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 />Since the threshold flow for sampling is 5 gpm, an inaccurate flow <br />reading may result in a water monitoring sample not being taken <br />when, in fact, the sample should have been taken. OSM believed that <br />a more sensitive flow measuring device should be used, such as a <br />portable weir. Trapper agreed to look into this issue with the <br />Division. Trapper also agreed, at the request of OSM, to find <br />evidence in the PAP that the spring below Coyote dam was present <br />before mining. Trapper contends that this spring is too far from <br />mining to be affected by mining. Trapper has conducted water <br />monitoring analyses on this spring, similar to the East Pyeatt <br />spring, for at least the last two years, although not specifically <br />required by the Division. OSM stated their preference that <br />additional water monitoring parameters be selected to demonstrate <br />that there has been no effect from mining on that spring. The <br />Division will investigate this matter. <br />There was no water in the Far East Buzzard no. 1 pond, NPDES no. <br />014. The flume, with no continuous recorder, and the concrete <br />single open channel spillway were functional. The embankment was <br />stable and the sediment cleanout level marker showed no problems <br />with the sediment level. No erosional problems were observed at the <br />outfall. <br />The East Buzzard pond no. 2 was also dry. The embankment appeared <br />to be stable and the sediment cleanout level marker indicated no <br />problems with the sediment level in the pond. There were no <br />problems with the flume and with the concrete single open channel <br />spillway. There was no continuous recorder on the flume. There were <br />no problems with erosion at the outfall. <br />There was only a very small amount of water in the West Buzzard <br />pond no. 3, NPDES site no. 006. The sediment marker was up and no <br />problems were observed with the sediment level. The flume and <br />concrete single open channel spillway were functional and no <br />problems with erosion were seen at the spillway outfall. There was <br />no continuous recorder on the flume. <br />FLIIlIE GDLCH IiONITORING BTATION <br />The Flume Gulch monitoring site is on the east side of the permit <br />area and consists of a metal flume similar to the flumes installed <br />6 <br />