Laserfiche WebLink
.~ <br />Y <br /> <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Deparlmenl of Natural Resources <br />131 3 Sherman 81., Room 215 <br />Denver, Culorado 80203 <br />Phone: (303) 8663567 <br />FAl(: (3031 832-8106 <br />DATE: August 8, 1994 <br />TO: Larry Routten <br />FROM: Susan Burgmaier <br />~~~~~~ <br />DEPARTMENT OF <br />NATURAL <br />RESOURCES <br />Roy Rnmer <br />Go.-ernor <br />Ken Salazar <br />Eaecuu~e Dueclor <br />m¢hael B. Lung <br />RE: Colowyo Mine (C-81-019) Division Drteaor <br />Notice of Violation No. C-94-015 <br />Per your request, I have prepared what I hope is a succinct response to Colowyo's reasons for <br />requesting that the above mentioned NOV be vacated. The numbers used herein correspond <br />the order of their document. <br />1. Colowyo states that in order to develop the initial West Pit box cut, a total of 313 acres <br />must be stripped of topsoil in 1994. If that is the required stripping area, Colowyo should <br />submit drainage control plans for at least 313 disturbed acres. <br />2. I agree. <br />3. I agree. <br />4. I agree. <br />5. Colowyo states that my estimate of 195 stripped acres should be discounted by 38.9 acres <br />since that area drains to "Drainage Structure #3:' That structure is a combination of two <br />impoundments created by constructing embatilmients. The following should be <br />considered: <br />a) Unless Colowyo has some sort of proof (certified statement from an <br />engineer) that on July 14, 1994 the combined capacity was at least 3.6 acre <br />feet, and that the structures were non-discharging, we cannot agree that <br />this was adequate runoff control for 38.9 acres and that this area should be <br />excluded from the West Pit pond drainage area. <br />b) Colowyo had not obtained prior approval for these structures, which due <br />to their construction, would be required. Normally, a technical revision <br />application would have to be made, and Colowyo would have to submit <br />designs and plans for pond construction. The ponds would be required to <br />be in compliance with Rule 4.05.6, which address construction, capacity, <br />and spillway requirements. Colowyo had not demonstrated compliance <br />with these requirements either before or after construction of these ponds. <br />6. Colow~o states that "initial construction of control structure #2 was completed next, <br />providing for an estimated 2 acre feet of capacity." The following should be considered. <br />a) At the time of my July 12th inspection, there was no "structure #2" in <br />place. Equipment operators were dust starting an embankment structure <br />in the vicimty of the current location for "structure #2." When I asked <br />