Laserfiche WebLink
PERMIT #: M-1995-034 <br />INSPECTOR'S INITIALS: RCO <br />INSPECTION DATE: August 11, 2010 <br />OBSERVATIONS <br />This was a monitoring inspection to verify that the site is being operated according to its approved plan, and to check to <br />see if any successful reclamation has occurred. The operator was notified but was not present for the inspection. <br />(BG) Backfilling and Grading: <br />Narrative: The operation was revised to allow some vertical highwalls. The site currently does contain vertical highwalls <br />in several areas of the pit, but the operator must ensure that any inactive highwalls are graded down to a stable 3:1 <br />gradient. Also, vertical highwalls should not encroach too close to the permit boundary to allow for slope reduction by <br />dozing material down. For example, for 20-foot high walls, allowing maneuvering room, the boundary setback should be <br />at least 80 feet. See also notes under "Signs and Markers." <br />(FN) Financial Warranty: <br />Narrative: The bond is $24,002. This amount was calculated at the time of 112 permit conversion. It is time for the bond <br />to be recalculated again; the new figures will be sent to the operator for review. <br />(HB) Hydrologic Balance: <br />Narrative: There was a small pond on the north edge of the pit floor, measuring 30 ft x 100 ft, with a pile of clay muck <br />apparently taken from the hole. This has existed for some time, as cattails are well established there. Exposure of <br />groundwater is not an approved in the permit, and the hole must be backfilled. See the PB (problem) description, page 1. <br />(MP) Gen. Compliance With Mine Plan: <br />Narrative: It has been noted in the past that the site has been operated in an orderly fashion. It appeared during the <br />current inspection that the contract operator currently active in the pit is not as careful. There are several separate areas of <br />current disturbance activity, such as N of the access road ramp, S of the access road ramp, and at the E end of the pit. The <br />types of actities noted are approved under the plan, but is not clear if the amounts of activities are beyond what is <br />currently approved. This is not a problem, but the operator must ensure that all areas of disturbance are clearly included <br />in the next annual report. <br />(RV) Revegetation: <br />Narrative: Some areas of the pit floor that have been graded and will not be redisturbed have been seeded, but no <br />vegetation is evident yet. Also noted was an abundance of halo eg ton across other parts of the floor of the pit. This salt- <br />tolerant plant is not part of the reclamation plan, and though it is not a noxious weed, the operator should ensure that it is <br />brought undercontrol and does not become established. If different salt-tolerant species than the ones in the current <br />reclamation plan are needed in order to establish good vegetation, please contact the local NRCS office for current <br />recommendations. Using a different seed mix will require a technical revision to the permit. <br />(SM) Signs and Markers: <br />Narrative: All necessary markers and the permit ID sign asre in place. All activity is within the permit boundaries. The <br />operator should note that the stripped topsoil along the western boundary is immediately adjacent to the boundary. <br />Handling that topsoil cannot be done by dozer since there is no room outside the windrow; it will have to be pulled down <br />by excavator, after the slope gradient reduced by backfilling the slope from below. This should be done soon, since this <br />more expensive method of slope reclamation may be beyond the bonded tasks. <br />(TS) Topsoil: <br />Narrative: The need to salvage topsoil was revised during one of the past revisions. It is not clear if the permit requires <br />topsoil to be salvaged or if the subsoil is the growth medium that will be used for reclamation. If topsoil is to be salvaged, <br />it would explain the stripped berm along the W boundary (described under "signs and markers" above). However, if <br />required to be salvaged, it was observed that it is being wasted along the E pit wall, where berms of previously stripped <br />topsoil are sloughing into the pit. The operator must address this question, and send a response to this office. <br />Page 2 of 3