INSPEC14667 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Somerset 5/94 page 2 permit revision to address this problem, The revision, consisting of seven maps and narrative, was approved 7/7/94. East of the Sanborn Creek portal area, along the abandoned state road outside of the permit boundary, is a rock pile 154 yards long. Some of the rocks exhibit signs of drilling and some of the rocks have roof bolts in them. SMC said that the rocks came from the railroad relocation that was done in 1991. The railroad was relocated to eliminate some bends in the track (per SMC). This also enabled SMC to put in the Sanborn Creek portal. SMC paid the contractor that relocated the railroad for the railroad work. The permit is silent with regard to the basis for relocating the railroad tracks, which company paid for the work, etc. This condition has the flavor of an underground mining activity because the railroad had to be relocated in order to put in the Sanborn Creek portal and SMC paid for the track relocation. However, I do not have enough information at this time to decide. A CMP in Bear Creek was partially blocked by debris on the inlet side. We removed some logs, and SMC later cleared the rest with a loader. The approximate original contour (AOC) requirements for the Bear Creek substation and portal pad location are not in compliance with the approved Colorado program at this time. The pad and road were constructed pre-law. Fill material was simply cast over the side and into Bear Creek. The approved permit grants an AOC waiver for this location and SMC is only required to retrieve a small part of the uppermost fill material. At the time of the inspection, the Bureau of Land Management IBLM1, as the landowner, had not specifically approved the AOC waiver (2.06.5(2)(el). Since the inspection, DMG ordered SMC to submit a letter from the landowner approving the AOC waiver. BLM has submitted a letter stating that it approves the reclamation as described in the Somerset permit and that it is BLM's understanding that the areas cannot be reclaimed to AOC because of the steep topography. However, this letter does not show that the landowner, "...has knowingly requested, in writing,...that avariance be granted" (2.06.5(211e)). The other two problems have not been addressed. Colorado regulations allow AOC waivers for the following postmining land uses: industrial, commercial, agricultural, residential, or public use (2.06.5(2)(a)). The approved postmining land use for this area is undeveloped land. Therefore, DMG does not have the authority to grant an AOC waiver for this type of postmining land use. DMG has stated that the land configuration will lend itself to one of the postmining land uses that are eligible for an AOC waiver. Therefore, even though the approved postmining land use is not one for which an AOC waiver may be granted, the land configuration itself makes it eligible for a waiver. This interpretation is contrary to the regulations. Also, BLM has stated that there