REV09300

• Permit No: C1981019
• IBM Index Class Name: Revision
• Doc Date: 1/2/1990
• From: OSM
• To: DNR
• Type & Sequence: PR1
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

.' /'
•
United States Department of the Interior ""'' '''~~~?
OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING OCT j q 1986
Reclamation and Enforcement Aa,p,,.,,
BROOKS TOWERS ~+~':_`JC,y,
'~a , w .
1020 I STH STREET ~~ "`' n~'C• , - ,. 4: o- .; :, . _.,
DENVER, COLORADO solo'- RECEhlf'~rO~1R~•'
OCT 2 1986 '~'-':
MEMGRAtrDUM uC~i - ~ 1°8u
T0: Robert H. Hagen, Director .
Albuquerque Fie 1d Office ~~ ALBUQUERQUE FIEF OFFICE
FROM: Melvin L. Shilling, Chief~~
Division of Federal Progr UUU```""''"'"
SUBJECT: General Requirements vs. Specific Requirements for Construction of
Valley Fi11s, Colorado State Program
In response to pour memorandum of August 25, 1986 the Western Field Operations
(WFO) has reviexed the permit file for the Seneca II mine, Wolf Creek
Revision. Shin revision did not involve Federal lands, and Colorado I4ined
Land Reclamation Division (NERD) xas informed that they could process the
revision independently. Therefore, Federal concurrence xas not formally
made. A copy of ~9 letter to Colorado MLRD as xe11 sa a copy of Colorado
MLRD's decision to approve the revision are attached.
Colorado I+1LRD'a decision to approve the revision ntutuu that tho excaau opoil
fill has bean designed for complianen with Rule 4.Oy.1(3) w1~1uh ullowu the uuu
of alternative standards. 1{owuver, Colorado MLRD'a July 23, 1y84 oomi¢ent
letter to the applicant citeu the vulluy fill ruquirumunta u1' Hulu 4.Oy.2 in
comments 4 and 5. The Woli' Creek rnviuion excuuu upoil t'!11 wuu apparently
pennittad under Rula 4.Oy.1.
Howaver, tha fill dasign and Colorado IffLRD'u decision uppunru to uddrneu all
the specific roquire~¢ents of Ru1a 4.09.2 (valley fill) except the ru~luiru~uunt
to construct tho fill in 4-t'oot lit'tu. 'L'ira uudurdruL~r w+,u to ba oouutruutu~l
acconiing to the vulluy till t•aquiruiunnts cited In yuu:• latter acrd Eire
hi-monthly cartii'ied impaction reports made during conatcvutlon nhuuld vurlt'y
thin construction method. 'rheas ruportn uro kept on t'ilu ut tha minunitu.
Upon ravinwing Rulu 4.Oy, Diupouul of lixuuuu :!pall and Urulurground Duvulupmurrt
Waste, and conuulting with the uoLicitor, wu ugrou with your SuturprutuClun
that tha specific requic•amurrts t'or vullay and nuud-ot'-hollow t'S11u (4.Oy.2 and
4.09.3) apply in addition to the general requirni¢aertn and take precedence over
the genaral rnquiremeuts wirurn coul'lictu ycaur. This is t'urtlrur supported irr
that eeetiom 4.09.2 and 4.09.3 do not mention ulturnatlvn duuign ntnnda nlu,
while section 4.09.4, Durublu Rock F111u; npuuiCloully ututuu that the
Division may approve alternative methods far the disposal oY hard rook upoil
(at least 80 parennt by volume rocks that do nut ulukn in water) an a situ
specific basis. Rula 4.Oy.4 (durable rock fills) deuu however, allow approval
of vallay and hard-o;'-hollow fills undat• thnuu stunciardu, and 4.Oy.4(2)(b) and
(3) cite apncifio raquirmm~ntu for oonstruction of baud-oP-hallow and valley
Pills. 91ake durability teats were lnoludad 1u the uppllcutloo for the Walt
• Cxvek revision, but no nnulyaio of whether the Pill mntw rlula met ihu
requirements t'or hard rock spoil coulii be found.
/~