INSPEC11800 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Minesite Inspection Narrative Page 2 of Surface and groundwater monitoring data through 1994 was on file. NPDES discharge monitoring reports for the two ponds were on file. Sediment ponds had last been inspected on January 11, 1995. A mine identification sign was in place on the entrance road where the permit boundary began. Perimeter markers were evident on the site but additional markers could be used above where coal had been mined to better delineate the area. No enforcement action is warranted as markers are present but clearer delineation is needed because of the adjacent gravel operation. Topsoil stockpile #8 did not have an identification sign on it as the inspection began. One was placed on the pile during the inspection so no enforcement action is required. All stockpiles were suitably marked at the completion of the inspection. The berm around stockpile Jt8 needed to be improved on the southwest side of the pile. This berm had not breached and appeared to have worked adequately during the past winter but should be upgraded. Vegetation on all stockpiles appeared to be adequate. Soils from the gravel mining operation has been stored on the joint use pad this material was identified by a topsoil sign. Both sediment ponds for the coal mine appeared stable. Pond #1 contained onl y a small amount of water and no evidence of recent discharge was noted. Pond #2 was discharging during the inspection. Discharge appeared to be between 5 and 10 gallons per minute. Quality of this discharge was acceptable. There has been erosion on the slopes above pond 2 and according to Harry Ranney the company was going to attempt repairs once the ground had dried out. A portion of this erosion is below the drainage ditch routing runoff to the pond. If repairs are not made further cutting may occur and could result in failure of the ditch so this work should be completed as quickly as possible. Erosion at this time is not to the point where enforcement action is required, however without repairs this will develop into a situation where enforcement action is required. The upper portion of the drainage control ditch along the access road had sediment buildup in it and needed cleaning. Measurements were taken along the upper section and the required 2 foot sizing was not maintained. This ditch was cleaned during the inspection and as no evidence of the ditch not functioning was identified no enforcement action is warranted.