INSPEC16740 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

(Page 2) • MINE ID # OR PROSPECTING ID # M-77-407 INSPECTION DATE 11/05/97 INSPECTOF!'S INITIALS RCO This inspection was performed by the Division primarily as a response t~ the operator's submittal of a 112 conversion application, which requires that the Division perform a pre- operation inspection. Certain aspects of the existing 110 operation were also inspected. The operator and the operator's agent were contacted about the inspection. The agent representing the operator, named on page one of the report, was present. The current landowner (who is also the former operator) was also present, but was not representing the operator. The permit was recently transferred to Montrose County. Onsite activities during this inspection included discussion of the conversion application, adequacy questions, and viewing the area to be included in the 112 permit. The northeast side of the 112 permit area, which extends down the hillside toward the highway, was initially viewed from the highway itself. This is a tree- and brush-covered slope, much of which exhibits natural gradients steeper than 3:1. Portions also exhibit small areas of sloughing, erosion and exposed gravel/cobbles. In some areas the overburden ie fairly deep. The north and east sides of the 112 permit are roughly bordered by old fencelines. These dilapidated fences are are marked on the permit map and mentioned as structures, but in fact merely mark a line and hardly function as fences. The applicant must de:'_ine the fences' condition, ownership, removal andjor replacement if necessary, and provide damage agreement(s) as appropriate. Another structure present on the 112 area is a road owned and used by ttie landowner, to access the top of the mesa from Kinikin Road. The lower part of the road i.; the pit access road too, but the upper part is not part of the pit operation. Future minin~3 activity along the southeast ridge will eventually impact the upper part of the landowner's road, and the road will be relocated. The permit ID sign, noting the current operator (Montrose County), must be re'~ised and posted at the entrance to the site. The west, north and east boundaries of the 112 permit area are adequately marked by the county road and existing fencelines, especially ain~:e most of these fencelines are within the boundaries of the permit and since mining activity will be set back even farther within those lines. The south boundary is aligned generally along the centerline of the existing drainage. Markers should be kept posted either ~ilong the permit boundary itself, or along the fixed limit of the affected area (edge of so~ithern road, for example). At the western side of the existing permit area, just north of the entrance to the site, is a two-acre area containing pre-existing disturbance related to the processing and stockpiling of gravel and asphalt. The operator undoubtedly understands that this area must be reclaimed, though it is not specifically addressed in the 112 application's reclamation plan or map. It may involve the stripping of the existing gravel remnants, but will surely involve at least the removal of the concrete footings, ripping of compaction, finish grading, placement of topsoil (or other suitable growth medium) and revegetation. The landowner stated that there is an easement restricting other mining activitiee~~ there. (Its reclamation, which may occur early in the 112 operation, may be conveniently performed since there will be a surplus of "overburden" to be placed somewhere ae the pit is expanded. Though the operator may not stockpile there, reclaiming this area may also help G~ith a potential problem of "too much overburden.") NOTE: In this area of pre-existing disturbance, there was a small patch (leas than 0.25 acre) of (spotted?) knapweed observed. The landowner or county should monitor acid treat it.