1989-12-12_INSPECTION - C1981017

• Permit No: C1981017
• IBM Index Class Name: INSPECTION
• Doc Date: 12/12/1989
• Doc Name: InspectionReports/ Documents for year 1989
• Inspection Date: 12/12/1989
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

INSPECTION REPORT Page 2
lamphouse yard . Recent construction disturbance on the yard caused
by the installation of the mine water pipeline was not bermed
properly to eliminate runoff from the area . The drainage from the
yard is supposed to be addressed as a small area exemption which is
acceptable but that was limited to the vehicular parking . On the day
of the inspection, soil and coal fines from the construction were
piled on the yard . In addition, a piece of mining equipment, was
also stored on the outside of the area . Sediment laden water was
flowing off of the area around and through the recent construction in
ditches caused by earlier erosive forces of past runoff events .
The second part of this violation was written for the discharge of
water from the french drain on the Sutey Waste pile . I must admit
that I have inspected the area during previous oversight inspections
and have overlooked this violation . But it was pointed out to me as
a violation that was missed and is now being addressed in this TDN .
The french drain was built to carry seep flows occurring under the
waste pile away from the fill so it would not saturate the area .
That drain was not segregated from the infiltration occurring in the
pile so it now receives drainage from the seeps as well as water In
the structure itself . The third violation of the TDN was written
for the failure to monitor groundwater in monitoring well GW--]- .
According to company officials, a bottle was inserted in the well to
pull a grab sample during their 2nd quarterly monitoring period . The
bottle stuck part of the way down the pipe because the pipe is bent
from movement within the waste pile . The filing date for that
quarters monitoring was dated during July, their next quarter
monitoring record was dated 10/24/89 . They did have some field
sample results for the quarters so they are still able to gather
information in the field but the grab sample was not possible due to
the deformed structure .
The fourth violation of this TDN was written for the failure to
control and minimize water pollution from their surface coal mining
operations . Two unlined eroded channels were noted on the outslope
of the glory hole pad that drained into the floc pond area . I asked
Mr . Thompson what had caused the erosion . He said that- part of the
drainage was from the pad itself but most of it was coming from all
overflowing mine wager tank on the upper end of the pad . I asked him
why it was overflowing, he responded by saying that they did not have
a shutoff float valve on the structure . Water from that as well as
the yard runoff itself, flowed out over the outslope of the yard and
was not contained in a drop structure from there, it flows out across
the dryer pad and eventually ends up in the 001 pond treatment
system. Steps should be taken to minimize the runoff through the
bottom yard because of the fines that are picked up by the water and
the nick points should armoured to reduce the contribution of solids
to flow going through the pond system.
The fifth violation of the TDN was written for the failure to
diveort surface runoff from the outslope of the fill to properly
designed channels on the rock tunnel dump. Ponding areas were noted
In two places on the dump . The first area was created by trash
stored in the winter area . The road into the dumping area is bermed
per MSHA requirement but the bottom end of the road was not open
because trash was piled in that: area thus creating an infiltration
zone on the face of the fill . The second area on the, fill, is * more