## \...\...\...\..... DIVISION OFFICE 1999 Inspection Guide Erosion and Pollution Control

> **General Project Data:**
>
> Date of Inspection:\
> Project Number:\
> County:\
> Inspection Made By:\
> In Company With:
>
> **References:**

1.  \...\...\...\... Department of Highways Standard Specifications and
    Supplemental Specifications;

2.  \...\...\...\..... Department of Highways Construction Manual;

3.  Applicable Special Provisions and Design Directives;

4.  \...\...\...\.... Department of Highways Erosion and Sediment
    Control Manual, (March 1, 1995).

> Date of Applicable Special Provisions\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> **Scope of Inspection:**
>
> This inspection consists of an on-site review of the erosion and
> pollution control procedures being implemented to abate air and water
> pollution. The State\'s supervisory control procedures and enforcement
> of the specifications and special provisions should be observed. The
> contractor\'s operations and preventative measures should be
> evaluated.

I.  **Office Portion**

    A.  Review of Procedures:

        1.  **Stage I** (to cover first six weeks only). Did the
            contractor submit his Stage I plan at the pre-construction
            conference?

            a.  Date Submitted

            b.  Date Approved

            c.  Is an approved copy of the plan in the project files?\
                Does the plan conform with the suggested minimum
                requirements set forth in Section IV of Erosion Control
                Manual?

        2.  **Stage II**

            a.  Date Submitted

            b.  Date Approved

            c.  Did the Regional Engineer request comments and/or
                recommendations from other Divisions of \...\...\...\...
                or outside agencies (IV-3 Erosion Control Manual)?

> If not, was time a major consideration?

d.  Date major excavation began?

e.  Is an approved copy of the plan in the project files?

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
3.  Comment on dates of approvals relative to beginning of work.

4.  Was a field review made prior to the pre-construction conference as
    suggested in Erosion Control Manual?

5.  Were resource agency personnel invited to attend field reviews on
    erosion control in accordance with the Erosion Control Manual?

> If attended, representative were from?

6.  Does a specific person on the project have the responsibility of
    checking erosion control periodically?

> If so, describe his authority:

B.  Review of Erosion Control Plan, Stage I and II

    1.  Does that plan adequately designate specific locations and
        dimensions for erosion control facilities? (Slope drains,
        sediment ponds, check dams, sediment traps, etc.)

    2.  Does the plan indicate the schedule of erosion control
        activities relative to the sequence of work operation?

        a.  Evaluate the scheduling of temporary seeding and mulching.

        b.  Evaluate the scheduling of permanent seeding and mulching.

        c.  Evaluate the scheduling of other sediment controls, basins,
            ponds, traps, dams, berms, hay diversions, etc.

    3.  Does the plan adequately provide measures to be used to prevent
        stream pollution from waste sites, borrow sites, haul roads,
        contractor storage areas, maintenance-service areas, and truck
        washing areas?

    4.  If the contractor intends to exceed the 70 000 m^2^ limitation,
        does the plan indicate that he has planned for additional
        measures to satisfactorily maintain pollution control to the
        level contemplated by this limitation? (Reference 1994 Standard
        Specifications 642.4).

    5.  Comment on the completeness of the plan with respect to the
        intent of the requirements to maximize prevention of water
        pollution.

C.  Review waste/borrow pit approvals for inclusion of permanent and
    Temporary measures (Reference Form HL-445).

D.  Air Pollution

    1.  Have permits been obtained for burning?

> Is daily permission for burning being obtained?

2.  Were dust control facilities considered during certification of
    batch plants?

3.  Were dust (particulates) control measures considered when choosing
    and approving haul roads, borrow and waste sites?

> Comments:

II. **Field Review**

    A.  Clearing and Grubbing

        1.  What erosion measures were installed before and during the
            clearing and grubbing operation?

        2.  Were measures effective in preventing siltation during this
            operation?

        3.  Is the method of debris disposal satisfactory? (Logs,
            branches, stumps, ashes, etc.)

    B.  Earthwork and Drainage

        1.  Major Channel Relocations

            a.  Have channel relocations been properly made in a manner
                that prevents pollution?

            b.  Has a permanent lining been installed before diverting
                water?

            c.  Comment on compliance with E.I.S. commitments if
                applicable.

        2.  Excavation

            a.  Are cuts being seeded and mulched as work progresses
                (every 4.6 m or two weeks as suggested in Erosion
                Control Manual)?

            b.  Comment on Timeliness:

        3.  Embankment Work

            a.  Are embankment slopes being built to template and
                compacted to reduce run-off siltation?

            b.  Are fills being seeded and mulched as work progressed
                (every 3 m or two weeks as suggested in Erosion Control
                Manual?

            c.  Comment on Timeliness:

        4.  What measures are being taken to enforce the erosion control
            specifications?

        5.  Haul Roads

> Comment on control measures being used (temporary seeding, dust
> palliative, temporary pipes, ditching, etc.)

6.  Waste and Borrow Pits

    a.  Waste pit control measures should be similar to embankment
        measures.

> Comment -

b.  Have waste pits been located adjacent to streams and/or constructed
    such that high water would cause erosion of the waste material?

> Comment -

c.  Borrow pit control measures should be similar to excavation
    measures.

> Comment -

7.  Stockpiles of Embankment Material

> Are the locations and measures applied consistent with erosion control
> requirements?

8.  Rivers and Streams

    a.  Are construction operations in or adjacent to rivers or streams
        being controlled to prevent pollution?

    b.  Are appropriate tests being taken in compliance with Section
        715.7.2 (check proposal)?

    c.  Has a background level been established from tests or from
        existing data?

    d.  Are there any guidelines (formal or informal) on when tests are
        to be taken in the project office?

9.  Minor Drainage Channels

> Are permanent linings being provided as soon as practicable and in
> conjunction with temporary controls?

III. **General Questions on Pollution Control**

     A.  Has the need for measures other than those shown in the erosion
         control plan become apparent, but not implemented in the
         abatement efforts?

> If yes, give your analysis of the reasons for this inaction.

B.  Were the erosion control features observed in the field adequately
    designed, constructed, and maintained?

C.  Will any temporary control structures be left as permanent measures?

D.  Are subcontractors conducting their work in a manner consistent with
    the prime contractor\'s requirements and erosion control plan?

E.  Are sanitary and other solid and liquid wastes from the project
    being properly controlled?

F.  Are dust control measures effective: (Haul roads, batch plants, work
    areas, etc.)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
IV. **General Comments**

    A.  Personnel

        1.  Project and District Personnel

            a.  Comment on their interest and knowledge with respect to
                erosion control and pollution control.

            b.  Do they have a copy of the Erosion Control Manual?

        2.  Does the contractor and project erosion control
            representative (weekly or after a storm event) jointly
            review measures for adequacy, maintenance and need for
            additional controls?

    B.  Have efforts to date been reasonably effective and responsive to
        the intent of pollution control requirements?

    C.  Is the contractor following the approved erosion control plan as
        evidenced by field operation?

> Comment