />that areas overlain by Calkins Sandy Loam were never disturbed by excavation, with the <br />exception of some pre-law disturbance that is clearly documented in the permit file. Hence, <br />the deep, good quality Calkins voile would not be available to the operator for use in <br />reclamation at the present time. <br />Two test pits were hand excavated in an undisturbed area west of the highwa7.1 on the terrace <br />south of Coal Creek. According to the soil map contained in the permit file, the native <br />soils at this location would be Nederland Very Cobbly Sandy Loam. It was c~beerved that the <br />undisturbed soils on the terrace exhibited a very large percentage of cobbler at the surface. <br />The soils from the test pits were very rocky and difficult to excavate. A color change was <br />observed in one of the pits at a depth of 6 inches, demarcating the extent of the A-horizon. <br />This soil would be considered very poor for purposes of reclamation. The cobbly nature of <br />the soil would make it difficult to salvage, difficult to re-spread, difficult to seed, and <br />would probably prevent crimping of mulch into the soil. Site observations correlated with <br />the soils map indicate that virtually all of the area south of Coal Creek disturbed by <br />excavation was in the areas overlain by Nederland Very Cobbly Sandy Loam, hence these <br />were/are the soils available in stockpiles to reclaim the site. <br />The pre-law disturbance area in and south of the creek and west of the culverts was <br />inspected. Pre-law disturbance here has left a hummocky topography with not: more than a few <br />feet of relief. This area has been stabilized by volunteer vegetation, including weeds. No <br />grading will be required for reclamation in this pre-law area, but noxious weeds will have <br />to be controlled, and vegetation established to otherwise meet the performance standards of <br />Rule 3 of the Mineral Rules and Regulations. <br />The potential benefits of harrowing the site were discussed. A spring tooth harrow would not <br />be effective in the very rocky areas of the site, so it was agreed that a1L graded, ripped <br />and broadcast seeded areas would be harrowed by dragging a pipe, or some such implement, <br />behind a tractor or small dozer. This will smooth the reclaimed surface, result in an <br />improved seed bed, and will improve seed to Boil contact. <br />The recently eloped west high wall was inspected and the elopes measured using an Abney <br />Level. The elopes in the range of 23 degrees are too steep for final r¢~clamation. The <br />operator agreed to cut this elope back to 3:1, and to preserve any topsoil ~jieturbed by the <br />eloping operation. Slopes steeper than 3:1 were also noted on graded stockpiles located <br />