Laserfiche WebLink
,: i <br />Marr Mine Bond Release, pq. 2 <br />We proceeded to the reclaimed Pit 1 area. Again, reclaimed highwall slopes are stable <br />with the exception of the north /northeast facing slope which had experienced erosion <br />through the contour furrows due to excessive wind blown snow pack and subsequent <br />melting /runoff. Kerr has reconstructed and enlarged the furrows on this slope. The small <br />areas impacted for this work are not yet stable, and we discussed leaving this area out of <br />the requested Phase II bond release acreage. In addition, another area which was <br />impacted by erosion repair work in the watershed south /east and adjacent to the-above <br />was also inspected, and we discussed similar treatment for this small area (excluding it <br />from the requested release acreage). Revegetation cover appeaeed adequate in the Pit 1 <br />area also, but species diversity and particularly shrub establishment is not yet as <br />successful as the 720 Pit. The major drainway flowing north from Pit 1 is stable and the <br />county road ditches are well maintained in this area. The BLM surface ownership at the <br />Marr Mine is in the Pit 1 azea and BLM participants did not express any major concerns <br />during the inspection. I described the proposed exclusion of the erosion mitigation azeas <br />from the release acreage to the BLM participants. This concluded the Marr mine <br />inspection. <br />We proceeded to tfie Kerr Loadout Area in Walden. One shop building has been ° ' <br />approved for retention by DMG. This azea was reclaimed in 1999 and vegetation is just <br />beginning to establish: No significant erosion was evident throughout the aiea.`The ' <br />reclaimed area is essentially level. The beam along the south edge of the reclaimed area <br />has been approved by DMG for permanent retention. The sediment pond has'not been <br />proposed for perinanenhretention, but we~discussed how this is a'vert' suitable'sife for' ' <br />retention of thi's'pond.'Inspec[iori participants indicated there-has been'no.adveise"• ~ -' =`~ <br />comment on the reclaimed area from the adjacent'Arapahoe National Wildlife Refuge <br />administrators; and there'are no wetland mitigation issues to consider at this time'through <br />the Army Coips'of Engineers. Topsoil depths sampled appeared to meet permit'' "'•= =•~ '- <br />requirements.. ~- ;~;,.:. .. , .... _...,.::r;;q;; ::.... <br />DMG participarifs indicated they had reviewed both the revegetation' covei saiiipling data' <br />and the SE_DCAD + demonstrations of water quality provided by Ken_in thebond"release <br />application for the'reclaimed azeas, and that both met or exceeded approved'permit~+'~ <br />requirements and applicable regulatory standazds for vegetation cover and water` quality. <br />OSM is currently reviewing the revegetation cover sampling data as indicated above. <br />Bond amounts requested for release appear to meet regulatory requirements. Additional <br />information regarding requested release amounts appears in the Kerr Coal Co. May 16 <br />response to DMG's application deficiency comments. OSM is reviewing this information <br />that was provided during the inspection. <br />This concluded the inspection. Please provide any comments concerning this report to <br />Henry Austin at haustin@osmre.QOV or to (303) 844-1400 X1466. <br />