E-Edition

 Photo Gallery


 Weather


 Online Poll

 Announcement  Forms

 - Births
 - Engagements
 - Weddings
 - Anniversary
 - Obituaries

 Customer
   Service

 - Subscriber Services
 - Place an Ad
 - Letter to the Editor
 - About Us
 - Contact Us
 - Archives



IEPA Hosts Fourth Public Mine Hearing


Although the stated purpose of the hearing was rather narrow, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) gave speakers substantial latitude during the fourth public hearing on Hillsboro Energy's proposed Deer Run Mine Thursday at the VFW in Taylor Springs.

The hearing was regarding an IEPA Section 401 Water Quality Certification. At the actual mine site, the company plans to dredge or fill 6.04 acres of wetlands and 7,855 linear feet of streams. The federal government, through the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers, has the final authority on those plans via a Section 404 Permit, but as part of that process, IEPA must certify that the plan will not impact water quality.

According to hearing officer Kurt Neibergall, the comment period will remain open until midnight, Nov. 24. Comments may be e-mailed to kurt.neibergall@illinois.gov or mailed to Hearing Officer Kurt Neibergall #5, Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, 1021 North Grand Avenue East, PO Box 19276, Springfield, IL 62794-9276.

The 401 Water Quality Certification hearing was the fourth regarding the mine. The first was an Illinois Department of Natural Recourses (IDNR) informal conference in February, followed by an IDNR public hearing in March. The IEPA hosted a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) hearing last month. Although the crowd Thursday was much smaller than for the previous three hearings, it was still a crowd, albeit less than 75, and the hearing lasted just short of five hours.

Dan Heacock, one of six IEPA panelists who answered questions at the hearing, said the mine's plan impacts "6.04 acres of jurisdictional wetlands and 7,855 linear feet of ephemeral and intermittent streams tributary to the Middle Fork of Shoal Creek."

To mitigate those impacts, the mine proposed to create approximately 14.16 acres of wetland, and restore 5,499 linear feet of ephemeral and intermittent streams.

Cindy Skrukrud, clean water advocate for the Illinois chapter of the Sierra Club, questioned why nearly 8,000 linear feet of stream can be destroyed and replaced by 5,500 in mitigation.

"Doesn't the ratio have to be at least one-to-one?" she asked.

Panelist Alyson Grady said the plan was determined using the Missouri Stream Mitigation Method which uses a mathematical computation to take into account more than just linear stream feet.

Skrukrud also said that the east and west forks of Shoal Creek, including tributaries in the permit area, are rated by IDNR as "biologically significant."

"We will definitely have to evaluate this information," Grady said.

Much of the discussion regarded drainage in the shadow area, a subject that IEPA panelists admitted was outside the purview of a water quality hearing.

"As mining begins to happen, the Corp keeps tabs on what's going on in the shadow area, as does IDNR," panelist Bob Mosher said.

Throughout the evening, panelist did their best to answer questions that were under the jurisdiction of IDNR and the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers.

"We're not IDNR, but we do talk to them," Mosher said. "Any drainage issue has to be corrected."

Jason Boltz, IEPA attorney, added that although shadow area drainage is not a specific issue for his agency, the IEPA will react if any water pollution is caused by subsidence.

"The Illinois Environmental Protection Act is still in force everywhere," he said.

Mosher later added that the IEPA has seen no evidence of "chemical contamination due to subsidence in Illinois." He invited anyone with evidence to the contrary to submit it for investigation.

Roger Dennison, President of Hillsboro Energy, said that although the hearing pertains to the permit area, IEPA has asked him to comment on the shadow area.

"All streams in the shadow area are dry seasonally," Dennison said, and introduced Amanda Pankau, an environmental scientist with HDR Engineering, to back him up.

Pankau said, using data from state and federal agencies, she mapped watersheds from Miller Creek, Bearcat Creek, and McDavid Branch, all within the shadow area.

"All streams have intermittent or ephemeral flow," she said, adding "No aquatic threatened or endangered species occur within the shadow area."

Because the IEPA anticipated interest in the shadow area, they, too have submitted a draft report entitled "Pre-mine Stream Assessment Deer Run Mine Shadow Area."

"The report examines the shadow area for land use, watershed drainage areas, 303(d) List status of streams, channelized stream segments, riparian buffers, threatened and endangered species consultation with Illinois Department of Natural Resources, and a stream flow assessment statistic called 7Q1.1 zero flow for shadow area streams," Mosher said.

That report also concluded that "it is likely that all the streams will have no flow for at least a continuous seven day period in nine out of 10 years."

