Laserfiche WebLink
Four Corners Materials in Durango, Colorado who is responsible for and familiaz with <br />the Ewing Mesa # 1 aggregate operations and she provided the following response; <br />"I do not have record of when the .culverts were installed, although it is <br />possible they were installed in order to provide better access to the gravel <br />permit area. Our reclamation plan calls for their removal, but they <br />have been left in place to date in order to facilitate access for <br />reclamation (seeding, weeding, and monitoring) activities...Another <br />feature that remains is the asphalt paved road that accesses the <br />middle level of the gravel permit area. If the culverts are to be removed, <br />the pavement will serve no useful purpose to either immediate access or <br />future development of the property. Four Corners Materials will remove <br />the pavement and seed the area if this point of access is no longer feasible <br />or desirable." [Emphasis added, entire text of correspondence appended] <br />From this information it is evident that the aggregate operation is responsible for the <br />subject culverts, as the subject culverts are addressed in the Ewing Mesa # 1 reclamation <br />plan, as is the asphalt road "that accesses the middle level of the gravel permit azea." <br />As the subject culverts aze the responsibility of the aggregate operation and not the coal <br />mine, the NOV must be vacated. <br />Modification of Abatements <br />As director of the Division, should you elect not to vacate the NOV, on behalf of <br />Oakridge Energy, I request that the abatements specified in the NOV be modified. <br />Abatement 1 is not relevant, given the fact that the aggregate operation has already <br />addressed the subject culverts in their permit and reclamation plan, as well as assumed <br />responsibility for them. The NOV was written for failure to maintain the subject culverts, <br />not for an alleged failing of the East Collection Channel, therefore there is no basis for <br />the second requirement in Abatement 1. <br />Abatement 2 requires the cleanout of the subject culverts. Oakridge Energy objects to <br />this requirement as Oakridge Energy is not the responsible party for the subject culverts. <br />Further, while Oala~idge Energy would favor removal of the subject culverts to avoid the <br />problems with maintenance, Four Comers Materials has expressed a desire to retain the <br />culverts for access. <br />Abatement 3 requires the restoration of the east Collection Channel. As noted above, the <br />NOV was written for failure to maintain the subject culverts, not for an alleged failing of <br />the East Collection Channel, therefore there is no basis for this abatement requirement. <br />Abatement 4 requires recertification of east Collection Channel. As noted above, the <br />NOV was written for failure to maintain the subject culverts, not for an alleged failing of <br />the East Collection Channel, therefore there is no basis for this abatement requirement. <br />Oakridge Energy Carbon Junction Mine Page 3 <br />NOV CV-2007-005 Vacation IZegpest <br />