Laserfiche WebLink
Colowyo C- 1981 -019 <br />10 Nov 2009 <br />Pg 3/7 6�� <br />Hydrologic Balance (cont.): - The East Taylor Pond (NPDES O1 OA) contained water <br />below the bottom of the gated discharge pipe and was not discharging at the time <br />of the inspection. The embankment was well vegetated and stable and no erosional <br />problems were noted. With the reclamation in the North Taylor portion of the West Pit <br />this past summer, the East Taylor Pond will receive the runoff from this area for the first <br />time. Colowyo should consider armoring the inlet of the pond with small riprap to <br />help reduce the velocity of the runoff and protect the inlet from erosion. *See <br />pictures at the end of this inspection report.* <br />- The West Taylor Pond (NPDES O11 A) contained water approximately 10 feet below <br />the top of the discharge pipe (approximately seven feet below the weep hole) and <br />was not discharging at the time of the inspection. The embankment was well <br />vegetated and stable. The A -A' underdrain of the West Taylor Fill (and ultimately the <br />West Taylor Fill itself) toes out approximately 100 feet above the inlet to the West <br />Taylor Pond. Ryan Pawlowski indicated that the inslopes of the West Taylor Pond <br />have not been seeded. Colowyo will need to seed the inslopes of the West Taylor <br />Pond this fall to help stabilize them and help control any possible erosion. <br />- Sump 2 contained water and sediment approximately six inches below the top of <br />the sump. The sump was stable. There was a dead deer in sump 2 that will need to <br />be removed. All of the sumps have fences around them to help keep wildlife out but <br />this one apparently tried to get in anyway (and succeeded). <br />- Sump 3 was dry at the time of the inspection. The sump contained some sediment <br />but was stable and in good condition. <br />- Sump 4 contained water and sediment approximately two feet below the top of <br />the sump. The sump was stable at the time of the inspection. <br />- Sump 5 was full of water at the time of the inspection. The area around the sump <br />(on the access road) was wet and muddy from the water that always backs up here. <br />NOTE: These sumps are not permitted pond or impoundment structures but are best <br />management practices for controlling sediment and runoff from the haul road. <br />- The Section 28 Pond (NPDES 012A) was dry at the time of the inspection. The <br />embankment still has patchy vegetation (which was reseeded by hand this fall) but <br />remained stable. The outfall for the pond is in the lower portion of the embankment <br />but the area appears to be well armored to control erosion. If the pond ever <br />discharges this area should be carefully inspected to ensure its stability. The <br />emergency spillway is a riprapped open channel. The spillway remains stable. <br />- The Prospect Pond (NPDES 007A) contained water approximately six feet below the <br />top of the discharge pipe (just below the weep hole) and was not discharging at the <br />time of the inspection. The embankment was well vegetated and stable. There was <br />very little sediment at the inlet of the pond, which was cleaned out last winter. *See <br />pictures at the end of this inspection report.* <br />- The Gulch A Pond (NPDES 004A) was dry at the time of the inspection. The <br />embankment was well vegetated and stable. Goodspring Creek, which flows right <br />by the Gulch A Pond, was flowing at what appeared to be an unseasonable high <br />level. <br />