Laserfiche WebLink
IL CRITERIA AND SCHEDULE FOR BOND RELEASE <br />PHASE I <br />The process of releasing the reclamation liability for a mine site is explained in Rule 3.03 and <br />further described in the Division's 1995 Guideline Regarding Selected Coal Mine Bond Release <br />Issues. Rule 3.03.1(2) (a) states, "Up to sixty percent of the applicable bond amount shall be <br />released when the permittee successfully completes backfilling, regrading, and drainage control in <br />accordance with the approved reclamation plan." SCC's approved reclamation plan prepared in <br />accordance with Rule 2.05.4 is contained in Volume 5, Tab 14 of the permit application package <br />(PAP). Evaluation and inspection of the UTL and Conveyor Corridor areas were based on the <br />specific requirements of the reclamation plan and the functional requirements of the post - mining <br />land use. <br />The Unit Train Loadout was converted to industrial use with approval of PR -4. The rail loop and a <br />portion of the rail spur were left in place as a key feature for the future industrial use of the area. <br />The final contours for the UTL are shown on Exhibit I IC of the PAP. Cross sections representing <br />the existing and final grades are shown on Exhibit 59. Grading of the site involved eliminating the <br />sewage treatment ponds, eliminating most of the embankment that supported the linear stacker and <br />coal stockpile and backfilling the sediment ponds. In 2009 the sediment pond reclamation plan was <br />amended with Technical Revision No. 59 to avoid recently identified jurisdictional wetlands. A <br />secondary benefit of the revision was a significant reduction in the number of mature trees that <br />would need to be removed. The trees provide important visual screening for the future industrial <br />use at the site. The two sediment ponds (Ponds 1 & 2) removed are located within the rail loop. <br />Due to the flat topography within the rail loop these ponds rarely retained water and there has <br />never been a discharge of water from either of the sediment ponds. The large wetland adjacent <br />to sediment pond 42 dictated the revisions to the reclamation plan. The wetland restricted <br />reclamation of sediment pond 42 to the west. Since the wetland is the low point in the area, run- <br />off from the reclaimed ponds had to be directed to the wetland. A drainage swale was <br />constructed to collect run -off from the reclaimed ponds and direct that run -off to the large <br />wetland. <br />Reclamation of sediment pond #1 involved placing fill nearly level with light use road number 4. <br />The fill was then sloped to drain to the drainage swale. Reclamation of sediment pond 42 also <br />involved placing fill nearly level with light use road number 4. The fill to the north was sloped <br />to the drainage swale. The fill to the west was sloped towards the wetland. No fill was placed in <br />the wetland. The Corps of Engineers jurisdictional determination is located in Appendix 15 -2 of <br />the PAP. Jurisdictional wetlands are also shown on Exhibits IOC and I IC. The operator did not <br />impact the wetlands so a Corps of Engineers 404 permit was not required. The drainage swale is <br />relatively deep, ranging from 1 -foot deep on the north end to three to four feet deep as it enters <br />the wetland. The disturbance associated with the reclamation of ponds Al and 42 and the <br />drainage swale were seeded and mulched. The slope gradient of the swale is approximately <br />0.55 %. This flat gradient and associated slow velocity combined with revegetation will cause <br />water to infiltrate and solids to settle thus virtually eliminating the discharge of water or <br />sediment into the large wetland. <br />Page 6 <br />