PERMFILE53352

• Permit No: C1984062
• IBM Index Class Name: Permit File
• Doc Date: 12/11/2001
• Section_Exhibit Name: EXHIBIT 26 PERMANENT OVERBURDEN STOCKPILE
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

• etr. kie>saal !_ Iona 2
renewal of the permit for the area. It has also been acknovlcdged that
the area noted in this part of the TDN vas seeded in years preceding the
approval of tha permanent program. Rovever, lS1RD finds that this would
fall uadar tlr normal ata~atds fot planting and should not be made part
of the caztifiettion process far tba ant-of-pit spoil dump dua• to the
constzuctioa eertifieatlon waiver.
AFO finds lQRD'a rasponsa to violation 1 of 2 to be good cause for not
takiag action. It Ss apparaat that the requirement for oz against
certifieatien hu not bsaa adaquatsly addrassa! in patmittina. AFO new
recognizes that it is identified and will ba addressed in the next round
of permitting for future referanee.
The TDN cites Colorado CCR 4.07-2 Section 4.05.2(1) as the regulation
believed to have been violated for violation 2 of 2. The SDN states
that the operator failed to pass all surface drainage from the disturbed
area through a sediment pond or a treatment facility before leaving the
permit area.
t9.RD's response indicates that the drainage from the area cited in the
TDN is not being passed through a sediment pond or a treatment facility.
Instead, it is included in a "small area exemption' granted by the
• Division for drainage control for the area under Section 4.05(3) of the
Colorado regulations.
AFO has reviewed the supporting doetimentation for the acreage cited in
the TDN and concurs with HIRD that it is included in a 'small area
exemption.` The information does not, however, refer to demonstrations
presented by the operator that would clearly shoe that drainage control
from the area is "exempted' from passing through sediment ponds oz
treatment facilities. Exemptions may be authorized only if the
disturbed surface drainage complies with applicable State and Federal
water-quality requirements for downstream receiving waters.
AFO has not found evidence in the lIIRD response to justify that no
violation exists. Please submit additional information for this office
to review in regazd to this part of the TDN within 10 working says o'_
the receipt of this correspondence. Upon review of the additional
informatioa, a finding will be made by this office for violation 2 or 2.
If you disagree with the findings of this office, you may request an
informal review in accordance with 30 CFR 842.211(b)(1)(iii)(A). If you
have other questions regarding this corzespoadence, please call Gary
Fritz at [phone].
Sincerely,
•
Robert R. Rage ireetor
Albuquerque Fia,~~ Office