Laserfiche WebLink
• (Page 2) • <br />MINE ID # OR I~ROSPECTZNG ID: M-1990-144 <br />INSPECTION DA'.'E: 2/10/2000 <br />INSPECTOR'S INITIALS: JCS <br />This inspecticn was conducted primarily for the purpose of collecting data that would provide <br />the basis for a re-evaluation of the sufficiency of the financial warranty. The site was <br />inactive at the time of the inspection. Although properly notified, the operator was not <br />represented during the inspection. <br />The ID sign wets in order. The permit area boundaries had been recently checked and adequate <br />boundary markers were still visible. <br />The inspectio~i began with the older excavated area in the southwest portion of the permit <br />area where an extensive exposure of groundwater was identified during the Division's <br />inspection on 9/30/99. This area has now been graded to eliminate most of the highwall and <br />to cover the exposed groundwater. Some few hundred feet of highwall, however, remain. <br />Reduction of this remaining highwall will be included in the Division's re-estimate of the <br />cost of reclaiming the site. <br />Inspection continued to the more recently excavated area in the north central portion of the <br />permit area where a smaller exposure of groundwater, west of the highwall, was identified <br />during the Division's inspection on 9/30/99. Some attempt to cover this area of exposed <br />groundwater hers been made since that inspection but the cover is not complete. During this <br />inspection, stall another area was identified apparently with less than the 2 feet of cover <br />required by the permit for groundwater. This area is located just south of the southern end <br />of the highwall where some water is exposed and a still larger associated area appears <br />saturated. Since the continued exposure of what appears to be Groundwater at the site <br />conflicts with the conditions of the approved permit, this becomes a compliance problem which <br />will be included on nacre 4 of this report. A copy of this report will also be forwarded to <br />the Division of Water Resources/State Engineer. <br />The length an3 height of the highwall remaining in the more recently excavated area were <br />estimated and the reduction of this highwall will be included in the Division's re-estimate <br />of the cost of: reclaiming the site. <br />The only remaining topsoil stockpiles identified during this inspection appear to be located <br />above the highwall associated with the more recently excavated pit area. Distribution of this <br />material over at least the pit area will be included in the Division's re-estimate of the <br />cost of reclamation. <br />Stockpile, operational areas and, to some extent, roads also represent surface disturbance <br />associated with the mining operation but from which topsoil may not have been stripped prior <br />to utilizatio~i. Their reclamation, i.e. beginning with at least ripping, will have to be <br />included. Seeding of all areas disturbed by the mining, i.e. pits, stockpile and operational <br />areas together with any roads that are not intended to remain will also be included in the <br />Division's re-estimate. <br />It is the Division's policy not to include the cost of removing stockpiles of salable <br />material in the bonding calculation. At the moment, this includes the huge stockpile of <br />crusher fines located just west of the entrance to the site. Reportedly, sales of this <br />material for construction purposes are periodically made from this stockpile. <br />