Laserfiche WebLink
• (Page 2) • <br />MINE ID # OR PROSPECTING ID # M-80-228 <br />INSPECTION DATE 05/19/98 <br />INSPECTOR'S INITIALS RCO <br />This inspection was performed by the Division as part of its monitoring of 110 permits and <br />as a pre-operation inspection for the area to be added to the permit through the 112 <br />conversion, as applied for by the operator on 4/22/98. The operator was contacted about the <br />inspection and was present throughout most of the inspection. <br />The 112 conversion will bring increased acreage into the permit, plus address the needed <br />changes to the post-mining land use and reclamation plan. No further mining is to occur, but <br />concrete botching and product stockpiling will continue. The floor will be graded and <br />surfaced to allow such industrial use. The side elopes of the pit will be reclaimed by <br />topsoiling and revegetating them. <br />The required permit ID sign was posted at the entrance to the permit area, on the scale <br />house/office. The permit area boundary markers (for the existing 110 permit) were observed. <br />All were flagged for visibility, and were located according to the boundary shown on the file <br />map. <br />The concrete batch plant was still being installed. It was nearing completion, and will soon <br />be ready to operate. This facility and its surrounding graded pads are at the south end of <br />the permit, and are being built to remain at the site as part of the post-mining land use. <br />Surface grading elsewhere in the pit has brought the site closer to final topography. <br />Sideslopes have been graded in the Nw part of the pit, which also includes a new ramp road <br />into the pit. This will become the main road; the other road along the west still exists, <br />but will remain only for non-commercial and safety uses. There is a poor drainage condition <br />which exists where this secondary road enters the pit floor. Puddling occurs, and some <br />uncontrolled runoff down the slope is evident, beginning what may become a larger gully. The <br />operator should ensure that this is addressed soon. At this time there is no problem noted <br />under the topic of "erosion/sedimentation'. <br />The pit floor is also being well graded. Many stockpiles have been removed, and the gradient <br />is smoother fran north to south. There is a minor ponding of water in the north end of the <br />floor. The operator stated that this is temporary, until the floor grading on that end of <br />the permit is completed and stormwater structures elsewhere are adequate. <br />Topsoil is stockpiled above the highwalls in the north end, in sufficient quantities to <br />perform reclamation according to the approved plan. The thistle problem still exists on the <br />topsoil piles above the NE highwall and on the lower sloughed material. This has been noted <br />previously as a problem, with the operator's follow up reflecting that the weeds are being <br />sprayed. The weeds are still there, in material which will be used for the revegetated parts <br />of the pit. Therefore the operator must continue to spray these weeds, even after topsoil <br />is respread and seeded. If the thistles remain, the site will not be released. If the <br />current spraying program is not effective, the operator should consult a local weed control <br />expert or the county weed authority. At this time there is no problem noted under "topsoil" <br />or "revegetation". <br />The margins of the pit along the south end where the floor has daylighted have stormwater <br />berms. The berm contains a couple slots cut into it, which will prevent containment of <br />stormwater runoff; they should be mended to function as designed. The berme appeared newly <br />constructed, and no ponding of water was yet evident there. This is not being noted as a <br />problem under "hydrologic balance" or "stormawater management" at this time. <br />