My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ENFORCE24956
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Enforcement
>
ENFORCE24956
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:33:31 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 10:51:35 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1982057
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
11/2/1993
Doc Name
CESSATION ORDER C-93-141 SENECA II-W MINE
From
PEABODY WESTERN COAL CO
To
DMG
Violation No.
CV1993141
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Michael Long <br />October 27, 1993 <br />Page 2 <br />the approved permit indicates up to three inches of soil is <br />lost during brush clearing operations. The clayey fly rock <br />debris would be piled with the brush and disposed of in the <br />pit as specified in the permit if topsoil salvage is <br />conducted in the area of concern. The potential topsoil <br />resource was not lost as a result of the cast debris. <br />3. Any debris not disposed of during brush clearing activities <br />would be mixed with loamy topsoil during salvage <br />operations, thereby diminishing any negative effects the <br />clayey debris might have on salvaged suitable topsoil. <br />4. Slopes within the area of concern range between 50 and 75 <br />percent. Tab 21 of the approved permit allows a variance <br />for areas too steep for topsoil salvage due to equipment <br />limitations and operator safety. Since the topsoil may not <br />be salvageable in the area due to very steep slopes, a <br />topsoil resource was not lost or damaged as a result of the <br />blast. <br />5. The area of concern was inspected after the blasting <br />incident. The topsoil contamination consisted of very <br />sparsely distributed "clay rock" that had fragmented upon <br />impact. <br />Peabody Western does not believe significant imminent harm <br />occurred or can reasonably be expected to occur to the <br />prevailing hydrologic balance for the following reasons. <br />1. There is no evidence that spilled oil has contacted waters <br />of the State. Quick and effective action on the part of <br />Seneca II-W Mine personnel to contain and clean up the <br />spilled oil substantially reduced the probability of impact <br />to the hydrologic balance. <br />2. The spilled oil was contained above Sediment Pond No. 006 <br />by constructing a series of four dikes in Pond No. 006 <br />Gulch, thereby limiting the aerial extent of potential <br />contamination. <br />3. Wet conditions in the upper soil profile in the Pond No. <br />006 Gulch drainage retarded crude oil from infiltrating <br />downward. Further, the drainage is ephemeral. <br />4. There is no evidence that downstream water uses have been <br />or will be materially damaged. Crude oil biodegrades at a <br />rapid rate in natural systems (much more rapidly than <br />refined products), thereby reducing the potential for long- <br />term adverse effects. <br />Abatement Step No. 2 in the Cessation Order has no bearing on <br />the cause of the damage to the oil well site. The issue is not <br />ground vibration. The following information pertaining to <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.