Laserfiche WebLink
_, ~ ~ '~ <br />(Page 2) <br />MINE ID / OR PROSPECTING ID / M-77-044 <br />INSPECTION DATE 07/06/95 INSPECTOR'S INITIALS RCO <br />OBSERVATIONS <br />This inspection was performed by the Division as part of its monitoring of 110 permits, and <br />to verify completion of the corrective actions as set forth in the inspection report of <br />9/13/94. The operator was contacted about the inspection and the operator's representative <br />named on page 1 was present during the inspection. <br />A sign identifying this site ae having a MLRB permit was posted at the entrance to the site. <br />As noted before, the permit boundary is adequately delineated by a fence. <br />The site has not been substantially changed from its condition ae observed on the previous <br />inspection (9/13/94), except for the backfill and grading work performed. This topic had <br />been noted as a problem in the previous inspection report. There were portions of the top <br />of the highwall in danger of sloughing and affecting land outside the permit boundary. This <br />problem has been remedied, through the grading work, and this topic ie no longer regarded as <br />a problem. (Though substantial grading has been performed, and the problem is abated, please <br />continue to monitor the backfill for settling, and the east highwall for stability, parallel <br />to the ditch. Maintenance of the site should be seen ae an ongoing need.) <br />There was still a bit of impounded water in the lowest part of the pit, though the amount was <br />much leas than the amount observed at the last inspection. Ae stated before, the presence <br />of willows and other healthy wetland-type vegetation leads this inspector to believe that <br />exposed ground water or a very shallow water table, during at least part of the year, ie <br />typical for this pit. At the last inspection, that fact prompted this inspector to require <br />the operator to contact the Division of Water Resources to document this condition. There <br />is still no evidence of said contact. <br />The permit file also still contains no response from the operator which describes the level <br />of mining and reclamation activities, nor a map of the locations of excavation, product <br />storage or topsoil stockpiling. <br />The need for the information described in the preceding two paragraphs, ie considered to be <br />under the topic of "records." Due to the lack of response from the operator, the problem has <br />been changed to a possible violation. The operator was informed of this both verbally during <br />the inspection, and by letters (dated 6/5/95 and 7/14/95). The operator has been notified <br />that this matter will be heard by the Board at the August 23-24, 1995 meeting. <br />The topsoil problems, as described in the previous inspection report, is still unaddressed. <br />Due to the lack of a response from the operator, this problem has become a possible <br />violation. This was discussed with the operator during the inspection. The operator has <br />been notified that this matter will be heard at the Board's August 23-24, 1995 meeting. <br />There were no other items discussed or problems observed during this inspection. <br />I 6 E Contact Address <br />NAME Epi Jaramillo <br />OPERATOR Cost ilia County <br />STREET PO Box 100 <br />CITY/STATE/ZIP San Luis CO 81152 <br />cc: Jim Stevens/DMG <br />^ CE <br />^ BL <br />^ FS <br />^ HW <br />^ HMWMD (CH) <br />^ SE <br />^ WQCD (CH) <br />^ OTHER <br />