INSPEC23862 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MINE ID # OR PROSP($ TING ID INSPECTION LSATE 2I Zj L~R (Page 2) • # M -`T(-Iqb OBSERVATIONS INSPECTOR'S INITIALSJ~/ This inspection was conducted in order to check completion of all corrective actions required for Compliance Problems 1 and 2 identified during the Division's inspection on 9/10/98 and to gather data allowing the Division to re-evaluate the adequacy of the current financial warranty. The permittee, Hard Rock Paving and Redi-Mix, Inc., was represented during the inspection by Gary Reed and Lawrence Nichols together with Lloyd Barnhart and Joe Gagliano (Consultants) and Jon Roorda (Surveyor). The pit was inactive at the time of the inspection although some equipment was onsite. The last significant activity reported at the pit was in the annual report received by the Division on March 11, 1997 which presumably covered the period between the permit anniversary date of April 21, 1996 and April 21, 1997. In this report, some 0.9 to 1.0 acres were reported as redisturbed. This redisturbed area was illustrated on an accompanying map. The Annual Report for the following year, ie. 1997-98, indicated no activity at the site since the last report. The site is approved for intermittent activity, however, Rule 1.13.7 requires certain information be either included in the permit or provided in the Annual Report for operations intermittently active. Such information, eg. date of cessation, plans for resumption of activity, condition of pit at cessation, does not appear to be included in the Annual Report for 1997-98. This is a compliance problem that will be included on Paae 4 of this report. The ID sign for the pit was in order. While the boundaries of the newly defined permit area had been marked, to some extent and as requested under Compliance Problem 1 (See report of Division inspection 9/10/98), these markers were so widely scattered as not to fully define the permit area outline. The corners formed by the linear portions of the permit area should be marked and the circular portions of the boundary should have more extensive markers. Allowing the boundaries of the permit area to be marked by the limits of the disturbance will not act to ensure that the permittee's equipment operators stay within those boundaries. This is a compliance problem that will be included on Page 4 of this report. With the exception of more complete marking of the boundaries of the permit ares, however, the new map of the property and permit area, supplied on 12/1/98, will satisfy the corrective action required for Compliance Problem 1 identified during the Division's 9/10/98 inspection. In regard to~the Corrective Action required for Compliance Problem 2 from the report of the Division's inspection on 9/10/98, a ditch had been installed by the permittee around the base of the topsoil stockpile located in the northwest part of the permit area. This ditch clearly separates the stockpile from the excavation operation and satisfies the Corrective Action. Since, however, this topsoil stockpile will probably not be used for reclamation purposes for some time, it should be stabilized. If it is to be stabilized by vegetation, it must be reshaped for that purpose. This is a compliance problem that will be included on Page 4 of this report. The approved reclamation plan calls for spreading 12-18 inches of topsoil on the reclaimed surfaces of the pit. With mining related disturbance now totaling an estimated 4 or more acres at the pit, there would appear to be a need for at least 6500 cu. yd. Of topsoil. This inspector's rough estimate of the volume of topsoil in the only stockpile of topsoil identified onsite is less than 2000 cu. yd. This is a compliance problem that will be included on Pale 5 of this report. The new map of the property and permit area does not show all post-permit mining related disturbance at the site to lie within the newly defined permit area boundaries. Of