Laserfiche WebLink
COH90LSnAS10N COAL GO, <br />C8 90-6-R <br />Temporary Relief was granted to the Applicant at this close of <br />the hearing, <br />8usaoarf~a! the Svideace <br />The Respondent called two witnesses sad offered tan Uchibita <br />that were properly admitted into evidance. The Applicant called <br />tWO vitae^aes and offered a2 exhibits, 17 of v~hi.ah sere admitted <br />into evidance. The Adm£niatrative Record waa admitted as Joint <br />Srhibit oese. <br />The Respondent called Charles E. Sandberg, civil engineer <br />sad District Program Manager with•OSM'e office in Springfield. <br />Sandberg testified that OSM has as overaighG funttioa is Illinois <br />and that 09M is reapanaibl^ £or document review of the permitting <br />process sad the pnrmite (Tr. 16-18). Sandberg contacted Daae <br />Lynch after Lynch made his first call to 08M is 1991. The <br />witnnse related the information Co zDMM mad told state employesa <br />that an OSDt inspector had visited the mine site and reported that <br />the magnitude o! a large diversion ditch could be a problem (Tr. <br />YO). IDD4S stated that it was proceeding with its own <br />investigation sad Saadbsrg did not get involved with the <br />situation again until Jaanary of 1993. <br />Lynch called OSaf again is 1993, concerned that ao notion had <br />been taken on hia complaint. Ths witness advised Lynch to file a <br />written ca~laiat with Os2t end this co~mplaiat xas received by OfiM <br />on F•ebreary s, 1993. (Joint Exhibit 1, at page 132). The <br />complaint alleged eight concerns, TWO of thane were the large <br />ditch and the £act that there ware changes is the land since <br />mining began. Upon receiving the complaint, Sandberg called IDb4d <br />sad infazmad.them that Lynch had made a formal complaint. <br />3andburg learned that the State etas coneidsriag Lyach'e 1991 <br />complaint. 06b[ established a deadline o! March 5, 1993, !or the <br />State to respond to Lynch (T`r. 23-24). <br />The State did complete its iaveetigatiaa and respond to <br />Zyach oa March 5, 1993. OSM reviewed this response. (Jt. <br />Szhibit 1, page I06). 7tithia a day of receiving the State's <br />response, Lynch again contacted OSM, axpresaiaq his <br />di^eatie£action with the State's resgoaea. Sandberg visited the <br />mina site is April to gather technical information sad to clarify <br />Lyaah'^ concerns. The xitaeaa walked the area and coasultad <br />aerial photos. Sandberg abaerv^d then that Ditch A-1 wa^ <br />constructed aacordiaq to the permit. The witness Pound the . <br />guentioa of AOC to ba the moat complex. Se regaasCed pre-mining <br />topography maps Erom Coaaolidatioa and rnquaeted aasistaaca !ro® <br />t7se Saatern Support Center is creating cross-seatioas to assess <br />the AOC areuad Ditch A-1 (Tr. 25-30), ' <br />