INSPEC31265 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

III. COMMENTS -COMPLIANCE Below are comments on the inspection. The comments include discussion of observations made during the inspection. Comments also describe any enforcement actions taken during the inspection and the facts or evidence supporting the enforcement action. This was a complete inspection of the Yoast Mine conducted on July 15, 2003 by Mike Boulay of the DMG. Lori Smith of Seneca Coal Company (SCC) was present during the entire inspection. Weather conditions were cloudy and warm. Ground conditions at the mine site were dry. The dragline was operating in the Yoast south area. Coal was not being hauled from the mine at the time of the inspection. Hvdrolo¢ic Balance Sedimentation Ponds 010, 011, 012, and 014 were retaining water at the time of the inspection. Ponds 010 and 012 were discharging small amounts of cleaz water. Inlets, discharge structures and embankments were in good condition at Ponds 010, 011, 012, and 014. Pond 011 appeazed turbid, and mud and sediment were visible in the pond. This additional sediment in the pond maybe due to topsoil loss from the North Pit azea located upgradient of the pond. Pond 011 was not discharging at the time of the inspection; the water level in this pond was approximately 1.5 feet below the primary spillway. The undisturbed azea located within the permit boundary between the North Pit and Pond 011 was inspected. This undisturbed area immediately below and to the east of the North Pit has experienced substantial erosion. During this inspection it was noted that a very lazge gully has formed in the drainage azea below the North Pit. The erosion begins at the fence line on the edge of the disturbance boundary and extends into the undisturbed azea for approximately 500 feet. The gully that has formed is greater than 15 feet deep in some locations and greater than 20 feet wide in one area where lazge aspens have been knocked down. This significant erosion is likely the result of concentrated surface water flows directed to this azea from the partially reclaimed North Pit. SCC has failed to meet permit requirements regazding topsoil redistribution and seeding timeframes for the North Pit azea, and has failed to meet permit conditions and required timeframes (as shown on Exhibit 19-1A) for the construction of Postmine Drainage Channels YPM-9 and YPM-10 located in the North Pit. Numerous rills and gullies have formed on the southern side of the North Pit where topsoil has been redistributed, but seeding has not occurred. SCC has also failed to implement appropriate sediment control measures for the North Pit reclaimed area, and has violated specific performance standazds resulting in significant erosion and gully formation in an undisturbed area.