ENFORCE23813 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Rockcastle Coal Company - 2 - September 13, 1991 3.) In accordance with the abatement measures specified within Notice of Violation C-89-034, and several previous inspection reports, all disturbed area drainage must be routed to a sediment pond, or a demonstration must be completed to verify that a pond is not needed. Specific areas of concern include the northeast perimeter of Pit 5, where several breaches have been noted. We recommend that this ditch should be removed, after demonstration that a pond is not needed. Ditch 5-1 should be extended to include the old topsoil/overburden storage area, or a demonstration for pond removal should be provided. All other uncontained areas of Pit 5 and 6 must be handled in a like manner. 4.) We can accept the ACZ plan regarding the Contour Ditch No. 5, in place of armoured channels. This change is based on field observations that hiilslopes below the proposed ditch are stabilizing with healthy vegetation. Please ensure that field implementation includes a smooth transition area where the ditch intersects the northeast road ditch. 5.) Please address the question, VII, 22 in the April 24, 1991 letter, regarding the sedimentation analysis methods used for the pond removal demonstration. Resolu*_ion of these minor details will allow us to apply the demonstration to several areas of the mine, thereby resolving pending drainage control problems. 6.) Be sure that all hydrologic calculations are properly certified. Pits 1/2/3 1.) Please refer to the April 24, 1991 letter, issue number V~~ 23 (mistyped as 21> regarding Notice of Violation C-89-034. The pending drainage control issues must be resolved. 2.) Please repair all pond inlet areas which have been damaged by downcutting, as previously requested. 3.) The operator has previously committed to reclamation of Pond 3. Please provide a schedule for this work. 4.) Once the pond removal demonstrations are complete, it is preferable that all ponds be removed. If the operator still intends to leave Pond 2 (and Ponds/6) as permanent, then the issues outlined in our letter of October 23, 1990 must be resolved. Permanent pond demonstrations pursuant to Rule 4.05.9(1) are still required. 5.) If Pond 2 is to remain, then pond design specifications must be submitted. Such specifications must verify compliance with Rule 4.05.6, including proper embankment and spillway designs. Please provide a field implementation schedule.