Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />16% more topsoil and subsoil will be salvaged in Pit No. 2 <br />than was previously stated by Kerr Coal. <br />B. Pit No. 1. Kerr's plan For topsoil salvage in the Pit No. 1 <br />area raised several questions as to whether this plan would <br />provide an adequate plant growth medium for the reclaimed <br />area. Several potential problems were identified with respect <br />to excessive topsoil erosion due to high slopes, reduced in- <br />filtration due to soil dispersion, lowered permeability leading <br />to possible drought conditions, and the possible formation of <br />impermeable layers between the topsoil and spoil. Factors con- <br />tributing to these problems were the slopes in exvess of 30%, <br />the sodic, high clay content of the spoil directly beneath the <br />topsoil, and the fact that only 6 inches of topsoil was to be <br />salvaged due to an extremely high clay content on the subsoil. <br />Kerr Coal resolved the problem by proposing to selectively <br />remove specific overburden material from Pit No. 3 and replace <br />that material as subsoil in the Pit No. I area. This plan is <br />described in detail in revised pages 780-3ccccccc, 780-IOccccccc, <br />780-68bbbbbbb, 780-68ccccccc, 816-I4aaaaaaa, 816-14bbbbbbb, <br />816-124aaaaaaa, 816-I24bbbbbbb, 816-183aaaaaaa, 816-138bbbbbbb, <br />and new Table i8, Pit No. 3, Selected Overburden Handling Plan. <br />The issue of excessive topsoil erosion due to the 30% slopes <br />was resolved after Kerr Coal explained that slope lengths are <br />reduced through the use of contour furrows along the side slopes <br />of Pit No. Z. <br />3. Kerr Coal has requested permission to leave tcpsoil ir. place within the <br />impoundment area of sediment ponds. It is this Division's position <br />that such areas constitute "disturbed areas" (Rule 1.04(36)), therefore <br />topsoil salvage is required by Rule 4,06. Leaving topsoil in place <br />within the ponds can potentially result in deleterious effects to the <br />soil, of concern to this Division. The primary effects which might be <br />expected are the following: <br />A. The wetting and drying cycles to which the soil in the pond <br />would be exposed can increase the concentration of sodium and <br />soluble salts in the topsoil, due to upward movement in the <br />soil by capillary action. <br />B. If the runoff water contains large amounts of sodium, this will <br />lead to increased dispersion of the clays in the topsoil, thus <br />greatly limiting any leaching or dcwnward movement of sodium or <br />soluble salts. Therefore, most of the water would evaporate, <br />leaving the salt load in the pond. Upon drying, this would be <br />followed by upward movement of salts and sodium by capillary <br />action. Data from Wyoming Fuels and some from Xerr indicatrs <br />that the 50 dram content of surface runoff may have a medium- <br />high sodium hazard, therefore resulting in a medium to high <br />cnance of concentrating sodium in the topsoil over time <br />C. The chemistry of the sediment cahich collects in the pond may <br />such as to result in contamination of the topsoil. Aside from <br />contributions of salt and sodium, there is a potential for con- <br />centration of heavy metals through physical transport and colloidal <br />adsorption. The analyses of the overburden submitted by Kerr <br />-20- <br />