Laserfiche WebLink
(Page 2) <br />MINE ID # OR PROSPECTING ID # M-1977-227 <br />INSPECTION DATE 10/7/08 <br />OBSERVATIONS <br />INSPECTOR'S INITIALS RCO <br />This inspection was performed by the Division as part of its monitoring of Construction Materials 112c permits. The inspection <br />was scheduled in coordination with the operator. The operator's representative named on page one was present during the <br />inspection. Also present during the inspection were the operator's reclamation equipment operator Bob Fratti and revegetation <br />expert Ingrid Bamberg. <br />The site has been in final reclamation for several years, with significant earthwork actively carried out during 2007 and 2008. <br />The site consists of a large central pit and several smaller pits, surrounded by natural weathered cinder and processed/reject <br />cinder, and stripped overburden/soil. While much of the cinder is loose and in a wide range of sizes, the pits also contain <br />several areas of solid outcrops. The loose material can be graded and shaped, but the outcrops will remain in place as part of <br />final reclamation. <br />The site still contained the concrete pad and walls that formerly were the product bins. Under the existing reclamation plan this <br />concrete structure will be fractured and buried in place or demolished and moved for burial on the site. The overhead <br />powerline still remaining onsite is the property of the local electric utility, and the operator is not liable for its removal. The site <br />can be reclaimed with the existing road left to remain. <br />There were noxious weeds observed at the Division's last inspection (10/18/05), consisting of a patch of Canada thistle and a <br />patch of Russian knapweed. In response to the problem noted for the noxious weeds, the operator submitted a written weed <br />control plan in January 2006. The plan has apparently been followed, since the knapweed has been eliminated and the thistle <br />patch has been reduced in size. However, the weed plan was never formally made part of the permit through a technical <br />revision, though it still needs to be. <br />The site has been regraded to partially backfill the main pit and reduce many of the piles of product and reject material, plus <br />eliminate some of the steep areas. The earthwork included spreading piles of overburden, which had been tested to determine <br />its suitability as a growth medium. That earthwork was left intentionally rough to provide a surface that offered places for the <br />seed and moisture to collect. The newly-graded surfaces are very dry and it is hoped that the winter season will bring suff icient <br />moisture to attain a good stand of vegetation. The operator noted that more extensive backfilling of the main pit was not <br />carried out due to an owl's nest in a crevasse. The degree of backfilling is adequate and is not expected to be unstable, but the <br />area should be monitored. <br />There was a 20-foot zircon trailer parked on the concrete slab, which was being used to store drums of seed that had been <br />collected locally in 2006. The operator is planning to seed the disturbed areas with this seed this fall. The seed species include <br />rabbitbrush, saltbush, broom snakeweed, blue grama and winterfat, which are all species that thrive in this area. The site <br />would be broadcast seeded by hand, due to the irregular terrain and rocky soil. The operator stated that the seeded areas <br />would not be dragged afterward, so it is hoped that the broadcast seed will find good soil contact sufficient for satisfactory <br />germination. <br />The final grading and revegetation plans were also items that were discussed during the Division's 2005 inspection, and which <br />were to be the basis of a technical revision that was to be submitted to revise the reclamation plan. This technical revision has <br />not been provided, though it should have been. <br />At this time, there are two reclamation-related items that have been discussed and are being implemented, but which have not <br />been formally made part of the permit through technical revision(s). Since the Division has been part of the discussions and is <br />in agreement with the types of work being performed, these two aspects of the reclamation are not being noted as a problem in <br />this report. However, the Division has not given these items a full review, nor has the permit been revised to include them. The <br />operator must provide the updated grading and seeding plans, plus the final weed control plan, as a technical revision. (All <br />these items may be included in the same technical revision.) The technical revision fee of $216 must accompany the submittal. <br />The bond is currently $397,142, which is very adequate to complete the outstanding reclamation under the current approved <br />plan. Upon approval of any technical revision the Division will recalculate the bond needed. The operator is reminded that the <br />bond amount or the permitted area may be reduced if certain reclamation tasks are finished or areas are fully reclaimed. <br />(Please refer to Construction Materials Rule 4.14 and 4.17 for the procedure to follow.) <br />The operator is further reminded that all reclamation or weed control activities that are carried out or considered should be <br />included in the annual reports.