INSPEC36677 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• (Page 21 • MINE ID aY OR PROSPECTING ID # M-1977-140 INSPECTION DATE 4/20/01 INSPECTOR'S INITIALS RCO OBSERVATIONS This inspection was performed by the Division as part of its monitoring of Construction Materials 112 permits and as a pre- operation inspection of an area that is to be added to the permitted area under Amendment AM-01. The operator was contacted about the inspection and a time was arranged to meet at the site. The operator named on page one was present throughout the inspection. Prior to inspecting the site, time was spent discussing the AM-01 application adequacy issues in the operator's office. The mine identification sign and some of the affected area boundary markers were observed, in compliance with Rule 3.1.12. No significant infestations of noxious or other problematic weeds were noted on site during this inspection. The reclamation cost estimate was not recalculated as part of this inspection. The current estimate was recalculated less than three years ago and the operation is in compliance with the approved mine plan and reclamation plan. While the current financial warranty is believed to be adequate to reclaim the site per the currently plan, there is an amendment which is presently being reviewed which will add acreage to the permit. The reclamation costs will be revised as part of the final amendment review. 1. The new area to be added through this amendment IAM-011 was inspected. It is level irrigated land located directly west of the pond in the existing permitted area. The permittee is the landowner of the entire area included in this amendment as well as the land surrounding the amended area. A small earthen ditch which enters the existing pond at its NW corner reveals the upper soil layers to contain about 12 inches of topsoil, changing abruptly to a gravelly layer. The amended area is planned to contain a 10-acre pond, which will require a land area of at least 12 acres, so that the perimeter roads and sloped banks will also be within the permitted area boundary. The +/- 12 acre area will adjoin the existing permit area, though the two ponds will not adjoin. Mining will be preceded by stripping of topsoil, and salvaging enough of it to be used for later reclamation on the pond banks. 2. The existing pond was inspected. Bank sloping was being carried out on the west end of the pond during the inspection, and was evidently performed recently on the north bank and portions of the south bank. The grading has created gentle slopes of 3:1 to 5:1. Some portions of the banks have existed for many years and contain willow thickets. In some of these ticket areas, the banks are slightly steeper than 3:1, however, it would not seem productive to disturb those wooded areas simply to grade the banks. The operator stated that swimming is not one of the proposed uses of the final pond. Some of the banks exhibited the replaced topsoil. For the most part it seems that a mixed soil-gravel medium is being used to plate the banks and other areas. If it supports the revegetation adequately there will be no problem. Some of the stripped topsoil is being used in products which are exported from the site. The operator indicated several areas which were recently seeded, and the newly emerged grass shoots. Revegetation success will be monitored. Until these areas are adequately vegetated, the operator should ensure that sufficient topsoil resources are salvaged to maximize vegetative success. At this time, there is no problem. The areas affected by the current operation were compared to the areas delineated on the permit area maps. There was a large discrepancy identified, which is located in the area occupied by the northern portion of the existing pond. The pond and its access road are located farther north than what the maps in the file show as being approved for disturbance. The affected area now extends approximately 9 acres beyond the existing approved permit boundary (according to the maps in the Division's recordsl. However, in 1996 the Division approved a technical revision (TR-011 which, though it did not fomally expand the permitted acreage, did include a sketch map from the operator showing this larger permitted area boundary. (The map was submitted to satisfy an adequacy question by the Division, but appears to have been prepared by the operator for seeking approval from the State Engineer's Office for a larger pond surface.) Normally an occurrence of mining disturbance outside the