INSPEC36172

• Permit No: M1980022
• IBM Index Class Name: Inspection
• Doc Name: DMG MINERALS PROGRAM INSPECTION REPORT
• Inspection Date: 9/11/1997
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

(Page 2) •
MINE ID # OR PROSPECTING ID # M-80-022
INSPECTION DATE 09/11(97
INSPECTOR'S INITIALS RCO
This was a monitoring inspection of a 112 permit performed by the Division. The operator was
contacted about the inspection and a time was arranged to meet at the site. The operator was
present throughout the inspection.
The site was identified by a sign posted at the entrance, and bounf=daries were marked by
continuous fenceline surrounding the entire permit area.
There is a $12,500 financial warranty for this permit. It has not been recalculated in
several years. Though it is not felt to be adequate to perform all the outstanding
reclamation of the site as it currently exists, this topic is not noted as a problem at this
time. The bond will be recalculated in the near future, and the figures sent to the operator
for review, prior to any required increase. The operator stated that a significant amount
of reclamation-related activity will occur during this winter, which will act to decrease the
reclamation liabilityfrom what currently exists. If the operator wishes to influence the
bond calculation, these reclamation activities should be performed in a timely manner and
fully reported to the Division.
There are several structures on the permit area, including a mobile/modular office unit
(housing the company's offices), a cinder block shop building with concrete floor, a fuel
station consisting of above-ground fuel tanks and concrete containment structure, and
numerous overhead powerpoles. Other features include small areas of asphalt pavement,
sections of buried pipeline associated with portable pumps, concrete footers and pad
associated with a past asphalt batching plant fall superstructures are removed), a small
earth-filled loadout, numerous concrete jersey barriers, plus the usual assortment of parts
and equipment. The operator stated that these items (structures and all) will be removed
£rom the site this fall and winter.
The mining has produced a large pond. It extends nearly to the western and southern edges
of the permit. The northern and eastern sides of the pond will not be fully mined to the
edge of the permit. The pond margins there will include a peninsula. Many of the existing
pond banks exhibit slopes which are either not topaoiled or are steeper than the 3:1 gradient
specified in the approved reclamation plan. The plan states that all areas above water will
be graded no steeper than 3:1, topsoiled with 6 to 12 inches of topsoil, and seeded according
to the approved mix. The site does not have a phased reclamation plan (though there are many
areas which appear adequately reclaimed). Obviously, the more pond surface produced, the
less acreage there will be to reclaim_ Any current bond calculation must, however, be
sufficient to cover the present surface area, not a smaller surface area in the future.
There is no topsoil stockpile on the site. Topsoil needs for upcoming reclamation will come,
according to the operator, from areas which were not stripped prior to placement of
structures and product stockpiles. There was extensive pre-law disturbance at this site.
The operator is encouraged to endeavor to salvage as much topsoil as possible from areas
which will be affected by mining (or uncovered during surface feature removal) for use in
reclamation.
The operator stated that a different configuration of the peninsula which will remain after
mining is now desired. If that involves mining significantly more land area than approved
before, that change may have to be documented through a technical revision. That holds true
for other changes discussed, such as a recreational beach at the west edge (sand vs
revegetation, slope gradient, etc. must be addressed), other existing slopes which are stable
and vegetated (though they may be steeper than 3:1), etc.