INSPEC28392 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

(Page 2) • MINE ID Jf OR PROSPECTING ID rX M-1981-165 INSPECTION DATE 11 9/01 INSPECTOR'S INITIALS RCO OBSERVATIONS This partial inspection was performed t>y the Division as part of its monitoring of 11012) metals permits. The operator's) named on page one were present throughout the inspection. The site had received about an inch of snow the previous night, which did not limit access to the site, though it did prevent some observations of ground features. The site was not active at the time of the inspection. The permit ID sign was posted on the access road gate. The gate is normally locked to prevent unauthorized access, but was open at the time of the inspection. The permit boundary was adequately marked by steel T-posts. The topsoil stockpiles in the upper end of the area was identified and separated from other permit disturbances. The old ore pile is now mostly removed, the material having been run through the mill in 1999. On or near this same pad area are two water tanks used for the flotation operation. There is also a vent shaft with vent fan located here. Except for the vent shaft, these features are all marked on the current map. The next map submitted as part of the annual report should depict the vent shaft also. The operator stated that there is a possibility that another vent shaft may be needed in future underground operations, but the exact location is unknown at this time. The creation of any surface structure and use of any surface area requires that it be included in the permitted area, and bonding for its reclamation be included in the overall bond. If the location of the future vent and/or its access road is not presently within the boundary, it must be added to the permit area. Additions of land to the permit are made through the amendment process. If adding more acreage makes the total to be included in the permit ten acres or more, the amendment becomes a conversion, and the permit becomes a 112. There is an abbreviated process, however, which may be an option for the operator to bring the necessary additional area into the permit. If there are areas presently within the permit which have not been disturbed by this operation and will not be needed in the future, they may be released from the permit in exchange for new areas to be added. This is done with the same requirement for public notice as with an amendment, but under the lower fees for a technical revision. If there are questions about this, please contact this office. Many old underground openings have been closed on or near this site. Several old shaft locations were indicated by the operator. Closer inspection of them will be made during the next inspection to verify that there is no settling and to judge the revegetation. The main portal used by the operator, called the 65 level portal, was seen to be adequately safeguarded by steel doors and steel portal sets. It was dry at the time of the inspection. The site lies in a narrow gulch, and requires stormwater management to protect the site and water quality. Numerous diversions and berms were observed, which appeared functional and matching the locations noted on the operator's stormwater maps. A complete inspection of all stormwater structures was not carried out, however, at this time. The mill building was locked at the time of the inspection. Most equipment used in the operation is stored inside the building. Outside the building were the screen, crusher and conveyor, at the location noted on the current maps. No fuel storage was noted outside the mill building. The tailings pond was partially full of water at the time of the inspection. There was about 8 feet or less of freeboard. The exposed portion of the liner material appeared strong and intact, seams securely welded, and no observable photodegradation. The liner on the north inslope, however, being directly below a steep unstable embankment, has exhibited numerous rocks it has received. These rocks range from a couple inches in size to almost a foot, and are angular. They originate on the rocky slope above the liner, and may fall a distance of up to 10 feet or more. This has the potential to compromise the liner by breaching it. The operator must remove all such rocks on it presently, and act to prevent future rockfalls from occurring. One possible method of stabilizing the slope is by use of chain-link fence material anchored at the diversion ditch above this steep slope, draped down the slope to the edge of the liner. This could help by holding rocks on the slope, reducing the chances of breaching the liner, reducing the amount of foreign material in the pond, and may aid in establishment of vegetation. Site access may no longer be practical this season, but the operator is aware of this situation, and stated that it would be addressed as early as possible in 2002. If this condition exists during the summer 2002 inspection, it will be considered a problem to correct. Revegetation of many parts of the permit area has been successful. There were no weeds observed