Laserfiche WebLink
15. The Division fords, pursuant to 2.07.6(2)(n), that the activities proposed by the permittee would not <br />affect the continued existence of endangered or threatened species or result in [he destruction or adverse <br />modification of their critical habitats. This finding is based on information contained in Tabs 10 and 11 <br />of the permit application, and consultation with the Colorado Division of Wildlife (DOW) and the U.S. <br />Fish and Wildlife Service (LISFWS) in association with previous permitting actions. Both DOW and <br />USFWS were contacted during the RN-04 review, and their input regazding potential impacts to <br />endangered or threatened species was specifically requested. No comments were received from either <br />agency. The Division's fording is bolstered by the fact that neither agency indicated concerns, and by <br />fact that no additional surface disturbances aze proposed by the applicant, pursuant to RN-04. <br />16. The Division has contacted the Office of Surface Mining, Reclamation Fees Branch. As of August 26, <br />2003, Snowcap Coal Company, the operator, is current in the payment of reclamation fees required by 30 <br />CFR Chapter VH, subchapter R. (2.07.6(2)(0)). An "issue" decision, has been recommended by the <br />Office of Surface Mining, Applicant Violator System. <br />SECTION B <br />The following findings and specific approvals aze required by Rule 4: <br />I. Roads -Rule 4.03 <br />Information on roads is presented in Section 2.05.3, in Tab-13 of the permit application <br />There are six haul roads, four access roads and five light-use roads within the permit area that <br />demonstrate compliance with applicable standazds of Rule 4.03. All the roads meet the design criteria <br />for grade and surfacing. All were found to be in compliance. Two pipe arches which convey runoff <br />flow in Coal Creek beneath Haul Road 4 neaz the Roadside North Portal have an end area of greater <br />than 35 squaze feet; therefore, to be in compliance with Rule 4.03.1(4)(e)(i), they must pass the <br />20-yeaz, 24-hour peak flow. The permtttee installed inlet transitions in order to pass the event. <br />Three dip-sections were installed along Coal Creek during construction of Haul Roads 2, 3 and 4. The <br />two upper dip-sections have six 36-inch CMP culverts laid side by side and incased in concrete. In the <br />concrete, they have an end azea greater than 35 square feet, therefore, they must pass the 20-yeaz, <br />24-hour peak flow to be in compliance with Rule 4.03.1(4)(e)(i). The lower dip section is only <br />required to pass the 10-yeaz, 24-hour peak flow to be in compliance with Rule 4.03.1(4)(e)(i). <br />Designs reveal that the dip-sections will not pass the design peak flows without overtopping <br />In 1982, the permi[tee submitted justification that the dip-sections would be as environmentally sound <br />as designs which would comply with Rule 4.03.1(4)(e)(i). Since the dip-sections aze constructed of <br />reinforced concrete, they will not erode if overtopped. In addition, the upstream and downstream <br />sections of the stream aze protected by riprap so they will not be undermined. The overtopping of the <br />dip-sections will likely be a gradual event. The water will flow over the top of the smooth concrete <br />surface with very little turbulence being induced by the dip-section. According to calculations done <br />by the permittee, the dip-sections would be overtopped for a total of 3.4 hours during a 20-yeaz, <br />24-hour precipitation event. The installations aze therefore acceptable to the Division. <br />21 <br />