Laserfiche WebLink
• (Page 2) • <br />MINE ID f OR PROSPECTING ID { N-78-072 <br />INSPECTION DATE 11/13/95 INSPECTOR'S INITIALS <br />OBSERVATIONS <br />This inspection was performed by the Division as part of its monitoring of 110 permits. The <br />operator was contacted about the inspection and a time was arranged to allow the operator to <br />be present for it. <br />This ie a county pit, for which there is no requirement for a stormwater management plan or <br />a financial warranty. <br />There ie a permit ID sign posted at the entrance of the permit area. There were no markers <br />observed, however, which would have delineated the boundary of the permit area. The operator <br />is required to install and maintain markers, pursuant to Construction Materials Rule 3.1.12. <br />Lack of markers ie noted ae a problem, under the topic of "signs and markers" on page 1 of <br />this report, and the corrective actions are explained on the last page. <br />This is a 1.75-acre permit area. The file does not contain a good description of the <br />dimensions of the permit, nor does it contain a map of the permit area itself. The operators <br />present for the inspection indicated the approximate configuration of the permit area. This <br />inspector estimated the size of the disturbed area by pacing, and it appears that the <br />county's operation ie approximately at the limit of the 1.75-acre size. The permit <br />application materials apparently never contained a permit area map. The lack of such a map <br />ie noted ae a problem in this report under the topic of "records". See the last page for <br />explanation of the corrective actions. The operator should prepare and submit a map of <br />sufficient size to adequately depict distances and features within and around the permit, <br />such as the county road right-of-way fence, entrance, permit corners, creek channel, site <br />drainage structures, mining and stockpiling areas, reclaimed areas, etc. It need not be <br />drawn to scale if sufficient measurements and distances are included. The need for an <br />adequate map ie two-fold: it documents the layout of the permitted acreage in the Division's <br />public files, and (along with the markers) helps the operator to limit activity to the permit <br />area. <br />The excavation ie 30 feet deep or lees. There is a small stockpile of gravel material in the <br />north end of the permit. The permit is located adjacent to the east bank of a dry creek, <br />just up on a low creek terrace. The south and east wall of the pit are eloped at 3:1 or <br />less, but they are becoming eroded. The entrance ramp ie not steep, but it consists of loose <br />fill material, and is furrowed 1 to 2 feet deep. The pit floor is not eroded, but seems to <br />be the area of deposition of the eroded material. The mining has daylighted on the west and <br />the Bite drains positively toward the west, partly through several shallow drainage channels <br />installed by the operator. Inspection of the shoulder of the terrace and creek bottom below <br />revealed that offsite sedimentation is not a problem. Ae mentioned above, it seems that <br />mining has reached the boundaries. Further mining in this small permit area may only go <br />downward. It is possible to enlarge the permit area through an amendment. See Construction <br />Materials Rule 1.10 for further explanation of the amendment process. The disturbance ie <br />very near the east, south and west boundaries, and the operator stated that there will not <br />be further disturbance in those directions. The operator is encouraged to begin stabilizing <br />the elopes, and/or reclaiming the entire permit area. (The inspection of 11/5/81 noted that <br />the east wall by the road was exhibiting rill erosion, and recommended stabilizing the elopes <br />by vegetating them. This wall ie still eroded, and any past revegetation effort here has <br />apparently not been successful.) <br />The approved reclamation plan states that topsoil has not been saved, and that subsoil will <br />be adequate to revegetate the permit. There ie no stockpile of this material, but it ie not <br />noted as a problem. The operator must ensure that there is soil material of sufficient <br />volume and quality, when reclamation begins, for successful revegetation. (If replaced soil <br />material is to be 6 inches thick, for example, about 1400 cubic yards would be required.) <br />ee reminded that the approved reclamation plan specifies that final elopes are to be 5:1 at <br />this Bite. Your reclamation plan calla for straw mulch to be dieced in, but does not specify <br />the amount. This is not noted ae a problem, but the record should be clarified. Remember <br />that livestock should be excluded from the site until the vegetation is well established, <br />and/or the permit is released. This may require temporary fencing or deferred grazing. <br />The main item of note is an area of off site disturbance adjacent to the north of the permit. <br />On approximately 1.5 acres there has been an excavation averaging 8 feet in depth. The floor <br />