INSPEC33311

• Permit No: C1981010
• IBM Index Class Name: Inspection
• Doc Name: INSPECTION REPORT
• Inspection Date: 9/3/1996
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

i
III. 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.
on the southeast side of the pond, had dried up.There was no water
in the Deer pond, NPDES no. 012. The flume, which did not have a
continuous recorder at inspection time, was functional, as was the
concrete single open channel spillway. There was no erosion at the
outfall. The erosion control blanket at the outfall was holding up.
The operator had repaired some erosional head cutting at the inlet
to the pond. The sediment cleanout level marker indicated no
problems with the pond sediment level. The embankment was stable.
There was only a small amount of water in the Elk pond, NPDES no.
010. The concrete single open channel spillway and the flume were
functional. The sediment cleanout level marker was up and indicated
that there were no problems. The embankment appeared to be stable
and there was no erosion at the spillway outfall. A small seep,
less than one gpm, had developed near the inlet side of the pond
spillway. The small flow percolated into the ground before reaching
the flume. The flume did not have a continuous recorder.
The Oak no. 2 pond, NPDES no. 017, was dry. The construction of
this pond was completed in June of 1996. The embankment was stable
and the concrete single open channel spillway was functional. The
sediment marker was up and showed no problems with the sediment
level. The flume was located about 150 feet downgradient of the
pond spillway, at the end of an erosion control blanket apron. The
runoff that will pass through the flume will include the pond
discharge plus runoff from an additional five acres outside the
pond watershed. The operator stated that the flume could not be
located at the spillway or at any location closer to the pond than
where it is now, due to the sloping terrain. The flume did not have
a continuous recorder. No erosion was evident at the outfall.
There was no water in the Sage no. 2 pond, NPDES no. 016. The
concrete single open channel spillway and the flume were
functional. There was no continuous recorder at the flume. The
riprapped spillway apron was intact, with no sign of erosion. The
embankment was stable and the sediment cleanout level marker was
present and indicated no problems.
No water was present in the Grouse no. 2 pond, NPDES no. 015. The
flume, without a continuous recorder, and the concrete single open
channel spillway were functional. There was no erosion on the
spillway outslope .due to the erosion control blanket. The
embankment appeared to be stable. The sediment cleanout level
3