Laserfiche WebLink
27 September 2022 C-1981-010/Trapper Mine RAR <br /> Overburden was being hauled to elevate floor in N Pit for access to M seam. Backfilling was occurring in <br /> the Derringer Pit. Excavation core drilling on the north slope of a potential C Pit has been completed at <br /> the west end of the site past Coyote Pond. The drill sites have been abandoned and reclaimed with <br /> grading. Most will be mined through if C Pit is permitted so seeding is on hold. The a selection of drill <br /> sites from the recent abandonment report for exploration drilling were visited. Ash hauling was occurring <br /> and roads were being watered throughout the site. No coal hauling was observed at the time of <br /> inspection. <br /> SIGNS and MARKERS Rule 4.02 <br /> o Topsoil stockpiles observed were clearly marked with identifying signs. <br /> o Pond identification signs and sediment markers were prominently displayed in the vicinity of the <br /> ponds visited and were in adequate repair at the time of inspection. <br /> o Permit boundary markers were observed to be prominently visible and adequately spaced along <br /> the east boundary. <br /> ROADS—Rule 4.03 <br /> Construction 4.03.1(3)14.03.2(3); Drainage 4.03.1(4)14.03.2(4); Surfacing and Maintenance 4.03.1(5) <br /> and(6)14.03.2(5) and(6); Reclamation 4.03.1(7)14.03.2(7) <br /> o Main haul roads were in good repair and well maintained at the time of inspection, as were roads <br /> in L and N Pits. <br /> o Access roads were accessible throughout the site. <br /> o Ditches appeared to be functioning adequately. <br /> o Roads were being watered. <br /> SUPPORT FACILITIES—Rule 4.04 <br /> The Ash Pit exhibited a firm surface throughout. After recent rains a small amount of standing water was <br /> noted in a couple of places as well as moist areas on surface. No issues were observed requiring attention <br /> at the time of inspection. <br /> HYDROLOGIC BALANCE Rule 4.05 <br /> Drainage Control 4.05.1, 4.05.2, 4.05.3; Siltation Structures 4.05.5, 4.05.6; Discharge Structures 4.05.7, <br /> 4.05.10; Diversions 4.05.4; Effluent Limits 4.05.2; Ground Water Monitoring 4.05.13; Drainage-Acid <br /> and Toxic Materials 4.05.8;Impoundments 4.05.6, 4.05.9; Stream Buffer Zones 4.05.18 <br /> Unless otherwise noted, pond banks and dams appeared stable at the time of inspection. Spillways were <br /> functioning adequately at the time of inspection. The following pond systems were visited: <br /> a) Grouse Ponds 41 held a little water grouse 42 was dry. <br /> b) Sage Ponds 41 and 42 were dry with established vegetation that will be lost when <br /> reclamation to remove the ponds is undertaken. <br /> c) Oak Pond 41 held a small amount of turbid water. Oak Pond 42 was dry. A scarp toward <br /> the top of the dam was evident. The sediment sump above Oak Pond 41 held water. <br /> d) West Flume held a puddle. <br /> e) Middle Flume 41 held water and was not discharging at the time of inspection. Remnants <br /> of an earlier algae bloom floated on the pond. <br /> f) Middle Flume 43 had recently discharged. <br /> g) East Flume held water. <br /> h) The Deacon Ponds were both dry. <br /> i) Jeff vay Pond 41 holding a small amount of water. Three rills were forming in south <br /> embankment and should be monitored for headcutting. The channel is stable with <br /> vegetation. However,where the channel meets the flume,vegetation was sparse and the <br /> vegetation mesh was exposed and in disarray. This should be cleaned up. <br /> Number of Partial Inspection this Fiscal Year: 3 <br /> Number of Complete Inspections this Fiscal Year: 1 <br /> Page 3 of 15 <br />