INSPEC43941

• Permit No: M1986104
• IBM Index Class Name: Inspection
• Doc Name: MINERALS PROGRAM INSPECTION REPORT
• Inspection Date: 11/16/1998
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

,. • (Page 3) •
MINE ID # OR PROSPECTING ID # M-86-104
INSPECTION DATE 11-16-98 INSPECTOR'S INITIALS ACS
1. The y. minus pile of crushed gravel where the herbicide was initially dumped is no longer present.
This material has all been screened to manufacture 'h inch minus road base to feed the asphalt plant
and byproduct '/. inch rock. The former location of the '/. inch minus pile may have been contaminated
if herbicide seeped into the ground, and this potential must be investigated. B and B reports that
Dames and Moore collected a soil sample from this location.
2. The potentially contaminated h inch road base stockpile has been marked off using caution tape and
silt fence. This stockpile is located south of and within approximately 40 feet of the Eagle River.
B and H reports that Dames and Moore used a vapor sensing device to identify areas of diesel
contamination in the pile and collected characterization samples from this pile.
3. The asphalt plant was not operating at the time of this inspection. The inactive plant was
inspected and no problems were noted. It was observed that B and B burns waste oil in the hot
plant. This waste oil is purchased from a waste oil provider and is generated from B and B's own
equipment. The use of waste oil as a fuel for the plant is approved in B and B's air emission
permit.
4. The wash ponds were inspected. There are two ponds, both of which are asphalt lined. All wash
water is recirculated with no discharge to the Eagle River. The ponds were dry at the time of this
inspection, and miscellaneous drums were temporarily stored on pallets in one of the ponds. Drum
storage will be discussed further below. B and B reports that Dames and Moore collected a silt
sample from the wash ponds because some of the potentially contaminated road base may have been
washed.
5. Skillman Gulch runs from south to north through the center of the permit area and empties into the
Eagle River. A road crossing has been constructed through the gulch to connect the east and west
permit areas. The gulch is passed through the road-crossing fill in a culvert. The gulch was dry
at the time of this inspection, and it was observed thaC a substantial amount of sediment was
deposited in the gulch. It is believed that most of the sediment is transported into the site and
is caused by upgradient erosion. However, a lack of storm water controls along the gulch as it
passes through the Montgomery Pit is very likely allowing silt-laden runoff from disturbed areas
to enter the gulch and subsequently the Eagle River. Storm water controls in the form of "Best
Management Practices" must be installed to prevent untreated runoff from disturbed areas from
entering the gulch. See problem PB-1 on [he last page of this report.
6. The fuel tanks located on the west part of the permit area were inspected. These tanks are located
in lined and bermed containment basins. It was observed that the liner had pulled out of its
anchoring at one of the fuel tanks. This liner will require repair. It was also observed that the
lined basins were holding several inches of water, reducing the containment volume available to
contain fuel spills or leaks. It was agreed that B and B would conduct an assessment of the
secondary containment basins at the fuel tanks, make any needed repairs, determine the capacity of
each basin compared to the capacity of the tanks, and institute a basin clean out plan and
triggering level for when water accumulates Co the point that containment would be lost in the event
of a tank or valve rupture. The plan provided should also specify the disposal method for any fluid
periodically removed from the containment basins. See problem PB-2 on the last page of this report.
The following list of corrective actions must be implemented to satisfactorily address the loss of
containment of herbicide thar_ occurred ac the Montgomery Pit. See problem PB-3 on the last page of this
report.
1. Provide the Division with a description of and the results from the characterization-sampling
program that was undertaken to assess the degree and extent of herbicide contamination at the site.
This initial submittal must include an evaluation of the potential decomposition producCS of the
herbicide relating to the heating and mixing with asphalt that occurred when contaminated road base
was run through the hot plant. It is the Division's understanding that samples were collected from
the asphalt plant bag house to facilitate this evaluation. The initial submittal must also include
a plan for additional sampling and evaluation thae may be required to define the limits of the
contaminated areas. The plan for definition of the limits of contamination will be subject to