My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ENFORCE32033
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Enforcement
>
ENFORCE32033
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:43:16 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 1:12:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981041
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
3/5/1993
Doc Name
INE FN C-81-04
From
US DEPT OF INTERIOR OSM
To
DMG
Violation No.
TD1993020370001TV1
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
2
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII` <br />999 <br />T F~ <br />9p <br />7 9 <br />~ H ~ av <br />United States Department of the Interior <br />OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING <br />RECLAMATION AND ENFORCEMENT <br />WASHINGTON, D.C. 20240 <br />FEB 2 5 1993 <br />Mr. Stephen G. Renner <br />Coal Program Supervisor <br />Division of Minerals and Geology <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />1313 Sherman Street, Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />Dear Mr. Renner: <br />~ ^ <br />RECEIVED <br />MAR 5 1993 <br />Divis,a+ of ivln ~e,as g Geolo9Y <br />This is in response to your January 29, 1993, request for informal review of the <br />Albuquerque Field Office (AFO) Director's determination that your agency did not <br />take appropriate action with respect to alleged violation No. 1 in ten-day notice (TDN) <br />92-020-370-003. The TDN alleges that Powderhorn Coal Company (permit number <br />C-81-041) at the Roadside/Cameo Mine failed to properly design and certify two <br />impounding structures. <br />In your request for review, you contend that the AFO mistakingly determined that the <br />two structures are sediment ponds, rather than incised temporary impoundments. You <br />explain that these non-discharging structures were installed to satisfy the demonstration <br />required by Colorado's Small Area Exemption (SAE) rule that discharges from <br />exempted areas can meet applicable effluent limits. You argue that since the <br />Section 4.05.9(2) of your impoundment regulations applies only to temporary <br />impoundments in which the water is impounded by a dam, the incised impoundments <br />in this case do not need to meet the design and certification requirements for sediment <br />ponds incorporated by reference as a requirement in Section 4.05.9(2). <br />First, your reliance on the language of Section 4.05.9(2) of your impoundment <br />regulations is misplaced. An amendment to that section proposing that it apply only to <br />impoundments "in which the water is impounded by a dam" was disapproved by this <br />agency to the extent that temporary impoundments are limited to such impoundments <br />created by a dam (56 FR 1371, January 14, 1991). <br />Moreover, even if this were not the case, I would agree with the AFO in concluding <br />that while these structures fall within the definition of impoundments, they are also <br />sediment ponds defined under your program to mean "a primary sediment control <br />structure....including but not limited to a barrier dam or excavated depression which <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.