Laserfiche WebLink
PERMIT #: M-1977-387 <br />INSPECTOR'S INITIALS: JLE <br />INSPECTION DATE: August 17, 2010 <br />OBSERVATIONS <br />This was a monitoring inspection of the Bates Pit; File No. M-1977-387, operated by Prowers County. This site is located <br />approximately 4 miles west and 1.5 miles north of Holly, Colorado in Prowers County. I, Jared Ebert of the Colorado <br />Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety conducted the inspection. Mr. Farron Williams of Prowers County <br />accompanied me on the inspection. <br />This is a 112c mining operation with 30 permit acres. At this time, the Operator has affected about 27 acres of land based <br />on the observations made during the inspection and a 2009 aerial photograph. The mine identification sign was posted at <br />the entrance of the operation and the boundary was marked with large metal posts painted yellow. <br />A large excavation has occurred with the bottom of the pit at the center of the permit area. The pit slopes vary in height <br />and grade. The northwest pit slopes are gentle and set at a 4:1 horizontal to vertical ratio or less. A highwall excavation <br />is located in the northeast corner of the site. The pit slopes in this location are very steep, ranging from near vertical <br />slopes at the top of the excavation to a 1:1 ratio at the base of the excavation. The top of this pit slope in the north and <br />northeast corner is very close to the permit boundary, approximately 20 to 25 feet based on field measurements. The <br />Operator is required to reclaim these slopes to a 3:1 horizontal to vertical ratio. Given the proximity of the highwall to the <br />permit boundary, the Operator will not be able to cut and fill the highwall to the required slope. They will need to take <br />material from other areas of the operation to build these slopes. The Operator is cautioned not to disturb land beyond the <br />permit boundary; this would result in a possible violation, corrective actions and civil penalties. The southern pit slopes <br />with a northern aspect have been graded to a 3:1 to 4:1 ratio. Mining appears to have reached its limits for the majority of <br />the site. It appears the Operator has some room to excavate to the west of the current excavation. <br />In the current approved mining and reclamation plan,. the Operator stated 9 acres had been mined prior to permitting the <br />site and that topsoil was not salvaged during the previous operation. However, the Operator stated future mining <br />operations would remove topsoil in one acre increments as mining advanced. In the reclamation plan, the Operator <br />committed to spreading topsoil 1-3 inches over the previously disturbed acreage and 4-6 inches over the future disturbed <br />acreage. Mr. Williams was unaware topsoil was required to be salvaged and was unable to locate any stockpiles. Several <br />small stockpiles of material were located within the site, but it was unclear if they contained topsoil. Overall, it does not <br />appear the Operator has salvaged and stored enough topsoil on the site to reclaim the property. This issue is cited as a <br />problem at the beginning of the report and will require corrective action to be taken by the Operator. Based on the <br />acreage disturbed and the Operators commitment to spread topsoil, the Division estimates the Operator will need <br />approximately 12,100 cubic yards of topsoil to comply with the reclamation plan. The County will need to submit a map <br />indicating where topsoil is stored at the site, if any, and will need to document the amount of topsoil stored in each <br />stockpile along with photographic documentation of the piles. If the County finds they have insufficient topsoil, they will <br />need to import the proper amount of growth medium into the site. In order to allow this operation, the Operator will need <br />to file a Technical Revision to the reclamation plan to account for this activity. The Technical Revision must include a <br />backfill notice as described in Rule 3.1.5 (9) and outlined below: <br />1.) A narrative describing the location of where the imported topsoil will be applied. <br />2.) The approximate volume of inert material to be backfilled. <br />3.) A signed affidavit certifying this material is clean and inert, as defined by Rule 1.1(20) <br />4.) The approximate dates the proposed activity will commence and end, however, such dates shall not be an <br />enforceable condition. <br />5.) An explanation of how the backfilled site will result in a post-mining configuration that is compatible with the <br />approved post-mining land use; and <br />6.) A general engineering plan stating how the material will be placed and stabilized in a manner to avoid <br />unacceptable settling and voids. <br />As described above, the Operator has graded portions of the pit slopes in accordance with the approved reclamation plan. <br />The Operator will need to backfill the large highwall located in the north and northeast corner of the site. Once the issue <br />of the topsoil is addressed, the Operator is encouraged to spread the topsoil on areas where mining is finished and will not <br />be disturbed by the future operations, and revegetate these areas. <br />Page 2 of 4