INSPEC18722 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

` n. • (Page 2) • MINE ID # OR PROSPECTING ID # M-91-133 INSPECTION DATE 1/15/99 INSPECTOR'S INITIALS RCO OBSERVATIONS This inspection was performed by the Division as part of its monitoring of Construction Material 112 permits. The operator was contacted about the inspection, and a time was arranged to meet at the site. One or the other of the operators named on page one was present during the inspection. The permit area was identified at the entrance to the site by the required permit ID sign, which was posted on the gate at the highway. Though this is not noted as a problem in this report, the operator should revise the number shown on the ID sigr; to contain the correct number one of the digits is incorrect. Three of the four corners of the permit boundary are marked. The SE and SW corner are well marked, the NE corner marker should be improved, and the Nw corner must be relocated and marked. The corners were all located by survey, and marked with survey pin and T-post. The T-posts should all be reinstalled securely, since they are a bit wobbly. The NE Corner is under a cottonwood tree, and marked only with a surveK gin. It must have a better marker installed to make it visible. No marker at the NW corner could be found even by measuring to its suggosed location from the fence corner. The T-post was found, but it was about a hundred feet away from where it should have been. Recent earthmoving or agricultural equipment traffic appears to have obliterated that corner marker. (More about this missing marker is written below.) It has been several years since the last monitoring inspection of this permitted pit, and several years since the reclamation costs were recalculated. This is a 30-acre permit area. The operation originally had phased mining and reclamation plans allowing a maximum of ten acres of disturbance. On 11/29J95 Technical Revision TR-O1 was approved, which reduced the maximum allowable disturbance to five acres, and the bond was decreased from $14,000 to $8,000. The phased plans are still in effect, but it seems that the phases are not being followed in the sequence shown on the file maps. Lack of adherence to the phased plan is not a problem in itself, as long as the total disturbance does not exceed the five-acre limit. However, the fact is that ~ e ~1 dis rban i in ex ss of five acres (This will be explored below The disturbance on the site includes an irregularly-shaped pit in about the center of the permit area. The nit s true acreage thoLg_h not measured was estimated to be about 9 or 10 acres. There are three ramps down into the pit. The pit is about 10 to 15 feet deep throughout, with all highwalls at about 1:1 slopes. No highwalls have been reduced to the reclamation gradient of 3:1 slopes. Equipment in the pit was minimal: several grizzlies and a wheeled loader. There were only a few small stockpiles of gravel in the pit itself. The pit floor was roughly level, and did not appear to impound water. The east highwall is near the natural river terrace slope. Further excavation on the east end will soon daylight the pit into the bottomland. A small portion of the bottomland is in the permit area. The operator stated that it is not desired to daylight the pit on the east, but to leave an unexcavated berm of material. The west highwall is approaching the permit boundary. The operator should ensure that enough room is left to reduce the highwall to 3:1 if material is to be pushed down from above. The north and south highwalls are not so close to the north and south permit boundaries. There is still a lot of material available to be excavated from both those sides. The unexcavated area south of the pit has not been disturbed yet at all.