Laserfiche WebLink
iii iiiiuiiiiiu iii _ <br />999 <br />United States Department of the Interior <br />OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING ~ <br />RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT -~ ~ <br />SUITE 310 <br />625 SILVER AVENUE. S. W. In Reply deter To: <br />ALBUQUERQUE, NEW MEXICO 87102 <br />July 9, 1991 <br />Permit: C-80-005 <br />Mine Name: Seneca II <br />Nlc. Steve Renner, Coal Program Supervisor <br />Mined Land Reclamation Division ~~j Eti d ~`~ <br />Department of Natura] Resources E/" ~~•.i <br />215 Centennial Building <br />1313 Sherrtan Street ~~~ 1 1 1991 <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />h~lined _ <br />Dear Mr. Renner: ~eCiatpafl0n ;~iasion <br />The enclosed Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSM) <br />inspection report identifies a violation that is considered to have <br />existed at the time of the last State cotrplete inspection (LSCI) but had <br />not been cited. <br />Date of Federal Inspection: 6/20/91 ; Date of LSCI: 3/21/91 <br />The determination that the State did not cite the violation(s) is based <br />on one or rrore of the following reasons: <br />The condition was identified in a State inspection report but no <br />State enforcement action was taken. <br />_~esign criteria or required certification has not been met for a <br />structure in existence as of the last State cortglete inspection <br />(sediment pond, excess spoil fill, etc.). <br />Necessary controls that wire required at the time of the last <br />State cortplete inspection have not been established (down drains; <br />draining reclaimed areas and haul roads.) <br />~_Site conditions indicate that the violation noted had been in <br />existence at the time of, or prior to, the last State cortplete <br />inspection. <br />Other (give explanation). <br />Although the violation ~.es abated during a joint inspection, OSM <br />believes that the violation was evident during the last State cortQlete <br />inspection. <br />