Mosher also pointed out that the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers plans to include special conditions "that will require the mine to file an impact analysis and stream restoration plan before commencing subsidence control activities as required by IDNR under SMRCA (Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act).

"The restoration plan must contain measurable performance standards to access whether channel stability, in stream habitat recovery, and an appropriate flow regime have been restored to the shadow area streams."

Many speakers, including Lee Schraut, Larry Schraut, and Jessica Dexter of the Environmental Law and Policy Center, expressed frustration that, since three agencies have permitting processes (IDNR, IEPA, and Corp), it is difficult for landowners to determine who is ultimately responsible for making sure subsidence repairs are done properly.

"The company needs to satisfy you regarding drainage," IEPA panelist Amy Zimmer said. "If not, go to IDNR."

Heacock added that drainage issues are often settled by local control, like drainage districts or soil and water conservation districts.

Dave Pastrovich, chairman of the Montgomery County Soil and Water Conservation District, said his organization has yet to be consulted.

"No, we have not met (with Hillsboro Energy) to discuss drainage issues in the subsidence area," Pastrovich said. "I have spoken to Mr. Dennison and he indicates that he plans to, but as of yet, it has not come to fruition."

Becky Clayborn, regional representative with the Sierra Club, expressed concern about the post-subsidence map furnished by the coal company that predicts drainage before correction work, and asked for a plan of that work.

"Specific corrective action will be determined after subsidence," Heacock said.

In answer to a question from Larry Schraut, Heacock said that he does not think the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers is planning a hearing prior to issuing a Section 404 Permit, and in answer to a question by Dexter regarding how streams in the shadow area will be restored, Mosher said initially, the ridges between longwall panels will act as a dam.

"Somehow, they have to remove that ridge so the stream will flow as it used to," he said.

How quickly must streams be restored?

"What we have been told by IDNR is that it must be within a timely manner," Grady said. "There is no set time frame."

Joyce Blumenshine, Peoria, asked if water quality from McDavid Branch would have any impact on Coffeen Lake, "notorious for low water."

Mosher said he didn't foresee a change in quantity or quality of water into the lake, but would find out if any water will be held back temporarily while awaiting restoration.

Mary Ellen DeClue, Litchfield, asked about potential impact on the Kaskaskia River.

"We look at immediate impacts first," Heacock said. "I don't think there is any reason to believe that if East Fork of Shoal Creek is OK, there will be any impact 30 of 50 miles downstream."

In response to a question from Karyl Dressen about whether wells in the shadow will be impacted, Zimmer said no, since wells average 50 feet in depth and the coal is 500 feet deep. If residents have issues, though, IEPA will regulate water quality and IDNR will regulate water quantity.

The IEPA also heard concerns on issues remaining from last month's NPDES permit hearing regarding water leaving the mine site.

Lee Schraut asked it the proximity of the proposed mine to city limits raised a "red flag" to anyone at the agency.

"Yes," Mosher answered. "Our prime duty is to make sure water quality standards our met. By making sure that water quality standards for Central Park Creek are being met, we feel we're doing our job."

Clarence Loucks, who farms southwest of Hillsboro, was also concerned about water quality.

"The Middle Fork of Shoal Creek runs through my property," he said, and added concern about whether water runoff would increase. "The weather seems to be changing."

"Water leaving the site won't increase from what is already occurring," Mosher said. "In fact, it will decrease from consumptive use."

Joyce Huber, Springfield, asked for a clarification about the four-foot clay liners that would be beneath sediment ponds on the mine site, and the proximity of the 14.16 acre proposed mitigation wetland to the City of Hillsboro.

Zimmer said the clay liners would have the "same permeability as a solid waste landfill," and Grady pointed to a parcel on the north side of 9th Avenue, a couple of miles east of the prison, as the new wetland location.

Skrukrud also suggested coal at the mine site be stored in silos instead of outside in piles and Herbert Wodtke of Loogootee renewed his suggestion to return "gob" to the underground mine cavity.

Mary Arlis Bates expressed frustration with IDNR and told the panel, "We are depending on the IEPA to protect the environment."

Catherine Edmiston raised concerns about polluted air and high cancer rates, the location of the refuse pile, global warming, cemeteries, and an environmental impact study.

Clayborn suggested that the proposed economic impact of the mine does not take into account the possible harmful impact to farmers.

"They're selling their farmland to a company that is not going to farm it," Clayborn said. "That is not helping the farming segment of Hillsboro's economy. It is killing it."

Print this story   |   Email this story

Comments


(optional)
   





 
About Us | Archives | E-Editions | Contact Us

Copyright The Journal-News, Hillsboro, IL. All rights reserved.