INSPEC39519 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

III. COMMENTS -COMPLIANCE Below are comments on the inspection. The comments include discussion of observations made during the inspection. Comments also describe any enforcement actions taken during the inspection and the facts or evidence supporting the enforcement action. was also noted that some subsoil material was lying on the refuse ramp at the east edge toe of the ramp. Mr. Barbe contacted the main office and requested that Avery and Johnston join us for further discussion of the situation. Berry requested that Barbe have the dozer use the rear tooth to excavate a trench at a location approximately 15 feet east of the refuse ramp toe. Mr. Barbe was extremely cooperative, and a trench was cut. The dozer than made a second pass with the blade, at which time it was verified that subsoil existed at the adjacent location to a depth of about two feet. Based on this observation, Berry requested that the refuse ramp be pushed back to the south to ascertain whether subsoil or topsoil had been buried. This activity occurred at about the same time that Johnston and Avery arrived at the location. Mr. Barbe continued to facilitate the use of the dozer to determine whether soil materials were buried. Following the requested excavation, it was determined that subsoil material, previously designated to be salvaged, had been buried by the refuse ramp development. The area was paced by Berry, and it was determined that the buried area was approximately 27 feet by 30 feet in area, and that subsoil existed in this area to a depth of about two feet. Mr. Berry asked both Mr. Barbe and Mr. Avery if they agreed with these measurements, and both Barbe and Avery agreed. It was further agreed that the dozer operator would be instructed to salvage and separate, to the extent possible, all subsoil in the area. This activity began, and .the inspection proceeded to the east flank of the refuse pile. The area on the east flank where the dozer had been previously stuck was examined. Mr. Avery explained that a dozer had indeed encountered wet conditions, and that the dozer became stuck in the saturated substrate. Mr. Avery indicated that it was necessary to use additional equipment to free the stuck dozer. It was noted that at the time of the inspection, surface water was emanating from the area where the dozer had been mired. It was observed and agreed by Berry and Avery that the incident had resulted in the mixing of subsoil and refuse, and that the substrate was wet at the time of the incident. The inspection proceeded back to the refuse ramp area to assess the mitigation efforts. The dozer had separated some subsoil from refuse, and a pile had been created to the north of the ramp area.