INSPEC22971 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 999 TAKE~~ ~ United States Department of the Interio PRIDE INS r OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING ~~ Reclamation and Enforcement t~ ~ Suite 1200 y F, ~I ~RQ 505 Marquette.4venue N.W. Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102 n ~R ~ ~ ~nn3 April 9, 1993 DtV`S"~ ~ (,i . ............. u ...,:,~..~,:i9 Permit: C-81-07.3 Mine Name: Golden Ea41e Mr. Steve Renner, Coal Program Supervisor Division of Minerals and Geology Department of Natural Resources 215 Centennial Building 1313 Sherman Street Denver, CO 80203 Dear Mr. Renner: The enclosed Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement. (OSM) inspection report identifies violations that are considered to helve existed at the time of the last State complete inspection (LSC I) but had not been cited. Date of Federal Inspection: 3/25/93 Date of LSCI: 12/16/92 The determination that the State did not cite the violations is t>a sed on one or more of the following reasons: The condition was identified in a State inspection report but no State enforcement action was taken. X Design criteria or required certification has not been met i:or a structure in existence as of the last State complete inspection (sediment pond, excess spoil fill, etc.). 2 X Necessary controls that were required at the time of the last State complete inspection have not been established (diversi_on ditches, sediment ponds, top soil protection, signs and markers, etc.). 4, 5, 6 X Site conditions indicate that the violation(s) noted had been in existence at the time of, or prior to, the last State complete inspection. ~ 3 Other (give explanation). Although the violations were cited by the State, or were abated during a joint inspection, OSM believes that the violations were evident during the last State complete inspection. 1. Failure to maintain drainage control 2. Failure to design an d/or certify 3. Failure to maintain ponds and SAE 9. Topsoil protection 5. Signs a nd markers 6. Disturbance outside of approved areas