ENFORCE20836 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

In the Colowyo Permit Revision No. 1 application, a variance from topsoil salvage requirements is requested for diversion ditches. The request was made pursuant to Rule 4.06.2, and cited two reasons for the request which fall within the guidance provided in 4.06. Particularly pertinent was the discussion regarding the lack of topsoil on steep slopes, across which the ditch traverses, and the resultant damage to adjacent topsoil resources should the avail~Lle topsoil at the ditch location be salvaged and hauled to a topsoil. stockpile. In order to alleviate the potential loss of material, the operator has, with Division approval, removed topsoil encountered while constructing the ditch, and placed it adjacent to the structure. This material was subsequently seeded. This stabilized material will be available for reclamation of the ditch. The Division granted the variance request, as documented in the June 4, 1992 "Proposed Decision and Findings of Compliance" for the Colowyo Permit Revision. The variance was approved for two reasons. The ditch traverses slopes which approach, and in some places exceed, 2H::1V. As the AFO notes, topsoil is not present in many of these steep areas. Therefore, little if any topsoil is available for salvage at these areas. Secondly, due to the remoteness of many portions of the diversion, it would have been necessary to traverse cross-country to salvage what soil was present. This clearly would have caused needless and unnecessary damage to the intervening soil resources. Our finding in this regard is supported by the Colorado Regulations at 4.06.2, and by the Federal Regulations as well. The Federal regulatory concept is documented in the Federal Register Vol. 48, No. 95 which states that "...OSM agrees that the possibility of needless soil removal and damage to soil properties should be considered, as well as vegetative cover, terrain, and climate, when determining the need for topsoil removal under this exception." Colorado has, in fact, taken these very conditions into account when determining that a variance for the Colowyo ditch was justified. Colorado has appropriately interpreted its regulations and applied them as intended. Therefore, no violation or permit defect exists. The AFO determination is flawed in four critical areas. The AFO has misread the Colorado regulations to say that topsoil removal variances may be granted in "...areas where light traffic does not destroy existing vegetation or cause erosion, aad secondly, where needless damage to soil characteristics would occur" (AFO correspondence, November 16, 1992; emphasis added). The Federal Register clearly states that these were intended to be disjunctive tests. Therefore, the Colorado regulations allow variances for light traffic areas or areas where needless damage would occur. It is for this very circumstance that the variance was approved by the Division.