INSPEC05435 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

;- ~.. • (Page 2) • MINE ID # OR PROSPECTING ID # M77-044 INSPECTION DATE 09/13/94 ~ INSPECTOR'S INITIALS RCO OBSERVATIONS This inspection was performed by the Division as part of its ongoing monitoring. The operator was contacted about the inspection but was not present for it. Thie ie a county operation, and no financial warranty or evidence of etormwater plan is required of the operator. The site ie accessed from an entrance gate off of County Road J.B. The entire permit area boundary is adequately marked by a fence. The southern half (approx) of the permit area ie not excavated, but has apparently been used for some time as a processing and stockpiling area. There were only a few small piles oneite at the time of the inspection. Some appeared to be either cobbly soil or overburden, others were reclaimable asphalt material. Much of the center portion of this half ie covered by a thin layer of gravel. There is evidence of only very limited activity, if any, at the pit recently. Much of the site has volunteer revegetation on it. There were no installed structures, tanks or pieces of equipment oneite. There was no evidence of soil contamination on the Bite. There was a small asphalt-related structure placed on the site, though not apparently used there. The northern half of the permit area holds the excavated area. The pit is approximately 15 to 20 feet deep. Compared to the newer part of the pit (on the east end), the older part to the west is deeper, and contains a greater degree of eetabliehed woody vegetation, mainly willows. Thie part contains some highwalls which have been graded to a stable elope (2:1 to 3:1), though moat of the highwalls range from vertical to 1:1 slopes, and unstable. There ie water impounded in this west part of the pit, at approx 15 to 18 feet below the level of surrounding land. it ie not known if this ie a seasonal or year-round condition, or whether it occurs every year. The eastern part of the pit shows more recent activity, is somewhat shallower, and contains the ramp providing access to the pit floor. Highwalle here are also generally unstable, elopes ranging from vertical to 1:1. Due to the questions and concerns the Division has about the annual level of mining and/or ~~ reclamation activities, the need for documentation of ponded water conditions within the pit, and the lack of an up-to-date map, the topic of "records" is noted as a problem on page 1, ~ and corrective actions explained on page 4. The margins of the pit overall approach the limits of the permit area to the west, north and east. The shoulder of the highwall on the west aide (adjacent to the deepest part of the pit) ie about 25 feet from the fence, for a length of 160 feet. At this depth and proximity to the fence, the operator moat backfill to attain stable eloping, there is no room for knocking down material from above. Along the north aide the same condition exists, except that the shoulder of the highwall is at the fence line. Due to instability of these elopes (and there are plenty of signs of slumping material) the operator ie urged to take immediate action to: 1) prevent the advance of the top of the highwall, 2) protect the fence structure, and 3) to prevent damage to land outside the permit boundary. Offeite damage may possibly constitute a violation. Along the east aide of the pit itself there is also a highwall encroaching on the permit boundary. Here the highwall has advanced to within 2 to 5 feet of a small ditch which parallels the boundary just inside the fence. The ditch was identified in the permit application, so was presumably not constructed after the permit area was eetabliehed. This highwall ie advancing to the east, ae evidenced by the recent slumping of material from the shoulder. Said slumping has actually cut off the ditch, routing water into the pit. That interrupted part of the ditch has been reconstructed closer to the fence. Here too slumping will continue to advance without specific action on the part of the operator, and may become a violation, if this reaches beyond the permit boundary. The ie noted as a problem under topic "backfill and grading" on page 1 and corrective actions ~~ are outlined on page 4.