Surface Disturbance Reclamation at Diversified Stone Products Quarry

1. BOARD OF OIL, GAS, AND MINING DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES STATE OF UTAH BEFORE THE BOARD: RECLAMATION OF SURFACE DISTURBANCE DIVERSIFIED STONE PRODUCTS DOCKET NO.: 2009-017 CAUSE NO. : S0410025 DECEMBER 9, 2009 BLM FILE: UTU-71573 RICHFIELD FIELD OFFICE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT Prepared by Michael Jackson, Geologist Utah State Office, Bureau of Land Management

2. December 1994 Notice filed by Diversified Stone Products (DSP) with Bureau of Land Management: Based on the map with the notice, “discarded material” would be placed north of quarry along the access road on approximately the same topographic contour as the quarry. For reclamation, the operator stated that “All areas affected will be recontoured to fit into the surrounding area.” (Italics added.) In the BLM acknowledgement letter: Overburden and reject material shall be stockpiled upslope of the access road and separately from the topsoil. (Operating Procedure 3) Upon completion of operations, (except to the extent necessary to preserve evidence of mineralization), overburden shall be returned to the pit to recontour the surface to near natural slope, then the topsoil respread over this fill material. (Operating Procedure 4)

3. DSP quarry in 1999: Black line is disturbance; blue, quarry; green, toe of dump (discarded material); between green and black lines, scattered rock from the dump. Quarry Waste rock dump Scattered rock debris

4. REQUIREMENT FOR THE OPERATOR TO POST A FINANCIAL GUARANTEE January 20, 2001 New federal regulations required that financial guarantees for reclamation be posted by all operators by January 20, 2003. BLM attempted to obtain a satisfactory financial guarantee from the operator. November 7, 2003 BLM issued a decision that a financial guarantee of $24,900 was required within 60 days. Operator disputed the cost estimate for reclamation but did not provide an alternative estimate.

5. REQUIREMENT TO COMPLETE RECLAMATION June 21, 2004 BLM issued a decision that the notice had expired and that reclamation is required within 60 days. September 28, 2006 BLM issued a Noncompliance Order for failure to reclaim and required reclamation within 60 days. Nov. 15, 2006 and April 5,2007 Two inspections were held with the operator to specifically discuss the reclamation requirements as addressed in the previous decision and Noncompliance Order

6. Inspection photo on 8/8/2006 showing: Waste rock dump on left and quarry face on right. Note berm at the top of waste rock dump.

7. RECLAMATION REQUIREMENTS For reclamation, as addressed in the previous decision, the Noncompliance Order and inspections with the operator, BLM required: Reclaim quarry pit to natural contour to the extent feasible. Quarry pit should be backfilled to height of highwall cut, not just to fill pit floor. Rock material that had been cast down the slope on the waste rock dump must be pulled up from the slope Rock material from the dump and other stockpiles should be used to backfill and recontour the quarry and surface disturbance. Will need to work in “lifts.”

8. RECLAMATION REQUIREMENTS, continued Access road into pit must be recontoured. Large boulders of scattered stone below the toe of the waste rock dump on otherwise undisturbed land could be remain. Available topsoil re-spread over recontoured areas to extent feasible with the amount of stockpile.

9. Inspection photo on 8/28/2007 showing: The berm at the top of waste rock dump had been pulled back into the quarry to level pit floor. Note the quarry face is still present and waste rock material on the slope below the quarry pit floor has not been pulled up for recontouring the “quarry cut” to original slope conditions. Operator had equipment problems.

10. Inspection photo on 11/30/2007showing: Some additional waste rock material had been pulled up from the waste rock dump to spread onto the quarry pit floor. Quarry face still present. Additional waste rock material still present as side-cast material on the waste rock dump.

11. Between September 26, 2006 and July 23, 2008 BLM documented 36 phone calls with the operator to determine the operator’s plans to comply with the Noncompliance Order that required reclamation of the surface disturbance. Operator often stated intended dates to call when plans were to be finalized and/or to start the reclamation work. Operator often postponed the reclamation for various hardships, including: Trying to sell property to get funds. Trying to sell partial ownership of DSP but awaiting finalization. Subcontractor would be present on certain dates, but no notification in changes in plans. BLM completed 10 inspections, many with the operator to be assured that the operator understood the reclamation work that is required.

12. SUMMARY Reclamation has not been completed that meets the standards of the federal regulations and the operator is in noncompliance. The Noncompliance Order is still in effect that requires reclamation. Limited recontouring of the surface disturbance has only leveled the quarry pit floor but does not restore the land to a natural condition to the extent feasible. Waste rock piles have not been satisfactorily recontoured. The quarry face is still present without adequate backfilling to eliminate or reduce the exposed cut. The last contact between the operator and BLM was on July 23, 2008, by phone, when he had made arrangements with DOGM to complete the reclamation in the Fall 2008. The operator has not made any additional contacts with BLM to follow up on the reclamation and the Noncompliance Order.