Laserfiche WebLink
III. COMMENTS -COMPLIANCE <br />Below are comments on the inspection. The comments include discussion of observations made <br />during the inspection. Comments also describe any enforcement actions taken during the <br />inspection and the facts or evidence supporting the enforcement action. <br />extreme westernmost part of the minesite. The silt fence needs maintenance to remove the topsoil <br />that has accumulated behind the silt fence. The west collection ditch at the site also could use <br />some maintenance when the area dries up. <br />Sedimentation Ponds <br />Several ponds were discharging due to recent spring rains, mine water pumpage and seeps or <br />springs. There were trickle discharges at the Ute and Elk ponds, some of which were due to <br />seeps. The East Pyeatt ponds nos. 1, 2 and 3 were discharging. The dischazge at the NPDES <br />point, East Pyeatt no. 3, was 80 to 100 GPM and was clear. The West Buzzard ponds nos. 1, 2 <br />and 3 were also discharging. At no. 3, the discharge was 15 [0 20 GPM and was also clear. The <br />No Name ponds nos. 2, 4 and 5 were discharging at about 80 GPM and was cleaz at the NPDES <br />point. There was a discharge of 50 GPM at the Johnson ponds nos. 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10. At the <br />NPDES point, the dischazge was clear. The sewage pond had a discharge into No Name pond no. <br />S. <br />West Pyeatt ponds nos. I and 2 were close to discharging. There was a fair amount of water in <br />Deer, Middle Pyeatt no. 1 and Coyote. There was only a little water in Oak no. 2, Grouse no. 2 <br />Sage no. 1 and Impoundment H. There was no water in Oak no. I, Grouse no. 1, Sage no. 2, <br />Middle Pyeatt nos. 2 and 3, East Buzzard nos. 1 and 2 and the Far East Buzzard pond. <br />The operator is planning on sediment cleanout of the East Pyeatt no. 1 pond. Sediment cleanout <br />level markers need to be replaced at Eas[ Pyeatt nos. 1 and 2, Wes[ Buzzard no. 1, No Name nos. <br />4 and 5 and Johnson no. 6. <br />All of the pond embankments appeared to be stable. Spillways were functional and showed no <br />erosion problems. All of the flumes at the NPDES sites were measured for levelness and were <br />correct. <br />At the Elk pond, it appears that water from the main drainage channel could overtop the west <br />collection ditch, since the drainage channel runs into the collection ditch at a 90 degree angle. <br />Either the main drainage channel leading into the west side collection ditch needs to be re- <br />directed, or the west collection ditch needs to be built up at the point where it receives runoff <br />from the main channel, so that there is no overtopping. The drainage channel leading into the <br />2 <br />