My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2008-09-16_INSPECTION - M2003003
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Inspection
>
Minerals
>
M2003003
>
2008-09-16_INSPECTION - M2003003
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:36:17 PM
Creation date
9/22/2008 10:06:33 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2003003
IBM Index Class Name
INSPECTION
Doc Date
9/16/2008
Doc Name
Inspection report
From
DRMS
To
Consolidated Constructors, Inc.
Inspection Date
9/5/2008
Email Name
RCO
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
(Page 2) <br />MINE ID # OR PROSPECTING ID # M-2003-003 <br />INSPECTION DATE 9/5/08 INSPECTOR'S INITIALS RCO <br />OBSERVATIONS <br />This inspection was performed by the Division as part of its monitoring of Construction Materials 112c permits. The operator <br />was contacted about the scheduled inspection. The operator's representative named on page one arrived a short time after the <br />inspection began, and he was present during the rest of the inspection. <br />The site was identified by a sign at the entrance to the site, but the sign should be improved to include the required language <br />pursuant to Construction Materials Rule 3.1.12. The original permittee had a proper sign, but it was not updated after the <br />permit was transferred to the present operator. Lack of a complete sign is not noted as a problem at this time, but the operator <br />should improve the sign as soon as possible Also as this is a 112c permit in which the permitted area boundary and the <br />affected area boundary are differentiated the operator should review the permit maps and must ensure that the affected area, <br />and the phases, are adequately marked on the ground. (The Rules are available on the Division's website: <br />www.mining.state.co.us.) <br />The site was active at the time of the inspection, with trucks hauling gravel from the site. Processing equipment, scale and <br />scalehouse, and stacker/conveyors were set up on the staging area west of the Phase 1 pit. Activities observed are consistent <br />with the approved plan, and the Phase 1 pit appears to be in its proper location, according to the approved mining plan map. <br />The pit is located in Phase 1, between the staging/processing area and the gulch. It is about 30 feet deep with benched <br />highwalls on the north and west. The aggegate is very deep at this site, and the pit may be deepened without expanding its <br />foorprint, if that part of the plan. <br />The current permit entrance road is different than that shown on the approved mining plan map. The map shows a road <br />entering the site at the NW corner, but the actual road being used enters the site about midway along the west side. Also, the <br />new operator stated that he would like to revise the mining phases of the site. Both of these location changes (road and phase) <br />may be made under a technical revision to the permit. Applying for these changes is not an urgent matter, and if there are <br />other minor changes that are desired, they may also be included in the same technical revision. However, the operator should <br />be aware that the revision to update the phase boundaries should be accomplished before the existing pit extends beyond <br />Phase 1, which may be soon, unless the pit is deepened before it expands in area. <br />There are three diesel fuel storage tanks at the site, all with earth-bermed and geotextile impermeable liners. The fuel storage <br />appears fairly neat with minimal spillage staining the ground. Portions of the geotextile have weathered and begun to <br />deteriorate, and there is some question about the impermeability (sealing/welding) of the seams. The operator should replace <br />the liners when the tanks are next empty and before operations ramp up again in spring 2009. At present this is not a problem. <br />There is a lot of debris mining-related and otherwise that is present on the south edge of the current staging area. The <br />operator stated that the previous operator put it there Items observed there include: six 55-gallon drums (four containing used <br />oil) one 25-gallon barrel (containing used oil) 75 5-gallon buckets (about half of them containing used oil), and oil- <br />contaminated soil around these open and leaking vessels There are three 20,000-gallon underground storage tanks about <br />2,000 cubic yards of building and demolition debris and about 1,000 cubic yards of old asphalt. This is noted as a problem on <br />page one under "general mine plan compliance" and "acid or toxic materials." The operator must remove and properly dispose <br />of all hydrocarbons contaminated soil and all demolition debris by the correction date shown on the last page of this report. <br />The asphalt may be kept onsite for reprocessing and later removal if the mining plan is revised soon to allow such activity. At <br />present however, that too must be removed from the site. Please see the last page of this report for the correction date. (The <br />used oil and miscellaneous demolition debris should be the higher priority for prompt removal, as the correction date shows. If <br />the operator needs additional time to fully remove the benign materials please contact this office to discuss a different clean-up <br />schedule. <br />There were several patches of noxious weeds noted onsite too specifically, musk thistle in and around the grouping of used oil <br />vessels: and Canada thistle and musk thistle on the original abandoned entrance road that is north of the pit. These are state- <br />listed noxious weeds and are required by law to be controlled. The operator should consult the La Plata County weed control <br />operator must submit an adequate weed control plan (written in consulation with the local weed authority) and commit to its <br />prompt and continued implementation A copy of this report will be sent to Rod Cook La Plata County. Pleaseibe aware that <br />rlamnnctrnhle nrnnress tnward cnntrol of these noxious weeds is reauired to avoid potential Board action. See the last Pape of <br />this report for the correction date.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.