My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2009-06-25_INSPECTION - M1990140
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Inspection
>
Minerals
>
M1990140
>
2009-06-25_INSPECTION - M1990140
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:48:10 PM
Creation date
6/29/2009 4:00:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1990140
IBM Index Class Name
INSPECTION
Doc Date
6/25/2009
Doc Name
Inspection report
From
DRMS
To
Duran & Pearce Contractors, Inc.
Inspection Date
6/24/2009
Email Name
GRM
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.
/
7
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-1990-140 <br />INSPECTION DATE: 6-24-09 INSPECTOR'S INITIALS GRM <br />OBSERVATIONS <br />This inspection was conducted as a follow up to a September 2008 inspection by the Colorado Division of <br />Reclamation, Mining and Safety under the normal monitoring program. The Martin Pit is located south of Craig <br />South Highlands on 107 Road. The Martin Pit is a 1 l Oc permitted site. The permitee Jim Duran met the inspector <br />on site. During the September inspection four issues were noted as problems. <br />A noxious and/or problematic weed infestation (Canadian or musk thistle) was observed within the affected area. <br />Due to an unusually wet spring spraying in the area in general has been delayed. Mr. Duran however was able to <br />spray the weeds recently. The inspector noted that the thistles were beginning to wilt and none had begun to flower <br />yet. Mr. Duran has a meeting set up with the CSU extension to formulate a control plan for the noxious weeds. <br />Once the plan is secured it should be submitted as a Technical Revision with the inert importation affidavit <br />discussed below. The weed problem noted in September as a problem is considered abated. <br />Topsoil and overburden are being stockpiled along the north edge. Rule 3.1.9 requires topsoil have: "protection <br />from erosion, remains free of any contamination by toxic or acid-forming material, and is in a usable condition for <br />reclamation." Side slopes of the stockpiles were observed to be devoid of any erosion control measures. The <br />inspector noted historic stockpiles had positive vegetation on them. New topsoil piles do not. If the piles are to <br />remain in place for more than one growing season the operator should broadcast the approved seed mix on the piles <br />to protect them. The lack of protection for topsoil noted in September is considered abated. <br />Various locations were noted as having foreign material imported and used as fill. Per Rule 3.1.5(9) : If an operator <br />intends to backfill inert structural fill generated outside the approved permit area, it is the operator's responsibility to <br />provide the Office notice of any proposed backfill activity not identified in the approved Reclamation Plan. Per the <br />definition of inert material in Rule 1.1(20) it does not include plastics, rebar or other metals, or barbed wire all of <br />which were observed in the fill. The observed trash was removed. Backfill material with rebar was also removed <br />and the area backfilled. The operator will be submitting a Technical Revision for importation of materials with his <br />weed plan. The incorrect importation of materials observed in September has been abated. <br />The inspector notes what appears to be groundwater exposed in the current exaction area. Per Rule 3.1.6(1) <br />disturbance to the prevailing hydrological balance of the affected land and of the surrounding area shall be <br />minimized. The operator has consulted with local DWR personnel on the issue. Mr. Duran stated that the water <br />may be irrigation / precipitation infiltration from the fields to the north and DWR personnel did not have an issue <br />with it. Since it appears that DWR does not have an issue with the exposure the matter is considered abated. <br />However, the inspector advises the operator to get something in writing and submit a copy to DRMS for the file for <br />future reference. <br />The original financial warranty has never been updated for this site. Staff will be recalculating the bond based on <br />current conditions and costs. An updated reclamation liability estimate will be sent out by separate cover.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.