INSPEC16400 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

'- ~ III. Comments - Compliance C~ Below are comments on the inspection. The comments include discussion of observations made during the inspection. Comments also describe any enforcement actions taken during the inspection and the facts or evidence supporting the enforcement action. found to be in compliance with the regulations. Operator will supply Division with "as built" of Prospect Pond at earliest opportunity (Pond was surveyed by independent contractorl. 1:1.5 sideslopes need to be monitoreu by operator for stability during routine pond inspections. the Prospect Pond Ditch was inspected for slope (3-d%), inclination and ditch depth (2 feet). The ditch was walked in critical areas to check for topsoil depths and the ability of Lhe ditch to retain expected flows without overtopping. Topsoil along ditch was pushed to outer edge of ditch and seeded as approved in the permit. Topsoil depths along portions of the ditch inspected averaged 12 to ld inches in draws and along occasional slopes wrth northern exposures and 0 to 8 inches (with a good deal of rock) along most of the ditch. In the Division's opinion, most of the area disturbed did not contain recoverable topsoil. 1'ortron uf' ditch below Lhe Section 16 rill and other critical turns along the ditch need to be reviewed aad closely monitored by operator Lo insure that peak flows will not overtop this new ditch in the future. Operator should submit "as built" for ditch to the Division at the earliest opportunity along with updated version of Map 12 showing location of ditch and small area exemption in Section 11. All ditches were found to be intact and functional. the inlet to Stoker Pond was found to contiuuc co be downcutting despite attempts by operator to remedy situation (additional road runoff has been routed to Stoker Pond for last couple of years along main ditch). A similar situation is occurring alo~rg a portion of the ditch from the truck wash to the Shop Pond. Necause of this apparent instability and failure of• past eftorts to remedy these situations, the Division is requrring a revision with desrgns for stable channels for these two areas. The Division also requires a small area exemption justification f'or the main office area. All surface and ground water monitoring sites (including alluvial and fill wells) were inspected and monitoring procedures noted. The new Upper Goodspring well has been monitored concurrently with the old tipper Goodsprrng well for at least two quarters. Monitoring of the new Upper Goodsprrng surface water monitoring site must begin by the end of Octo~er The old Upper Goodspring site was recently inundated by beaver, as has been the case at the Lower Goodspring surface water site for some time. A discussion took place as to how to mitigate this. the operator should make some measurement of flow when this occurs. The continuous flow monitoring device at the Taylor Greek surface water monitoring site has been removed by the L.S. Geological Service.