2011-09-22_ENFORCEMENT - C1982056 (2)

Home Browse Search

materials can be placed in the CRDA. As a practical consideration, road clean -up materials and other waste materials from underground, which fall under the very broad definition and CDRMS interpretation of "underground development waste", may contain metal, pieces of cinder block, wooden blocks or pieces of timber, pieces of coal, coal dust, rock dust, etc. Given the restriction on "combustible materials" and the practical difficulty of separating these materials, these materials cannot be placed in the existing CRDA, and TC has, therefore, had road clean -up materials loaded and transported to an approved off -site disposal facility. 3) The CDRMS has through prior decisions and ongoing inspection practices, created and perpetrated confusion relative to permit requirements and what constitutes acceptable practices It was never TC's intent that any waste materials from the Foidel Creek Mine be transported to and disposed of in the Deakins Pit. The Minerals Group, however, through approval of a permit allowing disposal of material containing coal, and implied consent over a period of time which included multiple inspections of the Deakins Pit, established and perpetuated the conception that placement and disposal of coal wastes in the Pit was acceptable. This conception indirectly influenced the independent decisions and actions of Bower Brothers, in diverting coal waste from the Foidel Creek Mine. Given the existence of this permit, and the language of Rule 4.10.1(2), it is not unreasonable to conclude that the Deakins Pit is within a permit area (Minerals Permit) and that coal mine waste disposal has been "approved by the Division ". In addition to these issues, it is important to note that the identified waste materials of concern (with the exception of the screened coal and coal fines piles at the Ross Pit, and what is identified as Stockpile 2 on page 15 of the 08/18/11 CDRMS Inspection Report) are predominantly mud and clay materials. In addition, any coal and coal - related waste materials from the Foidel Creek Mine should not be a concern relative to surface or groundwater, since coal and overburden materials have been characterized and documented as non -toxic and non acid - forming. In conclusion, TC questions the basis for the NOV and whether it should have been issued to TC, as further detailed by the following comments: Failure to place all underground development waste in existing disposal areas approved by the Division within the Permit Area — Most underground development material either remains underground in abandoned mine areas, or if it is rocky material, is shipped out of the mine on the conveyor belt and routed directly to the CRDA. Only materials which cannot be placed in the CRDA due to "combustibility" concerns are shipped off -site to a State approved disposal facility. Diversion of any waste materials to any location other than a State approved disposal facility was done without TC's knowledge or authorization. Failure to dispose of non -coal wastes in a State approved disposal site operated in accordance with local, State, and Federal requirements — TC's policy and practice is to contract for transport and disposal of all non -coal wastes in a State approved disposal facility (Twin Landfill). Diversion of any waste materials to any location other than a State approved disposal facility was done without TC's knowledge or authorization. Failure to conduct all surface coal mining and reclamation operations only as described in the approved application. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the permit, all applicable performance standards of the Act, and the requirements of the Rules. — To the best of our knowledge and ability, TC has, and continues to, conduct all mining and related activities