INSPEC38984

• Permit No: M1984001
• IBM Index Class Name: Inspection
• Doc Date: 8/31/2001
• Doc Name: MINERALS PROGRAM INSPECTION REPORT
• Inspection Date: 8/7/2001
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

(Page 3)
MINE ID # OR PROSPECTING ID # M-1984-001
INSPECTION DATE 817101
S INITIALS WHE
slope on which the stockpile is located and the steep outslope of the stockpile, D G is concerned that
geotechnical stability of the stockpile be adequately demonstrated in order to ensure th t no adverse impacts
to public safety and/or Hwy 141 occur. DMG concerns for stability of the highwall a d material stockpile
were not adequately satisfied by the information submitted under TR-01. DMG dente TR-01 on 5/25/01.
Area B Public access is controlled by locked gate. Operations at Area B are limited to xcavation of granite
boulders and overburden, naturally accumulated at the base of the massive igneous cliff Mining operations
have resulted in steep slopes (1H:1V or steeper) in unconsolidated material. Affecte area drainage was
appropriately controlled with berms and sediment basins.
Reclamation Plan for Area B indicates that initial slopes may be steep, not steeper than 1 H:1 V, but that steep
slopes would quickly grade to mild slopes approaching Hwy 141. Topsoil will be replace over affected areas
at 3"-6" depth and seeded with an appropriate revegetation seed mix. Affected lands will be reclaimed to
support wildlife habitat post mining land use.
DMG is concerned that the existing reclamation plan for Area B, lacks sufficient ~
compliance with the performance standards of Rule 3.1.5(3), 3.1.9(51 and (71, 3.1.1(
referenced rules address highwall reduction and slope stability, redistribution and stabi'
establishment of an appropriate vegetative cover. Specifically, staff is concerned that
be able to satisfy the performance requirements of the referenced rules with 1 H:1 V slc
material. The operator must satisfy the performance standards of the Act and Rul
warranties and termination of permit.
Financial Warranty DMG reclamation cost estimation, dated 11!14/96, totaled 526,88:
of DMG's 1 1/14/96 reclamation cost estimation appears adequate to ensure reclamation
areas. However, DMG's 11/14/96 reclamation cost estimation assumed reclamation
underlying the 60,000 cy stockpile and did not cover reclamation costs for reclaiming
or relocating the stockpile to an appropriate location. Should the Geotechnical Stabi
indicate that the existing stockpile does not have the adequate factor of safety to remain
DMG may require that the financial warranty be increased to include costs associa~
relocation of the stockpiled material to an appropriate site. Additionally, should the G
Exhibit (TR-01) indicate that the existing highwall does not have the adequate factor of
configuration, DMG may require that the financial warranty be increased to include a
stabilization of the highwall.
ail to demonstrate
), (4) and (5). The
tion of topsoil, and
e operator may not
s in unconsolidated
prior to release of
Preliminary review
remaining affected
' only the footprint
re stockpile on site
ty Exhibit (TR-011
as a permanent fill,
d with removal or
otechnical Stability
afety at its present
its associated with
Pursuant to Rule 4.2.1(2), should DMG find that the existing amount of financial warra y is insufficient to
ensure reclamation, the operator shall have sixty 1601 days to post the additional amount f financial warranty
OR to complete appropriate portions of the reclamation plan, as necessary to ensure t e adequacy of the
financial warranty.
I & E Contact Address
NAME
OPERATOR
STREET
CITY/STATElZIP
John Schmahl
J & M Schmahl
2301 River Road
Grand Junction, CO 81505
cc: Tom Gillis, DMG
^ CE
^ BL
^ FS
^ HW
^ HMWMD (CH)
^ SE
^ WOCD ICHI
X CDOT, Weldon
Rob Beck