Laserfiche WebLink
iayPA'.tf/'.~ ~ ~ F'~f.0.n ." .. <br />.. .! r _. .. ._ ... .~ .... <br />:~ <br />• .'~~'%~liefore the pond fills. DMG has discussed this issue with the <br />~permittee, however, the permiittee should be aware that if the <br />routing of water to the refuse pond continues to the point of <br />discharge then a violation may exist. A small tree also needs <br />to be. removed from the spillway of the refuse pond. Livestock <br />grazing in the area of the ponds along North Thompson Creek is <br />Having an impact, especially to the embar-]onent of the Long <br />pond. DMG has informed me that the permittee has instructed <br />the owner of the cattle to remove them form the site. <br />Water Monitoring: DMG conducted field measurements on the <br />discharge of the #3 mine. The results were as follows; <br />Temperature 60 degrees fahrenheit <br />Ph 6.9 <br />Conductivity 926, question as to accuracy <br />Flow estimated at 10+ gallons per minute <br />Coal Mine Waste: The refuse pile was walked and no signs of <br />instability were noted. Cattle were grazing on the refuse <br />pile during the inspection. The diversions along each side of <br />. the pile were maintained and functional. A pipe was found <br />which exits the southwest corner of the pile and runs to the <br />P-9 pond. The logical conclusion during the time of the <br />inspection was that it was an under-drain, however, there is <br />no indication in the plans for this drain. DMG says the pipe <br />was at one time used to measure flow in the ditch leading to <br />the refuse pond. The location of the pipe would make this <br />explanation questionable since it comes from underneath the <br />refuse pile. DMG says the permittee is in the process of <br />removing the pipe. <br />Roads: The access road leading to the truck dump was traveled <br />and the culverts were found not to match the location or size <br />shown on the map. The pond at the truck dump has been removed <br />but the mine plan does not mention when this was done ~r when <br />approval was given of the demonstration to allow removal. The <br />conditions of the truck dump are such that a sediment pond <br />would serve no purpose at this time. The road up to and <br />including the pad area of the truck dump has a hard surface of <br />an asphalt type material. The areas not surfaced has a heavy <br />covering of grass so there is really no potential for erosion <br />and no signs of instability were noticed. The mine plan must <br />reflect accurate maps and plans of this area and the pond must <br />be addressed if not done somewhere else. DMG has instructed <br />the permittee to address the drainage control for this area. <br />7 <br />