INSPEC20331 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

(Page 2) MINE ID # OR PROSPECTING ID #: M-1981-058 INSPECTION DATE: 1-25-05 INSPECTOR'S INITIALS GRM OBSERVATIONS This inspection was conducted as part of the normal monitoring program established by the Colorado Division of Minerals and Geology. Gayle Lyman from Elam Construction met the inspector on site. The DeBeque Gravel Pit was originally permitted in 1981. The site however, did not have any disturbance unti12003 when the permitee's operator did a major highway project next to the pit. The mine identification sign and affected azea boundary mazkers aze in place and in compliance with Rule 3.1.12. The sign is clearly visible at the scale house at the entrance to the site. Boundaries include fence lines and t-posts that clearly delineate the azea, which matches approved, permit maps. In March of 2003, a TR was approved to change the Mining Plan to adjust the Phases ofmining to accommodate the anticipated work start up. Current conditions reflect that the operator has followed the approved changes in the mining plans. The Staging Area has several stockpiles of various sized materials. Most of the area has a gravel floor that is cleaz of any vegetation. Some azeas do not have this gravel plating which has allowed the common weed kochia to grow. The weed is not noxious and can be beneficial for the short term. No equipment was noted on site at this time. Overall the staging area is free of debris. Phase 1 of the Mining Area has been almost mined to the Phase limits as approved under the TR. The operator has sloped the north, west and east sides of the pit to 3:1 at least to the water line. Elam should contact the Division or take photos of the sloping the next time the water is pumped down to establish that sloping meets the requirements of the reclamation plan. This will alleviate any questions when the site is ready for release. The south side is currently left at 1:1 as future mining will proceed in that direction. Currently, on site weeds consist primarily of kochia and non-noxious weeds. Pictures taken clearly show no tamarisk or Russian olive within the permit area. Some musk or Canadian thistle was observed in 2 or 3 spots. The plants are isolated and therefore not considered an infestation. However, the operator should treat these plants in the spring to assure that a minor issue does not become a costly bigger one. The operator has established slopes and grades on 3 sides of the pit azea. No seeding has taken place however which is not a problem currentlybut could lead to problems later. The operator has a responsibility to protect topsoil from erosion and to control weeds. If these areas remain un-vegetated it opens up the operator to future problems in loss of topsoil and the invasion ofnoxious weeds. Staff strongly recommends that revegetation ofthose azeas where mining is complete and re-graded be accomplished as soon as possible. Those areas could be released from the permit area within a couple of years and reduce the reclamation liability for the operator. Should the site become infested with tamarisk and Russian olive, which is highly likely, the operator would be responsible for the control of these plants. No revegetation efforts increase this likelihood at the expense of the operator . Staff will begin to include tasks for tamarisk control in bond calculations for sites where The bond was recalculated in September of 2002 based on a larger disturbance than the 2003 TR. Therefore, based on current conditions the bond appears adequate. No other issues or problems noted.