My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2010-05-06_ENFORCEMENT - C1981008
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Enforcement
>
Coal
>
C1981008
>
2010-05-06_ENFORCEMENT - C1981008
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:11:34 PM
Creation date
5/6/2010 1:05:12 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981008
IBM Index Class Name
ENFORCEMENT
Doc Date
5/6/2010
Doc Name
Response to Divison's Response
From
OSM
To
DRMS
Violation No.
TDNX10140182003
Email Name
DAB
MLT
SB1
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
to establish the extent of prime farmlands and to make immediate adjustments to soil handling <br />procedures that would be consistent with regulations governing mining on prime farmlands. <br />(At the time of the meeting, mining operations had already progressed partway through the <br />prime farmlands on the Morgan property.) In addition to modifying the topsoil salvage and <br />handling plan for current and future disturbance, a sampling protocol and criteria were <br />established for evaluating the quality of prime farmland areas on the Morgan property that had <br />been already mined and backfilled. As a result of the February 15, 2009 meeting, the Division <br />directed WFC to make immediate changes to the topsoil salvage and stockpiling operations on <br />the Morgan property and to implement the sampling and testing program for evaluating subsoil <br />and topsoil replaced on those areas already mined. <br />As stated above, in February 2008 WFC had mined through a portion of the Morgan property. <br />There were 51.6 acres where topsoil had been stripped. Of the 51.6 acres, 7.63 acres had been <br />topsoiled on the eastern edge of the Morgan property, and an additional 27.9 acres had been <br />backfilled with at least 26 inches of Bench I material. The bench 1 material was tested for <br />subsoil suitability and found to be suitable. Map 2.04.9-2, Topsoil Balance Map as of February <br />2008 shows the pit location, where topsoil had been removed and where topsoil had been <br />replaced. On the 51.6 acres where topsoil had been stripped and not yet replaced, WFC <br />committed to replace (p. 2.05.4(2)(d)-34) a combined topsoil and subsoil minimum depth of 48 <br />inches, with approximately 22 inches of mixed Lift A and B material over a minimum of 26 <br />inches of suitable subsoil (Bench 1 material). <br />For all disturbances after February 2008, at the direction of the Division, WFC began salvaging <br />and replacing an average of 16 inches of Lift A, 36 inches of Lift B and returning a minimum <br />of 3 feet of Bench 1 Material to the Morgan property. WFC will continue to sample the <br />suitability of replaced subsoil and topsoil using the NRCS suitability criteria for Prime <br />Farmlands. <br />The requirements of the Colorado regulatory program for prime farmland soil removal and <br />stockpiling and replacement are at Sections 4.25.3 and 4.25.4. The A and B horizons must be <br />segregated separately. The rules do allow exceptions where other available soil materials can <br />be substituted for the original topsoil material. The minimum depth of soil to be reconstructed <br />must be 48 inches. We therefore find that the terms of the permit for soils for the Morgan <br />property prime farmland are consistent with the regulations. There is no requirement to salvage <br />and return all the subsoil or Bench 1 material. As required under Section 4.25.4(1), the WFC <br />permit requires the total thickness of the A and B horizons and Bench 1 material to be at least <br />48 inches on all areas disturbed before and after the Morgan property was designated as prime <br />farmland. <br />In its response Colorado maintains that inspections conducted on the Morgan property indicate <br />that the terms of the permit are complied with in the field. Ms. Turner's complaints do not <br />contradict this. <br />On this basis and in accordance with.30 CFR 842.11(b)(4)(i), OSM finds that the Division has <br />shown good cause for not taking action to cause the possible violation to be corrected because <br />the possible violation does not exist. We find that the terms of the permit properly implement
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.