Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Rick Siebel, Regional Director -5- <br />Office of Surface Mining <br />Western Region Coordinating Center <br />May 16, 1995 <br />Inspection Report (M-SEIR) state, "The stream channel diversion which was approved as a <br />permanent structure by [the Division] does not appear to comply with the requirements of <br />4.05.4(4) of [Colorado's Regulations]. This diversion consists of a culvert which is 8 feet in <br />diameter and approximately 750 feet long covered with an estimated two to three feet of soil. <br />This culvert collapsed and was partially replaced in the past and the state wrote a Notice of <br />Violation for sediment buildup in 1993. This structure appears to be a maintenance liability if <br />left in its present configuration." <br />Part Two of the TDN stated, "Failed to restore disturbed areas to AOC. Slopes of refuse pile <br />(west and south slopes) pad slope by sediment catch basins." Associated comments in AFO's M- <br />SEIR state: <br />In 1988 the permit was revised to change the refuse pile design. This change <br />required 18 degree slopes without terracing. Slope measurements on the western <br />side above sediment pond 1 were found to be up to 19 degrees and up to <br />21 degrees on the southern facing slope near the two catch basins...The pad area <br />slope which is the southern embankment of the pond has not been graded and was <br />found to be at the angle of repose. Since the slopes around the catch basins are <br />not 18 degrees or less as required and the basins are not permanent structures and <br />could have been regraded to make a slope of 18 degrees or less on the southern <br />side of the refuse pile, approximate original contour has not been obtained. <br />The Division responded to the TDN in a letter dated Apri121, 1995. AFO received this response <br />on April 26, 1995. In its response, the Division stated with regard to Part One of the TDN that <br />we disagreed with AFO's determination that the 8-foot-diameter culvert was not in compliance <br />with Section 4.05.4(4) of Colorado's regulations. Section 4.05.5(4) states: <br />Permanent stream channel diversions may be constructed with the approval of the <br />Division if such diversions are consistent with applicable state law, would not <br />diminish downstream water rights and meet the requirements of 4.05.4. When <br />permanent diversions are constructed or stream channels restored after temporary <br />diversions, the drainage design shall emphasize [not "be restricted to"; emphasis <br />added] channel and floodplain dimensions that approximate [not "of"; emphasis <br />added] the premising configuration and that will blend with the undisturbed <br />drainage above and below the area to be reclaimed. <br />Section 4.05.4(4) goes on to state: <br />The average stream gradient shall be maintained with a stable longitudinal profile <br />and the channel and floodplain shall be designed and constructed to the extent <br />possible, using the best technology concurrently available to: <br />