ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD

September

20,

1984

BLACK BEAUTY

COAL

COMPANY~

?

Petitioners

)

PCB 84—109

ILLINNOIS ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

AGENCY

Respondent.

OPINION

AND

ORDER

OP

THE

BOARD

(by J. Marlin):

ThIs matter

comes before the Board upon the July 31,

1984

filing of a petition for variance by the

Black

Beauty Coal

Company

(BBCC)

from the 35 mg/I total suspended

solids

(TSS)

effluent standard of 35 III. Adm, Code 406.106.

BBCC requests

a variance for its Cedar Creek Mine in Brown and

Schuyler

Counties for five years or until and

if there

is a grant of

regulatory change in R84-29.

The Illinois Environmental Pro-

tection Agency

(Agency) on August

31,

1984 filed its recoin—

mendation to grant the variance for eighteen months subject

to conditions0

Filed with the variance petition was a

motion

for expedited consideration which is granted0

BBCC

waived its

ri~ht

to

a

hearing and none was held0

No public cou~ments

in

opposition to BBCC’s request were received0

BBCC

is the owner/operator

of

a proposed surface coal

mining, processing and shipping complex which covers

portions

of 3,548 acres

in

Brown and Schuyler Counties0

BBCC has ap-

plied

to

the Illinois Department of Mines and Minerals

(XDMM)

for development

permits for the Cedar Creek Miner which is

expected to begin production approximately on January

1,

1985.

It will’employ 125 new employees and produce 700,000 clean

tons of bituminous coal

per

year

(Pet0

2,

4).

The mining

program will consist of developing structures to control

run-

off, clearing vegetation where necessary,

removing topsoil,

removin~jroot media where necessary,

and stockpiling soil

for

subsequent reclamation work.

The land will be graded

to

ap-

proximate the original contour.

Topsoil and root media will

be replaced and then revegetated

(Pet.

3).

The

mine itself

it composed of fifteen permit areas

which

are further composed of

twenty~five

subareas

(Pet.

17;

Attach.

1 Hydro. Map).

All

subareas are within a five mile

radius of

the processing complex.

No more than three subareas will

be

mined at a time

(Pet.

5).

The overburden covering the

coal

seam in

the

subareas varies

from twenty to seventy

feet.

The

coal seam is located at shallow depths

on high flat areas but

has been eroded away in the lowlands and ravines.

60437

---

The fifty~fivesedimentation ponds needed to control

TSS

runoff are located in ravines between steep slopes

(Pet.

12;

Ag.

Rec.

2,

3).

The shallow bedrock in the area has

contributed

to diffiqulties in deepening the ponds.

The ponds will

be built

as needed ar1d then reclaimed.

Associated diversion ditches

will

channel runoff to the ponds.

Detention time in fifty—three

of

the ponds ranges from l~9to 12.5 hours for runoff

from a ten

year twenty~fou~

hour storm event,

Two other ponds have six-

teen and twenty~twohour detention times.

Twenty foot

high

dams could be constructed but are not cost effective

or feasible

considering the short life of each mining subarea

(Pet.

10).

BBCC will have to obtain pond design approval in the

form of an

NPDES permit from the Agency.

In addition, BBCC proposes

to

monitor the discharge from the ponds and submit ~he data

to

the Agency.

BBCC claims that the environmental impact of granting

the

variance will be minimal and that the ponds will reduce the

sediment loading to the area streams

(Pet.

6).

However,

the

Agency contends that the claimed sediment reduction is

un-

founded because BBCC used the less restrictive federal set-

tleable solids standard rather than Illinois~TSS

standard

when initially designing the sediment ponds and determining

the stream sediment loading

(Ag. Rec.

2;

Pet., Attachs,

4,

2).

There is little valid data at this time to support

BBCC~sclaim

of reduced stream sediment loading.

Surface mining for coal in Illinois has traditionally

been

carried out on the flatlands.

The BBCC proposal to mine on

ridges is not often done in Illinois.

This mining project

will

give BECC and the Agency the opportunity to gather data on what

is essentially a new type of mining in Illinois.

The

proposed

sediment control measures can be considered experimental

and

should provide field data which will assist the state in

deciding

whether such projects should be encouraged in

the future.

During mining BBCC proposes, where possible,

to contempor—

aneous1~restore the approximate original contour of the land

by soil replacement andrevegetation

(Pet,

3)..

This contempor-

aneous restoration, combined with the short active life of

the

sedimentation ponds, estimated to be under three

years

(Pet.

8),

should minimize adverse environmental impact.

BBCC must show that compl!ance with the TSS

standard

would

impose an arbitrary or unreasonable hardship.

BBCC asserts

an

arbitrary or unreasonable hardship would exist if the

variance

were denied because the variance is necessary for Agency

issu

-

ance of the needed NPDES permit

(Pet.

14).

