Laserfiche WebLink
III. COMMENTS -COMPLIANCE <br />Below are comments on the inspection. The comments include discussion of observations <br />made during the inspection. Comments in Section IV describe any enforcement actions <br />taken during the inspection and the facts or evidence supporting the enforcement action <br />Photograph 260), the alternate drain support beam (see <br />Photograph 260), me mind drainage piping and riffle half- <br />pipe, the Long Pond (see Photograph 259 above), <br />Treatment Ponds T-1 and T-2, Sedimenfatron Pond P-9, <br />discharge piping, and the clear-water transmission ditch D- <br />12and upper Culver section (see Photograph 258) were <br />inspected. All of these features were in good repair, less <br />the bridge. This bridge, as is the Stoney Ridge Fon Shaft <br />Bridge, is permitted to be in disrepair, satisfactory only for <br />foot traffic to cross for inspections. <br />RECLAMATIpN SUCCESS Reclamation has been successr . <br />at the mine and loadout site. Examples of such successh, ~:; ~ tip.' ' + ~ r+• <br />reclamation are presented here. Picture 257 is of the %~; - ~" tom' F; : ` . <br />reclaimed mine waste disposal area ai the mine site. ' '- ' <br />reclaimed areas appeared to be stable. No erosion: ~~ <br />features were noted. Picture 262 is of the steep escarl , <br />between the upper and middle terraces of the Roar.' ,; <br />Fork River valley and the restored Kaiser-Sievers irrigation <br />ditch, In the reclaimed convey corridor at the loadout sate ~ ' <br />This area and ditch appeared to be stable. No erosional <br />features were noted. Picture 263 Is of the permanent two-'~ : : • _' :a ; :~ r! ss rr ~ n ; ,I~ <br />terraco. No deficiencies were noted in this area of reclama~ ~r, <br />- . ~ ._"'~ <br />~~ - <br />C-81-025, Page ~ of L~ Popes, rdatei ~ wo3 (in Ltialsi -~..~~ <br />