ENFORCE24862

• Permit No: C1980007
• IBM Index Class Name: Enforcement
• Doc Date: 7/10/1997
• Doc Name: NOTICE OF VIOLATION
• Violation No.: CV1997009
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

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.
compression ridge was evident. No distortion is apparent on the opposite eastern side of the
Sylvester Gulch stream channel. The stream channel adjacent to the down gradient third of the
failed embankment appears to have been reduced to approximately one foot in depth and width
with grassed sides and bottom. Above the landslide to the south the undisturbed channel is
approximately five feet wide and three feet deep with bare sides and bottom. My conclusion is
that the failure plane of the slope failure exists within the foundation slope beneath the road fill.
The elevation of the failure plane appears to coincide closely with the elevation of [he stream
channel. Rather than form a compressional mound, the failed bedrock appears to be overriding
the alluvium, obliterating the original stream channel.
Mountain Coal Company (MCC) will have to identify the elevation and orientation of the failure
plane. Sufficiently precise monumentation will need to be installed to define the rate and
direction of movement. Test pits and augered test holes should verify the location and orientation
of the failure plane. Sampling and lab analyses should provide the strength parameters for the
failed soil material. Experience has now proven the Division's suspicion that lab analysis of
collected rock and soil specimens was not the appropriate methodology by which to determine
effective slope mass properties. Now a very contemporaneous opportunity has presented itself
for the back ca]culation of appropriate slope bulk strength properties. These strength parameters,
in tum, should be used for the rehabilitated slope designs.
Once the above information is obtained, MCC will then need to develop a remedial treatment for
the failed mass. If the failed mass cannot be rehabi]itated to support the access road, the road
will need to be relocated through an appropriate revision application. The light use road is
currently being used to facilitate equipment traffic. The constriction to movement is, or will,
create delays in project progress. It is possible that the affected slope cannot be rehabilitated.
In any case, the disturbed area will need to be stabilized and reclaimed. Because the materials
have been driven past peak strength to failure, it probably will not be possible to simply regrade
the failed slope to AOC. Significant over excavation and stabilization may therefore be required.
It is doubtful that movement on the failure plane will cease within the next month.
The stream buffer and riparian azea adjacent to the creek have probably been irreversibly
compromised. Temporarily, measures should be taken to prevent downcutting of the
compromised channel and sediment generation. MCC's suggestion of a temporary flexible PVC
pipe to transport waters past the failed mass is an acceptable temporary measure. A date for
submittal of a revision for operation accommodation and final reclamation of the channel and
riparian area should be specified. The Cotps of Engineers also must be notified and appropriate
permits applied for by MCC. Finally, a date for completion of any stream channel modifications
prior to the end of this year's construction season should be specified.