ENFORCE37574 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Thomas Ehmett 4 June 30, 1994 original contour (AOC) were considered, along with site-specific factors, and the DMG believes that the approved plan complies with both the letter and spirit of the applicable regulations. The assessment of AOC involves the need to make an appropriate, .and somewhat subjective, interpretation of the pertinent regulations. It is not necessary that the final postmining contours be exactly the same as premising contours, and it has long been acknowledged that the primary regulatory authority has the responsibility to make this determination regarding AOC as it pertains to a final reclamation plan. These concepts are substantiated within INE-26 which states, in part: 3. a. Background. In modifying the phrases "original contour" and "surface configuration," in the definition of AOC with the terms "approximate" and "general," respectively, Congress recognized and acknowledged that there would likely be differences between the premising and postmining topography. Further- more, the reclamation of any minesite must take into consideration and accommo- date site-specific and unique characteristics of the surrounding terrain and postmining ]and uses. Consequently, AOC determinations must necessarily retain a certain amount of subjectivity and often rely principally on the judgment of the regulatory authority, which has been given the primary responsibility for such decisions under the Act. Certain criteria are applied to the assessment of AOC by the State of Colorado, and these closely parallel the factors outlined within INE-26. Each factor is discussed below, as it pertains to this Marr Mine situation: General Surface Configuration - While an exact replication of the premising topography is not required, the postmining topography must approximate We premising configuration, and blend into the surrounding terrain. The approved "Pit 1" configuration is not exactly the same as We premising co~gurdtion; however, it does approximate and blend into the surrounding terrain. The pre- mising configuration consisted of a generally southwest to northeast trending ridge feature located in Section 26, Range 78 West, Township 9 North, 6th P.M. This ridge consists of slopes which are as steep as 3.SH:1V along both the northwest and southeast flanks. There are other areas of the ridge which are less steep. The ridge also consisted of a concave, bowl- shaped feature along the north northwest flank. Mining of "Fit 1" has enlarged this concavity to the south southeast by approximately 1000 feet. The approved plan, and for the most part, the existing reclaimed topography consists of slopes which dip down from the ridge top at approximate gradients which are no steeper than 3H:1 V . These slopes, and this general feature are consistent with the greater topography of the area, and they do not constitute a significant variation from the topography of the general area.