Laserfiche WebLink
• (Page 21 • <br />MINE ID # OR PROSPECTING ID # M-83-142 <br />INSPECTION DATE 01/30/97 INSPECTOR'S INITIALS RCO <br />OBSERVATIONS <br />This was a partial inspection performed by the Division as part of its monitoring of 112 permits. The operator was contacted about <br />this inspection and was present for it. There was no snow cover on the site. <br />There is a bond of 517,000 for [his site. Based on the approved plan of mining and reclamation, plus the present condition of the <br />area, a new reclamation cost estimate will be calculated, and the figures sent to the operator. The total cost to reclaim the <br />disturbance is probably well under the present bond amount. <br />The required permit ID sign was posted at the gate located at the end of the access road (intersection of 32 Road and B Roadl. The <br />entire permit boundary is adequately marked by a field fence. The permit area encompasses three distinct portions which are defined <br />as the affected area; the permit area also includes land which will not be affected. The entire southern edge of the permit area is <br />to be used during and after mining as a road corridor. Some of this corridor has received fill to improve the gradient of the road, <br />some of the length of the road has been asphalt paved, and the scales, scalehouse and office are installed on [he north edge of the <br />road at the bottom of the hill. This scale area is one of the separate affected areas. The road will remain paved after reclamation, <br />but the scales, concrete footers and scalehouse will be removed. <br />There is a linear butte-type hill in the central portion of the permit area, which is one of the areas to be excavated. There is presently <br />no mining disturbance there which must be reclaimed. Future operations may progress into that portion, and the hilltop will be mined <br />down to a lower level. <br />The hilltop in the southeast corner is the location of most of the excavation activity in the permit. The adjacent, off-permit land to <br />the south and east is not excavated, and shows that the depth of the permitted pit is approximately 1 5 feet. Material has been <br />mined down to the underlying shale level. The access road leads directly into the pit, with no ramp needed. Excavation has <br />produced a pit floor which slopes at about 5% to the west; the pit is about 2 acres or less. Excavation will probably not proceed <br />deeper, and because it is confined to the hilltop and has reached the limits of the level hilltop, there is not a significant amount of <br />material left to mine. There is a berm around the north and west perimeter of the pit, about 3 to 6 feet high, which was produced <br />by pulling back material with an excavator, and protects the areas downslope from rolling material. Downslope areas are still in the <br />permit area. <br />The side slopes on the east and north have been excavated to very near the perimeter fence and stand at a 1 :1 slope. There is not <br />sufficient space above the slope, within the boundary, to push material down to attain the gradient specified in [he reclamation plan <br />(3:11. The operator has, however, imported a significant amount of soil material to use as backfill against the south sideslope. It <br />appears that there may be sufficient material present [o backfill and revegetate. The soil appears clean and will probably be of a <br />quality to be able to seed directly into it. The operator should note that, in the future, if materials generated offsite are to be <br />imported for backfill as part of reclamation activities, a notice is to be submitted to the Division before actual importation begins. <br />Please refer to Construction Materials Rule 3.1 .519) as a guide to the information to be included in such notice. In this case, though <br />the importation has already occurred, it will not be regarded as a problem. The Division does requesC, however, that the operator <br />supply the information required for such a notice, for the material involved in this backfill of the south wall. <br />The east edge of the pit will actually daylight into an adjoining permit area (Ford Gravel Pit, File No. M-96-0911 that this operator <br />has recently applied tor. Excavation in the Ford Pit will commence from the common boundary line and proceed eastward into the <br />new pit, effectively eliminating the steep highwall completely. If that adjoining pit permit is not approved or its excavation does not <br />commence this season, the operator will have to backfill the east slope too. Because of the situation explained herein, these steep <br />slopes close to the permit boundary are not a problem because they will not remain as 1 :1 through this season. <br />This pit floor will probably be affected well into the future, or as long as the Ford Pit floor is not of sufficient size to accomodate <br />porcessing equipment and stockpiling. After the pit area is inactiviated, the issue of topsoiling it must be faced. The soil in the area <br />is thin, and was gone due to pre-law activity here before this operator took over the permit. There may be topsoil resources available <br />within the permit least of the scale areal or it might be imported. (The operator's thoughts on this will be welcomed.) The issue <br />of topsoil is not regarded as a problem in this report. <br />There was one problem noted during the inspection, which falls under the topics of "acid or toxic materials" and "hydrologic <br />balance". There was apparently a recent release of waste oil, possibly mixed with diesel, on the eastern portion of the pit floor. <br />The floor, as mentioned above, is a tight shale/clay material, and was frozen on the day of the inspection. There was an extensive <br />area of minor oil drippage, very surficial, and a couple areas of puddling. One such area actually had standing oil, in a shallow puddle <br />with about a 20 sq ft surface. The tight frozen ground may have prevented the spill from penetrating very deeply. <br />