Laserfiche WebLink
III. COtMII:NTS - COI~LLANCE <br />Below are comments on the inspection. The comments include discussion of <br />observations made during the inspection. Comments also describe any enforcement <br />actions taken during the inspection and the facts or evidence supporting the <br />enforcement action. <br />This was a complete inspection. Tom Kaldenbach represented CDMG and Karl <br />Koehler represented the operator. <br />The ground was dry and the weather was warm. Draglines were in operation in D <br />pit (NO Name drainage) and F pit(East Pyeatt drainage). The dragline in R-E <br />pit(Middle Flume drainage)was temporarily shutdown. <br />AVAILABILITY OF RECORDS <br />The records checklist is attached. All required records were available in <br />Trapper's office. <br />SIGNS AND MARKERS <br />Mine i.d. and blasting warning signs were properly displayed at public entrances <br />to the permit area. Permit boundary markers and topsoil markers were displayed <br />at the numerous locations inspected. <br />ROADS <br />The surfaces of haul roads, access roads, and light duty roads were in good <br />condition. <br />Haul road embankments and cut-slopes showed minimal erosion. Ditches next to <br />roads appeared to have design capacity. <br />HYDROLOGIC BALANCE <br />Ditches and Culverts - The perimeter ditches on the south side of Trapper in Ute <br />Gulch appeared in good condition. <br />No maintenance problems were found with culverts. Sediment has been mucked from <br />several culverts recently. <br />Pond inspection - Ponds are summarized in Table 1. <br />Pond discharges and conditions - The operator's representative reported that 0.2 <br />inch of rain fell over the previous weekend. The only NPDES points F,+tle~p~~~y~(;~ra, <br />discharge was occurring were 002 (No Name) aiTd East Pyeatt (011 me is <br />fed by the No Name spoil spring. The East Pyeatt discharge was all from the TIS <br />East Pyeatt spring, a probable natural spring. <br />All pond inslopes and embankments appeared stable and were not Bullied. Where <br />visible, each pond appears to have at least 60~ of its capacity available for <br />sediment storage, consistent with the permit application. Sediment was being <br />removed from East Pyeatt #1 pond. Flumes were in good condition in all <br />drainages. <br />Page 3 <br />