Laserfiche WebLink
<br />site and included empirically-derived hydrologic parameters based on actual vegetation sampling <br />data from the reference area and the reclaimed area. Modelling results indicate that sediment <br />loss from the reclaimed area is equal to that of an adjacent, un-mined area. The Division <br />requested that CYCC submit additional data, if available, to further support the results of <br />modelling. The operator submitted additional evidence in the form of stock pond observations <br />and rill and gully survey data. Volume measurements of sediment accumulation in stock pond <br />31-f (which lies within Block C but is not part of this bond release application) were compared <br />to original surveyed volume data for this stock pond. Rill and gully survey measurements were <br />also used to estimate the amount of sediment attributable to channel erosion, thus indirectly <br />providing an estimate of sediment loss from the reclaimed watershed areas. Contour furrows, <br />originally established in the re-seeded parcels, remain evident throughout the reclamation. In <br />summary, the amount of sediment attributable to the reclaimed parcels themselves appears to be <br />very small. The lack of erosional features identified through CYCC rill and gully surveys and <br />Division field inspection further supports the conclusion that the area is stable and produces no <br />more sediment than an adjacent un-mined area of similar land-use. <br />Surface water runoff from Block C eventually passes through a large permanent impoundment <br />known as Pond A. NPDES Discharge Monitoring Reports submitted by the operator and kept <br />on file at the Division indicate a long record of compliance with the effluent limitations <br />applicable to this outfall. No springs of significance are located within Block C and, of those <br />small springs identified within Block C, none have any measurable downstream impact. Ground <br />water monitoring data submitted annually as part of the Annual Hydrology Report reveals <br />moderate increases in salinity in the strata adjacent to the spoil aquifer area down-gradient of <br />Block C, likely due to the migration of spoil waters generated in Eckman Park. However, <br />increases are within the levels predicted in the approved permit and the lack of use of this water <br />further supports the contention of no evidence of pollution of surface or sub-surface waters. <br />REVEGETATION FINDINGS <br />Rule 3.03.1(2)(c) allows for any remaining portion of bond to be released when the "petmittee <br />has successfully completed all surface coal mining reclamation operations in accordance with the <br />approved plan and the final inspection and procedures of 3.03.2 have been satisfied. This shall <br />not be before the expiration of the period specified for revegetation responsibility in 3.02.3". <br />Rule 3.02.3 defines the period of responsibility as ten years and until the petmittee has met the <br />revegetation requirements of Rule 4.15. Included in the initial application were vegetation data <br />collected by the operator to demonstrate that the permittee has met the requirements of the <br />approved permit with regard to re-establishing vegetation on the disturbed areas of Block C. <br />Review of the map and text discussion submitted in conjunction with the Block C bond release <br />application reveals that the acreage included in Block C has met the 10 year period for <br />revegetation responsibility. Topsoil was re-distributed to the approved depth and verified by the <br />Division. The nine reclamation parcels included in Block C were reseeded in 1980, 1981, or <br />1982. Based on revegetation information presented by the operator as found in the application <br />and reviewed by the Division, Block C meets all the required final bond release revegetation <br />criteria for cover, production, and diversity, and therefore has successfully met the applicable <br />requirements of Rule 4.15.7 and 4.15.8. <br />-2- <br />