Laserfiche WebLink
CONSOLIDATION COAL CO. 1 ~ CN 9•-6-A <br />On J1iaa 8, 1993, O9M submitted a TDN letter to IDlQl, which <br />the witness said OSM ie required to do when it receives a <br />citizen's aomplaiat (Tr. 31). The witneae testified that o9M had <br />conducted its owe research into the coatoura of the site and <br />reviewed the permitting and technical documents. (Jt. 8xhibit 1, <br />page 195). Baadberg identified the pre-mining topography of <br />Radolph•s property oa &eapoadeat'^ ~ch3.bit Z. Thera are twro <br />Radolph parcels, a western and ea9tern parcel. nitch A-1 did not <br />exist prior to the mining. It begins at the northern boundazy on <br />the alfected western parcel, proceeds south almost to the <br />southern property line, they turns east along that southern edge <br />(Tr. 35-38). <br />3eadberg believed there might be na AOC violation in the <br />vicinity of Ditoh A-1 because his reeeazch showed a drainage <br />pattern which did not bleed well with what existed prior to the <br />miniag. The ditch did aoC appear'to compliment the existing <br />properties and there were sigaifioaat differoacea in the <br />location, depth, and width of the ditch. The ditch traverses a <br />different path from the original drainage. The flow of drainage <br />hsa increased sad the drainage pattern in the iymnediete area had <br />base altered by the permits (Tr. 38-40). The stream which <br />existing prior to mining probably had a depth of five to eight <br />feet with a beak width no wider than 50 to 60 faeE. The stream <br />was about S00 to 600 feet long '(Tr. 41-43). <br />Tho State rerpoaded to OSN•a TDN, but the vitaeae did not <br />find the respoaae eatiafactory. The witaeas expected complete, <br />often technical, explenatioaa as to why the 9tata did or .did not <br />consider the Applicant to be committing violations. The State•e <br />reapoaae included a request for additional alarificatioa of the <br />alleged violatiaaa, but O3M felt the violations were clear (Tr. <br />65-46). ' <br />oa August 30, 1993, the director upheld OSM•e decision sad <br />ordered a federal inspection. This iaepeatioa took place oa <br />September 14, 1993. A repreaeatative from the Pastern Support <br />Center aaeoaapaaiad the inspector on the site visit. Alter <br />further investigation sad review, OSM imsuad the HOY oa November <br />a3, 1993. 9lolatioa number two van the failure to achieve AOC. <br />(Joint Pxhibit 1 at page 161) (1'r. 48-53). It was the witnees• <br />opinion that there had been significant change in drainage sad <br />coatoar. The original drainage area vas a mnaader~ag stream. <br />The post-mining ditch was 3,000 feat long and nearly 500 feet <br />wide is aa®e areas. Ditch A-1 hoe become a mayor factor is the <br />topography. In a maximum storm the water depth is the drain <br />Mould Daly be 2.6 feet. The ditch is {0 lsat deep and does not <br />fit,tha need (Tr, 54-57). <br />The Map Z6, 1987, directive IME-Z6, isauad by former OBM <br />Director Chrieteasen requires OSIt to defer to the atatq <br />