_INSPECTION - C1981014 (54) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

respectively. No formal, mine-related road exists or was approved on the west side of the RDA. Page 15 of bond release findings SL-02, issued April 25, 2003 discusses roads approved to remain as permanent. Map 19 of the approved permit application, revised August 1996, does show a pre-existing road that runs from the power substation disturbance to the north. However, this road is west of, and outside of, the disturbed and reclaimed area. Ms. Coulter is primarily concerned with the surface condition of the existing roads during inclement weather conditions due to snow and rain. Light-use roads, as defined by Rule 1.04(111)(c) are roads that are "infrequently travelled or used on an intermittent basis" for such things as monitoring, maintenance of monitoring facilities, or other "occasional uses'. Rule 4.03.3(6)(b) states that "Light use roads shall not be used if climatic conditions are such that usage may cause degradation of water quality." Rule 4.03.3(5)(a) requires that light use road surfacing be "adequate for the use of the road." Under the currently approved plan, the Phase I bond release findings of SL-02, and the rules governing coal mining, there is no requirement that EFCI must construct or maintain a road on the west side of the refuse pile. While surfacing may not be adequate for year-round use of the approved, permanent light- use roads, surfacing appears adequate for occasional use for all approved roads. We discussed the possibility of improving the surfacing to the Pond 4 area, should this pond be approved for permanent retention. The landowners expressed the desire to receive reports on a more frequent basis through the use of electronic communication. Inspector Gorham committed to forward monitoring data and various reports on a more frequent basis. The group then proceeded to the reclaimed area of pond 3. Ms. Saunders was concerned about the presence and general numbers of rabbitbrush plants, which are numerous in this area (see June 2009 photo below right). Rabbitbrush was not included in the reclamation seed mix and is not considered a noxious weed in Fremont County. This native shrub is only lightly browsed in the summer but is a significant source of browse for wildlife in the winter. The Division duly notes the landowners concern about the abundance of rabbitbrush and suggests that EFCI pay special attention to this concern during future vegetation monitoring efforts. Currently, the approved reclamation plan calls for removal of Pond 4 after EFCI demonstrates to the Division that the pond is no longer necessary to control levels of suspended sediment as compared to adjacent, un-mined areas. Based on discussions with the landowners during the inspection, they would like Pond 4 to remain as a permanent