INSPEC22060 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

111. COMMENTS -COMPLIANCE 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. In my opinion, the facts indicate that a violation occurred, but based on the sample results it appears that discharge standazds were not exceeded. Enduonmental damage would appear to have been negligible. It is not known how long the pipe may have been leaking, but ScottWans[edt indicated that he had inspected the pond approximately one week previously, and that there was no discharge at that time. Once the problem was observed, the operator quickly mobilized several workers to initiate repairs, and the leak had been sealed and discharge ceased within approximately 3 % hows of the initial observation. Other Hydrologic Balance Observations • Pond RP-2/3 center cell contained only a shallow pool of water, but both the east and west inlet cells of the pond were almost full of mwky water. A substantial delta of sediment has accumulated at the inlet to the east cell, and cleanout appears to be warranted. Operator indicated that cleanout was scheduled for this field season. • Pond RP-1 contained a shallow pool; water level was approximately 6 feet below top of riser. • Water level in Pond RP-4 was approximately 3 to 4 feet below top of rise; no discharge. There was a trickle of inflow into the pond via the east inlet ditch. • RP-SA water level was approximately 6 feet below the open spillway elevation. Modification of the open channel or modification of the existingriprap placement to better define the two level spillway configuration needs to be completed promptly, as requested in the March inspection report. • Pond DP-1 was full on 3/27, with the de-watering mbe running full and some dischazge through the top of the primary riser. Dischazge water was clear. • Pond SS-1 at the slot storage area was discharging through the slotted riser, with water level approximately 4" below the top of the riser. Discharge water was clear. • Other sedimentation ponds contained only puddles or were dry. Both processing ponds in the D-Portal area contained standing water but were not discharging. Coal Processing Waste Drainage Control Refuse Area RP-SA Measwes have not yet been initiated to repair eroded azeas in the vicinity of the PondSA west inlet as requested in the March inspection report, due to recent thaw and muddy conditions. Operator indicates that the work will be performed when conditions allow. RP-SA permanent perimeter collection ditches aze in good condition and stable; they do not yet carry disturbed drainage from the refuse slopes for which they were designed, due to the early stage of pile construction at RP-SA: The perimeter ditch design specifications are variable, with as many as 12 different designs depending on location and gradient. Permit designs appear to contain some discrepancies that will be addressed within the mid-teen permit review currently in process. In various locations, straw bale checks were staked in place during original installation, apparently as a stabilization measure until vegetation became established. The bale checks are not a part of the final ditch design, do not appear to