INSPEC30505 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• (Page 21 MINE ID X OR PROSPECTING ID rY M-83-142 INSPECTION DATE Ot/30r97 ~ INSPECTOR'S INITIALS RCO OBSERVATIONS This was a partial inspection performed by the Division as part of its monitoring of 11 2 permits. The operator was contacted about this inspection and was present for it. There was no snow cover on the site. There is a bond of S 17,000 for this site. Based on the approved plan of mining and reclamation. plus the present condition of the area, a nev+ reclamation cost estimate v+ill be calculated, and the figures sent to the operator. The total cost to reclaim the disturbance is probably well under the present bond amount. The required permit ID sign was posted at the gate located at the end of fife access road (intersection of 32 Road and B Roadl. The entire permit boundary is adequately markrd by a field fence. The permit area encompasses three distinct portions which are defined as the affected area; the permit area also includes land which will not be affected. The entire southern edge of the permit area is to be used during and after mining as a road corridor. Some of this corridor has received fill to improve the gradient of the road, some of the length of the road has been asphalt paved, and the scales, scalehouse and office are installed on the north edge of the road at the bottom of the hill. This scale area is one of the separate affected areas. The road will remain paved after reclamation, but the scales, concrete footers and scalehouse will be removed. There is a linear butte-type hill in the central portion of the permit area, t•+hich is one of the areas to be excavated. There is presently no mining disturbance there which must be reclaimed. Future operations may progress into that portion, and the hilltop will be mined dov+n to a lower level. The hilltop in the southeast corner is the location of most of :he excavation activity in the permit. The adjacent, oft-permit {and to the south and east is not excavated, and shows that the depth of the permitted pit is approximately 1 5 feet. Material has been mined down to the underlying shale level. The access road leads directly into the pit, with no ramp needed. Excavation has produced a pit floor which slopes at about S% to the west; the pit is about 2 acres or less. Excavation will probably not proceed deeper, and because it is confined to the Y~illtop and has reached the limits of the level hilltop, there is not a significant amount of material left to mine. There is a berm around the north and west perimeter of the pit, about 3 to 6 feet high, which was produced by pulling back material with an excavator, and protects the areas doty nslope from rolling material. Downslope areas are still in the permit area. The side slopes on the east and north have been excavated to very near the perimeter fence and stand at a 1 :1 slope. There is not sufficient space above the slope, within the boundary, to push material down to attain the gradient specified in the reclamation plan 13:11. The operator has, however, imported a significant amount of soil material to use as backfill against the south sideslope. It appears that there may be sufficient material present to backfill and revegetate. The soil appears clean and well probably be of a quality to be able to seed directly into it. The operator should note that, in the future, if materials generated ofisite are to be imported for backfill as part of reclamation activities, a notice is to be submitted to the Division before actual importation begins. Please refer to Construction t,4aterials Rule 3.1 .519) as a guide to tl-,e information to be included in such notice. In this case, though the importation has already occu«ed, it will not be regarded as a problem. The Division does request, however, that the operator supply the information required for such a notice, for the material involved in this backfill of the south v+all. The east edge of the pit will actually daylight into an adjoining permit area (Ford Gravel Pit, File No. M-96-0911 that this operator has recently applied for. Excavation in the Ford Pit will commence from the common boundary line and proceed eastward into the ne~v pit, effectively eliminating the steep highwall completely. If that adjoining pit permit is not approved or its excavation does not commence this season, the operator will have to backfill the east slope too. Because of the situa[ion explained herein, these steep slopes close to the permit boundary are not a problem because they will not remain as 1 :1 through this season. This pit floor will probably be affected well into the future, or as long as the Ford Pit floor is not of sufficient size to accomodate porcessing equipment and stockpiling. After the pit area is inactiviated, the issue of topso~ling rt must be faced. The soil in the area is thin, and was gone due to pre-law activity here before this operator took over the permit. There may be topsoil resources available v+ithin the permit (east of the scale areal or it might be imported. IThe operator's thoughts on this will be welcomed.) The issue of topsoil is not regarded as a problem in this report. There vas one problem noted during the inspection, which falls under the topics of "acid or toxic materials" and "hydrologic balance". There was apparently a recent release of waste oil, possibly mixed with diesel, on the eastern portion of the pit floor. The floor, as mentioned above, is a tight shale clay material, and was lrezen on the day of the inspection. There was an extensive area of minor oil drippage, very surlicial, and a couple areas of pudding. One such area actually had standing oil, in a shallow puddle with about a 20 sq ft surface. The tight frozen ground may have prevented the spill from penetrating very deeply.