2015-06-29_INSPECTION - C1982057

• Permit No: C1982057
• IBM Index Class Name: Inspection
• Doc Date: 6/29/2015
• Doc Name: Inspection Report
• From: DRMS
• To: Peabody Energy
• Inspection Date: 6/23/2015
• Email Name: LDS
• Email Name: JHB
• Email Name: MPB
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

6/29/2015 State.co.us Executive Branch Mail - June inspections at Yoast and Seneca II W Mines and Hayden Gulch Loadout
STATE, OF Hernandez - DNR AI sha <al [e-mail]>
COLORADO , Y Y
June inspections at Yoast and Seneca II W Mines and Hayden Gulch Loadout
-I message
Simmons - DNR, Leigh <[e-mail]> Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 8:58 AM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: Alysha Hernandez - DNR <[e-mail]>, Janet Binns - DNR <[e-mail]>
Scott,
Attached are the reports from the inspection we carried out at Yoast (cl994082), Seneca II W (cl982057) and
Hayden Gulch (cl992081).
I also created a .mpk file which can be opened with ArcMap. It contains the three georefenced maps we used as
background maps to help us navigate the site as well as the point shapefile we collected whilst doing the
inspection. The .mpk file exceeds the 25MB attachment limit on my email account, so I have sent it to you
using Google drive - please let me know if you are unable to open it.
I talked to Mike about some of the issues that we discussed in your office regarding the termination of water
monitoring and here is my interpretation of that conversation:
Water monitoring
DRMS water monitoring requirements are not formally tied to phases of bond release, (although reductions in
water monitoring often happen to be associated with bond release applications, there is no requirement for this)
Rule 4.05.13(3)(b) discusses the water monitoring liability period. I have copied the text below and added color to
highlight some key points:
After disturbed areas have been regraded and stabilized according to this rule, and after cessation of use
of underground mine workings, the person who conducts surface or underground mining activities shall
continue to monitor surface water and ground water quality and quantity in accordance with the approved
plan. Data from this monitoring may be used to demonstrate that these qualities and quantities of runoff
without treatment are consistent with the requirements of 4.05; that the operation has
minimized disturbance to the hydrologic balance in the permit and adjacent areas; that the operation has
prevented material damage to the hydrologic balance outside the permit area; and that the water rights of
other users have been protected or replaced. Based on this demonstration, the operator may request
reduction or deletion of the monitoring program or control system.
This means that there is no rule requiring Seneca Coal Company to continue groundwater monitoring past the
point at which the above demonstration can be made. The same is true of surface water monitoring requirements
over and above those required by the NPDES permit. (My understanding is that the Water Quality Control
Division uses phase II bond release as an indication that discharge permit could be terminated).
Ponds
It looks as though some of the sediment ponds have already been permitted as permanent structures and have
been approved by the State Engineer's Office.
For Seneca II W (ponds 005, 006, 009, 015, 016 and 017) this was accomplished with TR77 and MR76, and the
relevant pages are to be found in Tab 20, Attachment 20-2 plus appendices.
For Yoast the situation is a little more complicated. Tab 20, Attachment 20-1 was updated with MR29 and states
that 4 sediment ponds and 2 stock ponds are to remain as permanent structures. Appendix 20-1.2 contains the
permanent pond demonstrations and associated approvals from the State Engineer's Office. It looks to me as
though ponds 13 and 14, and ST -1 are approved as Livestock Water Tanks, and pond 10 is approved as a Non -
Jurisdictional Impoundment. As far as I can tell, for the remainder:
• pond 11 is approved as permanent in principle, but a demonstration has not yet been made, and approval
from the State Engineer has not yet been granted
• pond 11A (a stock tank) is approved as permanent and a demonstration has been made but approval from
the Sate Engineer has not yet been granted
• pond 12 is not approved as permanent
https:Hm ai I .googl e.com/m ai I/u/0/?ui= 2&i k=e29129fcb5&view= pt&search= i nbox&th=14e3fd3896636673&si m l=14e3fd3896636673 1/2