BBCC asserts

this

would force it to construct larger ponds which would be

either

unreasonably expensive and/or impossible

(id.)

due to the

unique topography of the land

(Pet.

15).

The only other option

---

would be not starting mining operations (Id.)~

The

Agency

asserts that BBCC knew of the strict Illinois TSS

standard

early in the permit application process

(Ag. Rec.

2),

BBcC,

however, contends in its motion for expedited decision that

it only recently became aware that a variance would be re-

quired.

Although BBCC has not included the planning and

design

costs of the project, to the Board it is evident

that

sub-

stantial amounts of time and money have been expended

given

the advanced state of the project and fact that BBCC

has a

contract to deliver coal from the mine.

The Board finds that even though the hardship is

to a

certain extent self~imposed,to deny BBCC a variance

would

impose an arbitrary or unreasonable hardship.

At this time,

there remains a question whether an economically

feasible

means of complying exists given the topography of the

area,

If the variance were not granted, hardship would

include loss

of the substantial amount of money already expended,

the ter-

mination of the mining project, and the loss of

the value of

contracts to furnish coal.

The Board notes that this

project

will have minimal adverse environmental impact

and will pro-

vide data

on

the impact of

a

mining method new

to Illinois.

By limiting the period of variance to eighteen

months and

requiring BBCC, inter alia, to monitor its mine

discharges,

the Board allows collection of necessary data on

sediment

loading and pond efficiency while maintaining controls to

minimize adverse environmental effect.

The Agency has some concerns which it believes can be

addressed by granting the variance for eighteen

months and

requiring additional collection of data.

Soil

boring and

bedrock elevation data would be used to determine whether

ponds could be enlarged by excavating behind the dams,

Data

on the use of flocculating agents to aid in

sediment control

would also be

required.

The Board will impose

these require-

ments as conditions to the grant of this variance.

Black Beauty Coal Company is granted a variance

from

the

total suspended solids effluent standard of

35

Ill.

Adm. Code

406.106 for a period of eighteen months for its~da~?re~

Mine subject to the conditions below.

Although the

Agency

claims that BBCC may exceed the total iron mining

effluent

standard

(Ag. Rec.

2).

BBCC has not requested variance

from

this standard.

This Opinion constitutes the Board~sfindings of

fact and

conclusions of law in this matter.

---

4

ORDER

Black Beauty

Coal

Company

is hereby granted a variance

from the total suspended solids effluent standard of 35

lii.

Ada. Code 406.106 for its Cedar Creek Mine in Brown

and

Schuyler Counties, Illinois, subject to the following con-

ditions:

This variance expires on March 20, 1986.

2.

This variance is only to apply to the first set

of sediment ponds necessary to start this mining

operation

(an estimated 6 to 10 ponds)

and

only

for the life of those ponds.

No additional ponds

are to be installed under this variance

beyond

March 20, 1986

and

no pond enlargement to ac-

comodate expanded mining operations is to occur

after initial pond installation.

3.

Petitioner is to implement an intensive sampling

program,

after

consultation

with

the

Agency,

sufficient

to

determine

the

efficiency

of

the

first

set

of

ponds.

This

program

is

to

be

car-

ried out by Petitioner during the variance

period,

with

the

results

submitted to

the

Agency

as they are obtained.

4.

Petitioner is to implement a program, after con-

sultation with the Agency, for adding flocculating

agents to the ponds sufficient to

aid

in sediment

control.

5.

Any

further request

for

variance

submitted

by

Petitioner is to include results of the sampling

program described above, as well as evidence, in-

cluding soil borings and bedrock elevations, to

show

if

the

balance

of

the

ponds

can

be

enlarged

by

such

means

as

excavating

deeper

behind

the

dams.

6.

Within forty-five days of the adoption of the Board

Order in this proceeding, Petitioner shall execute

and forward to the Illinois Environmental. Protection

Agency, Mine Pollution Control Program, 2200 ChurchUt

Road, Springfield, Illinois

62706, a Certificate

of

Acceptance

and

Agreement

to

be

bound

by

all

terms

and

conditions

of

this

variance.

This

forty—five

day

period

shall

be

held

in

abeyance

for

any

period

this

matter

is

being

appealed.

The

form

of

the

certificate

shall

be

as

follows:

---

5

CERTIFICATE

I,

(We).

___

___

____

___

hereby accept(s)

and

agree(s) t~S

bound

by

all

terms and conditions

o~the

Order of

the Pollution Control Board

in PCB 84-109, dated Sep-

tember

,

1984.

Petitioner

By;

Authorized Agent

Title

Date

IT IS

SO ORDERED.

I,

Dorothy M. Gunn, Clerk of the Illinois

Pollution Control

Board, hereby certify that~,the above

Opinion and Order was adopted

on the

~

day

of ~

1984 by a vote of

-

~‘C,

)7~.

~

Dorothy M, ,tunn, Clerk

Illinois