INSPEC02714

• Permit No: C1981023
• IBM Index Class Name: Inspection
• Doc Name: INSPECTION REPORT
• Inspection Date: 12/20/1999
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

Shuey, Steve • •
From: Mezei, Nick SPK [NMezei~spk.usace.army.mil]
Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 1999 8:58 AM
To: 'jan~kaiserventures.com'
Cc: 'mtkeegan~earthlink.net'; 'steve.shuey~state.co.us'; 'aqua_hab~frontier.net'
Subject: Stollsteimer Creek near Chimney Rock Clean Water Act Violation
e-mail message, Dec. 22, 1999 Re~jVed
Memo to Jan Roberts and Mike Keegan, at Kaiser Ventures (760.392.4257]
Kaiser Ventures is leasee of reclaimed mine along Stollsteimer Creek where
Clean Water Act violation (by others) exists.
Jan and Mike:
This memo is intended to document our telephone conversation of
12/21/99.
1. It is my understanding that in the process of obtaining large rocks
from areas outside of your leased area, Aqua Hab crossed your leased area,
and temporarily deposited several large rocks below the ordinary high water
mark of Stollsteimer Creek. Also, the equipment used to maneuver these
rocks crossed Stollsteimer Creek, disturbing the banks and bottom of the
channel. According to Corey Sue Hutchinson of Aqua Hab, the purpose of the
discharge of rock was to temporarily store the rocks until they could be
loaded onto trucks on the other side of the creek. According to Wally
Erickson of the State of Colorado Division of Minerals and Geology, most of
the rocks stockpiled temporarily were above the oniinary high water level,
and the disturbance to the channel was not substantial. I will address only
the issues within the jurisdiction of the Corps of Engineers, which is
limited to discharge of material in waters of the United States.
2. The unpennitted discharge of material below the ordinary high water
elevation of a channel is a violation of the Clean Water Act if the limits
and conditions of potentially applicable nationwide general permits are not
observed. The subject discharge could easily have been avoided, therefore
the general conditions of the nationwide permits were not observed,
resulting in a violation. The mechanical disturbance of the banks, as well
as the discharge of the rocks occurred on property where Aqua Hab did not
have permission to trespass, therefore a violation of local laws and
regulations occurred, which is also a violation of nationwide permit general
conditions.
3. The adverse impacts to the aquatic environment due to these violations
are minimal, especially if the impacts are ameliorated in an expeditious
manner.
4. It is the policy of the Corps of Engineers to resolve minor violations
of the Clean Water Act in a manner which would result in the remediation of
the aquatic environment as quickly as possible, if the violator agrees to an
acceptable remediation effort. In this instance, the violator has agreed to
a remediation plan proposed by Wally Erickson, and that remediation is
acceptable to the Corps of Engineers. Remediation will consist of the
removal of rocks from below the ordinary high water elevation of
Stollsteimer Creek immediately, and the restoration and stabilization of the
disturbed bed and banks of the channel.
DEC 2 21y99
~ryngo Field Office
ptvtsbn of Mrnerals & Geology
5. I hope that Kaiser Ventures and the violator can resolve the Clean
Water Act violation expeditiously. If you have any questions, please