INSPEC43091

• Permit No: M1977393
• IBM Index Class Name: Inspection
• Doc Date: 4/28/1995
• Doc Name: MINERALS PROGRAM INSPECTION REPORT
• Inspection Date: 4/28/1995
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

..~
(Page 2)

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