Air, water concerns voiced over proposed South Huntingdon coal refuse reclamation

Nearby residents and environmentalists are worried a proposed project to reclaim coal refuse in South Huntingdon could negatively impact local water and air quality.

They aired their concerns this week at a virtual meeting about Robindale Energy Services’ plan to remove usable fuel from the Soberdash coal refuse pile on 12 acres near Hunker and leave behind a grassy area suitable for industrial development.

If the project is approved, Latrobe-based Robindale will be responsible for containing dust on the work site, according to representatives of the state Department of Environmental Protection, which conducted the meeting. They said removal of the coal refuse is expected to improve the water quality in adjacent Sewickley Creek, which would be monitored upstream and downstream from the work site.

Robindale also must post a bond as an assurance of its work.

Eric Harder of the Mountain Watershed Association told the state officials he’s concerned work on the reclamation or subsequent development of the site could lead to subsidence and breaching of undermined areas, allowing water to get into the mine void. He said that could create a new source of mine drainage into the creek.

If the former mine is impacted, Harder said, “There’s going to be subsidence issues in that entire footprint. That’s something we need to think about.”

Robindale has proposed only removing coal refuse above the ground and is not expected to breach the underlying mine, according to DEP’s Diane Roote, a licensed professional geologist and one of the lead reviewers of the project permit application.

“Robindale did some drilling,” said DEP civil engineer Chris Vought, another lead reviewer. “They have a pretty good idea where the surface is. They know how much material is there.

“We are aware of the deep mines out there. If this area was subsidence-prone, it would have been noted” by DEP’s Bureau of Abandoned Mine Reclamation.

Under Robindale’s proposed contract with the DEP, it would screen about 350,000 tons of Soberdash coal refuse at the site, trucking away an estimated 297,500 tons (about 85%) of the material to burn at a coal-fired power plant — likely at the Seward power plant.

The rocks and burnt material that remains would be incorporated into the final grading of the site, which calls for “a vegetated level pad with soiled out-slopes for potential future industrial land use.”

Neighbors said trash has been buried at the site. “Anything they encounter will be remediated,” Roote said of Robindale.

According to Roote, Robindale is proposing four to six weeks of preparatory activity at the site, about 21 months for removing burnable coal material, five to 10 weeks for final grading and four weeks for seeding and mulching. DEP could not provide an estimated timeline for when it might conclude its review of the project and make a decision on approving the Robindale contract.

Refuse from a Keystone Coal and Coke Company coal preparation plant was deposited at the Soberdash site between 1939 and 1952.

The DEP officials said they couldn’t comment on possible development of the site, since no one has filed an application to do so. They also declined to discuss any plans for adjacent properties.

“DEP has not received and is not currently reviewing a permit application for a post-project industrial use on this or neighboring parcels at this time,” spokeswoman Lauren Fraley later said, adding that the department “cannot speculate on future development.”

Robindale also has requested a permit covering stormwater discharges during its work at the site.

“My biggest concern is for the wildlife and what is going to happen to the creek,” said Patti Nelis, a nearby homeowner on Pittsburgh Pike.

DEP has noted the project would remove coal refuse that has been a source of runoff affecting Sewickley Creek, which is a warm water fishery.

Vought said the project is designed to “self-contain” any additional runoff during Robindale’s work at the site. He explained the company would bring in portable equipment to screen the coal refuse and would work from the northwestern corner of the site toward the south and east, leaving a “berm” on the east side to help contain runoff. The company also would employ silt socks around the site to trap sediment, he said.

Stanley Siegel, who has property downstream from the site, aired concerns about the possible impact on creek water.

While Siegel agreed that removal of the coal refuse is a good step, he questioned how DEP can assure the quality of creek water won’t be negatively affected. “This is serious,” he said. “I have animals. I use it for my domestic use.”

Mountain Watershed Association Executive Director Ashley Funk expressed concern about dust migrating from the project site.

According to DEP, a separate air quality permit isn’t required for the project because of its relatively small scale.

All trucks leaving the site with coal material are to be tarped, according to Roote. She said Robindale “would have water trucks on the site and would water down the area where they’re screening the refuse and any areas where there could be the potential for fugitive dust.”

Joe Lloyd of Robindale consultant CME Engineering said trucks would depart from the site using Alberts Road, alternatively known as Elderaldo Road, and connecting sections of Brickyard Hill and Plastic Factory roads to reach the New Stanton Ruffs Dale Road and, ultimately, Interstate 70. Except during shorter winter days, operations would occur during daylight hours, he said.