2010-11-15_REVISION - C1981008 (2)

Home Browse Search

PT r - zaia oa:2aPia - :j i - - -- FROM-DIV RECLAMATION MINING SAFETY vu � +803937@ 1 a6 __._ May�18, 2010 T -651 P F -683 Page S of 4 r 4 re soil salvage practices we changed and substantially weakened with Minor Revision Nu (MR51 and MR57, respectively), tubers 51 and S7 A review of the file fo nra MR 52 indicates that the application form and the cover letter submi by WFC teined misleading information regarding the actual content of revised pages and /or ma submitted. The application materials state that the MR 51 addressed the mods include acreage added to the permit. It is presumed that the acreage addressed w ma ps also modifi p reviously to approved by a more significant revision. However, there Is no mention In the form as usly 51 of any change to the topsoil salvage Practices for the mine. Likewise, the a or co r letter f MR fatter for MR 57 indicate a change in the type of equipment to be used for topsoil sale no Mention of the change in topsail salvage provisions regarding � ppiication form and cover 8 de Pth and amount t be.. sahrag@ are is In hindsight, more detailed review of the accomp ccom an in discrepancies; however, It appears that DBMS incor rectly assumed that the submitted ea ese disclosed the conten of the revised pages. it also appe Y materials fully ars chat DRMS incorrect) ass umed that WFG was coordinating with the landown as these revisions were developed an d i WFC permit contains numerous discrepancies' including inconsistent submitted. structure, the permitting history indicates the problem. Technical Revision Number 4 that WFC submittals submittal that confounded and fragmented ssed one such cant . The eh sign often c ontained ifi error now withdrawn Technical Revis N 9 addre umber 55 Was another example of a faulty addition, issues identified in 2005 remain unresolved, and are the sub ina ppropriate and mittal from WFC. In The ongoing landowner co plaints are of merit must b l jest of the current PR06. JOEllen Turner, the landowner representative for the Morgan Prope d. These complaints are from Ms. serious concerns regarding both past and current nd , s. T me records available to bRMS, Ms. Turner has standing to address these co � co Ms. Turner base d d r is documenting permits rag a Attorney dated Augus g� Ms (signed by the landowners Frank and erty e Based upon of is 2 AAealed the initial t 9 0 0.9 ( that DRMS provided appropr response to the TDN, and the OSM upon a Power al still investigating the possibility that additional d different act Ma Morgan), Ms. Turner has also a The pending issues must be addressed expeditiously be required. p iously and completel to ensure Colorado Surface Coal Mining and Reclamation Act (Act) and the associated full compliance with the allow any further delays in addressing PR06. Nor can DRMS allow an operations that will not comply with requirements of the regulations. DRMS cannot includes coordination with the landowner rem 5, 34 -33. 1 Of th e Acfi and the �2 a y permitting actions or field a regulations. Such compliance coordination is both a legal and Practical requirement. 11 { (h) and Rule 2.05.5(2) (b))• Such The pending Permit Revision Number 06 must be resolved as foll 1. In accordance with'the information now available to WFC and DRMS acknowledge that all lands on the Morgan Pro With all prime Farmland. r ,the permit must equirements in Rules pe 2.05.6 and 4.25 F m�st bed' and full compliance .2•. In accordance with the information now available to emonstrated, • acknowledge the post m ining fond use of irrigated cropland t]RMS, the permit must � P for all acres on Morgan Prope p rty This