2014-05-30_INSPECTION - M1988093

Home Browse Search

PERMIT#:M-1988-093 INSPECTOR'S INITIALS: TC1 INSPECTION DATE: May 20,2014 into the permit area and are becoming established. This is a problem for failure to employ weed control methods for a state listed noxious weed species within the permitted area, and to reduce the spread of weeds to nearby areas as required by Section 3.1.10 (6) of the rule. CORRECTIVE ACTIONS:The operator shall either implement the existing weed control plan, or develop a weed control and management plan in accordance with Section 3.1.10 (6) of the Rule. This plan should be developed in consultation with the county extension agency, or weed control district office and should include specific control measures to be applied, a schedule for when control measures will be applied and a post-treatment monitoring plan. This weed control plan shall be submitted to the Division as a Technical Revision to the approved plan with the appropriate Technical Revision fee of$216.00 by the corrective action date. CORRECTIVE ACTION DUE DATE: 7/30/14 OBSERVATIONS This inspection was initiated by a request for Temporary Cessation. The purpose of this inspection was to check compliance of the operation with the requirements of the Act, Rules, and the conditions of the permit. Jordan Sasser and John Young were present during the inspection representing the Operator. This site entrance is located approximately a mile east of Florence, on the north side of County Road 79, in Fremont County. This is 112c sand and gravel mining operation, also referred by the Operator as the Florence South Pit. The site was not active at the time of the inspection. Inspection: Permit Boundary: A permit sign was posted on the entrance road (see Photo 1). A locked gate is intended to prevent unauthorized entry to the site. However, there was evidence of unauthorized entry, as shell casings were observed on the pit floor and blankets were observed on the east end of the pit along the access road to the topsoil stockpile. A large portion of the southern access ramp has collapsed (see Photo 2), presenting a potential safety hazard. This portion of the road requires repair. The collapsed portion of the access ramp is cited as a problem on page 1 of this report. Pit boundary signs wired to T-posts surround the phase 1 boundary(see Photo 3). Pit & Permit Area: One large and two smaller stockpiles were observed in the pit area(Photos 4 - 5). The large stockpile appeared to be fines, while the two smaller piles appeared to be processed material. The highwall is raveling, apparently from both sloughing and water erosion. This raveling poses a potential stability problem near a power pole relatively close to the crest (see Photo 6) in the middle of the highwall. The highwall was estimated to average about 40 feet in height and approximately 700 feet long (see the indicated yellow line on Figure 1). The Division estimates 41,500 cubic yards are necessary to backfill the highwall to the approved 2.5:1 final grade in the original application reclamation plan. The original reclamation cost (Exhibit L) estimated only 39,350 cubic yards would be needed for backfill (25 ft high by 1,700 feet long). Mining Activity: Mr. Young indicated no mining activity has occurred at the site since he started working for the Operator in 2007. As such, he was not familiar with the specifics of the mining operation. A review of the approved mining plan indicates most of the mined area is in phase 1, but some is in phase 2. There appears to be additional resources remaining in phase 1. The Operator should consider revising the mine plan to use the existing power line as a phase boundary by submitting a Technical Revision prior to resuming mining activity. Reclamation: No reclamation has been performed to date (referencing the 2014 annual report). Tamarisk are becoming a problem on the pit floor (see Photo 7) and the Division does not have a noxious weed control plan Page 2 of 8