Laserfiche WebLink
MINE ID # OR PROSPECTING ID #: M- 1977 -493 PAGE: 4 <br />INSPECTION DATE: 9 -26 -00 INSPECTOR'S INITIALS: ACS <br />protruding from the soil. This debris should be removed using methods that will not <br />disturb the emergent vegetation in this reclaimed area. <br />The remaining portion of the Storke Complex subject to the SR -03 application was <br />inspected. This area comprises the lower elevation portions of the Storke Yard located <br />below the primary storm water diversion ditch. The steepest slope remaining in the <br />SR -03 portion of the Storke Yard is located below the 5 -shaft head frame and slopes <br />down towards the wastewater treatment plant and the Highway 91 hairpin. This slope <br />has been the location of an ongoing seep and spring monitoring program initiated at <br />the time the pumps were removed from the 629 level pump station in the underground <br />mine. This slope was measured to be no steeper than 3:1. Please note that all slope <br />measurements referenced in this report were corrected in the office from the <br />measurements taken in the field when it was discovered that the DMG's Abney level was <br />out of calibration by 4 degrees and was measuring the slopes as being over steepened. <br />The rest of the Storke Yard below the storm water diversion is gently sloping with <br />virtually all drainage routea to the Storke Waste Water Treatment Plant. The lower <br />Storke Yard has been reclaimed through regrading and application of cover fill and <br />plant growth media including natural materials available in the reclaimed area and <br />aggregate stockpiled at the former concrete batch plant. Areas where there was <br />exposed and potentially acidic waste rock and development rock have been largely <br />covered with earthen material more likely to sustain a viable stand of vegetation. <br />Concrete foundations and structures have been demolished and /or covered. A very <br />substantial 12 -foot thick foundation that was present in the 5 -shaft hoist pit and <br />was drilled, blasted, and removed. The reclaimed areas have been seeded and have <br />been planted with trees and shrubs. Establishment of vegetation is proceeding as well <br />as can be anticipated given the harsh climate and poor soils typical of this high <br />altitude location. Vegetative performance standards have not yet been met, but the <br />limited request for surety reduction for grading and cover soil application in the <br />46 acres delineated on Figure 1 in SR -03 is granted. The overall reclamation effort <br />in the 46 acre area of Storke Yard is commendable; the DMG's only remaining <br />requirement is the collection and removal of mining related refuse as discussed <br />previously; additional surface deposited refuse was noted in the vicinity of the 5- <br />shaft. <br />Climax has requested a reduction in surety amount for the Storke Complex of $155,381. <br />This figure was determined as a percentage of the total Storke Yard backfilling, <br />finish grading, and topsoiling costs from the Climax estimate dated February 1999 at <br />section 4.1, page 59. This is comparable to the DMG's 1998 estimate at tasks 10, 11, <br />12, 13, and 14. Rather than adjusting the bond on the basis of the percentage of the <br />Storke Yard that has been reclaimed, the DMG has elected to re- estimate Storke Yard <br />grading and topsoiling costs based on the current partially reclaimed condition of <br />the area. This is necessary due to the fact that one of the basic assumptions used <br />in the earlier estimates by both the DMG and Climax is not likely to be valid for the <br />remaining reclamation of the complex. The assumption in question is that the material <br />excavated or cut from the reconstruction of the Arkansas River channel would balance <br />with fill requirements in the remainder of the Storke Yard and that filling with <br />channel reconstruction cut could be completed using a D9N dozer and a 100 foot average <br />push (see pages 5 and 6 of the Climax Mine "Reclamation Bonding Cost Calculations" <br />dated 3/31/94). Since the bulk of the Storke Complex has already been backfilled and <br />regraded without using the channel reconstruction cut material, and the remaining <br />areas in the Storke Yard where the cut material may be wasted are somewhat limited, <br />the assumptions used for cost estimating must be revised. The following table <br />