Laserfiche WebLink
PERMIT #: M- 1985 -026 <br />INSPECTOR'S INITIALS: PSH <br />INSPECTION DATE: September 26, 2012 <br />Problem — Final shoreline grading <br />The reclaimed lake slopes are steeper than the required 3H:1V slopes from 5 feet above to 10 feet below the <br />expected water line as required by Rule 3.1.5(7) and as per the approved Reclamation Plan for the site in Pond <br />1 and Pond 3. The north shoreline of Pond 1 appeared to be between 1H:1V to 2H:1V. A boat dock has been <br />built along the steep shoreline. The Division was not able to determine if the shoreline was re- graded to <br />facilitate the dock or was never in compliance with the reclamation plan. The shoreline along the north and <br />west sides of Pond 3 appeared to be 2H:1V. As cited as a problem on page 1, the Operator must demonstrate <br />the slopes are in compliance with the approved reclamation plan or re -grade the out of compliance lake <br />shoreline slopes to the required horizontal to vertical ratio. <br />Problem — Reclamation Plan <br />Phase 1 —The Phase 1 portion of the site was not accessible during the inspection. Therefore, the status of <br />reclamation in the phase could not be accessed by the Division. Based on the approved mine plan for the <br />phase, 5 acres were planned to be disturbed in the phase and a settling pond was located in the southern end <br />of the phase. <br />Phase 2 — This phase consists of 3 ponds surrounded by pastureland on the west and south sides and a <br />residential development on the north and west sides. Pond 1 (14 acres) and Pond 3 (3 acres) are unlined <br />groundwater lakes. Pond 2 (2.4 acres) is a clay lined pond. The Division does not have evidence the liner for <br />Pond 2 has been approved by the Office of the State Engineer. This proof will need to be submitted by the <br />Operator prior to any future release request consideration by the Division. The residential development has <br />constructed boat docks within the permit boundary. The construction of the docks is not approved in the <br />current reclamation plan. As cited as a problem on page 1, the Operator must update the reclamation plan to <br />include these structures into the plan. <br />It appears the northeast section of the permit area located east of the access road has been included in a lot <br />within the subdivision. The lot is currently undeveloped, but a sale sign was posted during the inspection. <br />Construction of a house in this section of the permit boundary is not approved in the current reclamation plan. <br />As cited as a problem on page 1, the Operator must update the reclamation plan to include any development <br />in the area. <br />Topsoil —the upland area between Pond 1 and 3 was gravelly and was not covered by six inches of topsoil as <br />required by the reclamation plan. A small stockpile of possibly topsoil material was observed in the northeast <br />corner of this area. The Operator must demonstrate this stockpile is adequate re- topsoil this area. If the <br />volume of topsoil is not adequate the Operator must import enough suitable topsoil to reclaim the area. <br />Revegetation — the vegetation along the shorelines of the three ponds and upland areas was sparse. Annual <br />weeds including cheat grass and kochia were observed during the inspection. Evidence of the grazing on the <br />upland areas of Phase 2 was observed during the inspection. A double -wire electric fence has been installed <br />along the west side of the interior access road and the ground appeared to have been grazed recently. Since <br />the permit has not been released by the Division, the Operator must reseed the area with the approved seed <br />mixture and prevent the area from being grazed until the permit is released by the Division. <br />Debris and equipment — construction equipment and debris was observed along the fence line south of Pond <br />3. The debris must be removed by the Operator prior to any future release request consideration by the <br />Division. <br />Page3of <br />