INSPEC07337 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

.~ • (Page 21 • b11NE ID ~ OR PROSPECTING ID N M-83-148 INSPECTION DATE 03/20/97 INSPECTOR'S INITIALS RCO OBSERVATIONS This inspection by the Division was performed as part of its monitoring of 112 permits. The operator was contacted about the inspection but was not present for it. Two employees were onsite in the north end of the permit, at the crusher site, but did not accompany this inspector during his time onsite. This permit area was converted from a 1 1 0 to a 1 1 2 permit in 1 996. The file contains revised maps of the mining and reclamation plans, plus the revised plan narratives. This permit is located on a low mesa top, accessible by county-maintained road. Operations appear to be contained to the mesa top, e.g., no material was apparently sloughing down the slopes from the top. There was no evidence of erosion on the slopes. The increased acreage from the conversion added some land on the north end but mostly on the south. The northern half of the present affected area is fairly level and used for gravel crushing and stockpiling. None of that area has been reclaimed. There are several acres in the eastern portion of the permit (south of the top of the entrance ramp) which appear to have been levelled and topsoiled. There is a small stockpile of what appears to be topsoil there also. The southern half of the affected area contains stockpiles, the active highwall (advancing toward the southl, and an asphalt batch plant. The highwall is 12-1 5 feet high, nearly vertical, and extends the width of the mesa top. A small area above the central portion of the highwall seems to have been stripped of topsoil in preparation of the mining there. This active portion of the permit is free of debris and orderly. The file, as mentioned above, contains a complete copy of the operator's conversion application, which includes a description of the mining and processing activities to be carried out there. The 1 12 permit was approved to include conventional excavation, onsite stockpiling, and onsite crushing. There is no mention of asphalt hatching in the file. Though the plant seems to be new and clean, with poly-lined ponds, etc., its presence onsite is not approved for this permit and is therefore noted as a problem. The topics of "general mine plan compliance" and "processing facilities" are noted as problems on page 1. See the last page for the corrective action The plant facility is portable, and consists of an office trailer, fuel tank on steel stand, earth-tilled ramp, screen, poly-lined ponds dozed into the pit floor, asphalt mixing drum with hopper, and atrailer-mounted asphalt fluid tank. This asphalt fluid tank (for lack of a more exact name) is insulated and includes integral fuel tanks, presumably for heating the fluid during storage before actual mixing. At the east end of the trailer is evidence of a diesel spill on the soil of the pit floor. It covers a surface of not more than 100 sq ft, but has penetrated the soil at least 10 inches deep. This location appears to be where fuel is transferred from tank truck to the tank on the plant trailer. Assuming that this location will continue to be where fuel is transferred, the floor should be modified to include a suitable containment for potential spills. Most spills are probably small, and the "hydrologic balance" at this high, dry location is not felt to be compromised land it is not noted as a problem on page 11~ Presently, though, the topic of "acid or toxic materials" is noted to be a problem on page 1, due to the diesel spill which was uncontained and not cleaned up. Please see the last page for the corrective action. The operator is encouraged to contact this office to discuss onsite dispersal/photo-degradation or proper offsite disposal options. Concerning the abatement of the problem associated with the presence of the unpermitted batch plant, the operator has several options. The plant may be completely removed by a specific date, or the permit's mining plan may be modified to allow future operation of the asphalt plant at this site. Such a modification would involve a technical revision (TRI, which fora 1 12 permit costs $1 50. Either of these options, or another reasonable alternative from the operator, must be implemented or a proposal submitted for review, by the corrective action date shown on the last page. There were no other items noted during the inspection. If the operator wishes to discuss this report with the inspector, please contact the following office: Division of Minerals and Geology 484 Turner Dr., Bldg. F-101 Durango CO 81301 Phone 970/247.5193.