Laserfiche WebLink
OBSERVATIONS <br />PERMIT #: M -1982 -129 <br />INSPECTOR'S INITIALS: JLE <br />INSPECTION DATE: August 30, 2011 <br />This was a normal monitoring inspection of the Rocky Flat Gravel site; DRMS File No. M- 1982 -129 operated by <br />Mr. L. Otto Goemmer. This site is located approximately 2 miles southwest of La Veta, Colorado in Huerfano <br />County. I, Jared Ebert of the Colorado Division of Reclamation, Mining and Safety (Division) conducted the <br />inspection. Mr. and Mrs. Goemmer and their sons Paul and Cole accompanied me on the inspection. <br />This is a 9.9 acre 110c operation with three distinct parcels of land. The original permit area was for <br />approximately 7.5 acres; during an amendment (AM01) the Operator added 2.28 acres of land east of the <br />original area and .22 acres to the south. The 2.28 acre area is above where the primary pit basin is located <br />and has been graded to create a flat plain. Grass has begun to establish in this portion of the site. The .22 <br />acre parcel is also a flat area with several small remnant material stockpiles in place. <br />The original 7.5 acre permit area consists of a small basin where previous mining activity occurred. The basin <br />daylights to the south. The north, west and eastern aspect slopes have been graded to a 4:1 horizontal to <br />vertical ratio or less. The slopes appeared stable and grass has begun to establish throughout the affected <br />land. Lafarge operates a site directly to the north of this area known at the La Veta Pit (M- 2001 -086). The <br />northern boundary of this Rocky Fiat Gravel site and the Lafarge excavation is separated by a berm. According <br />to the Division's files the purpose of the berm was to keep water from flowing from the Rocky Flat Gravel site <br />into the Lafarge site. A small amount of water was collected at the northwest corner of the permit area at the <br />base of the berm. This issue is discussed below. <br />On October 24, 2008 an inspection was conducted at this site by Division staff. During that inspection, it was <br />observed that groundwater had been exposed and /or stormwater was impounded at the site. The Operator <br />was required to either backfill the excavation with material to two feet above the groundwater level or <br />demonstrate compliance with the Office of the State Engineer. According to the subsequent annual reports <br />submitted by the Operator, they had applied for an augmentation plan. This inspection was primarily <br />conducted to determine the status of the exposed groundwater and determine if the corrective action had <br />been complied with. <br />During the inspection, Mrs. Goemmer explained the water court had denied their augmentation plan and <br />thus, they had been backfilling the pit to cover the exposed groundwater. At the time of the inspection, there <br />was only a small amount of water located at the northwest corner of the site. Paul Goemmer indicated it had <br />rained the night before the inspection and the water collected at the site was a result of that event. Overall, it <br />appears the Operator has taken the actions required from the October 24, 2008 inspection report. According <br />to Mr. Goemmer, the underlying soil has a high clay content making it difficult for stormwater to percolate <br />into the ground. It appears the backfill material is more permeable as standing water was only observed in a <br />small area in the northwest corner of the site. If stormwater continues to be impounded in this area, <br />additional backfill material may need to be added to the northwest corner to improve soil permeability. <br />Page 2 of 5 <br />