2011-05-12_ENFORCEMENT - C1981008 (3)

Home Browse Search

Field Office Determination: By letter dated February 4, 2011, the DFD informed DRMS that it had shown good cause for not taking action to cause the possible violation to be corrected because the possible violation of Rules 4.06.2 and/or 4.06.3 does not exist in accordance with 30 CFR § 842.11(b) (4) (i). Specifically, the DFD found that DRMS provided adequate documentation, including rainfall data and photographic evidence, to establish that soils could not have been saturated at the time and were being handled under proper conditions. Request for Informal Review: Following receipt of the DFD decision letter, you requested informal review of the DFD's decision on February 14, 2011. Specifically, you disagree with the DFD's February 4, 2011, decision and essentially reiterate your original complaints that rocks were not removed prior to topsoil replacement and prime farmland soils were handled while wet. You also ask why DRMS is allowed to not send you their response to a TDN prior to OSM making a determination on that response, question why photographs you submitted to the DFD of the Morgan property were not considered in lieu of those provided by DRMS, and state objections to Permit Revision No. 6 (PR-6). Informal Review -- Facts: As provided by 30 CFR § 842.15, you requested an informal review of the DFD's decision on the TDN. Based on the information available to me, the facts of the situation appear as follows: 1. On January 6, 2011, you filed a citizen's complaint alleging that topsoil removal operations were conducted in the rain and under eighteen (18) inches of snow. Specifically, you alleged that "On December 23, 2010 after it had rained for two days and very nasty. The mine moved our "A" lift which they had pushed up and loaded it in haul packs and running on our "B" lift in the mud, hauled our "A" lift to the stock pile tracking and compacting everything. Our good dirt stick to the tires and tracking everywhere and compacting our topsoil stockpile of the "A" lift in wet conditions." In a second letter received on the same date, you stated "They sent a letter stating that the state will only allow them to remove topsoil if it is dry & then they remove it in the rain & under 18 inches of snow." 2. In response to your complaint, DFD issued a TDN to DRMS on January 12, 2011, and included a potential violation of Rules 4.06.2 and 4.06.3 (topsoil removal and storage regulations) alleging that topsoil salvage operations damaged the chemical and physical properties of the soil and did not minimize erosion, contamination and/or compaction. 3. Following receipt of the TDN, DRMS conducted a partial inspection of the New Horizon Mine on January 14, 2011. The inspection report indicates that there were no active topsoil salvage, stockpiling or redistribution operations occurring on the prime farmland at the time of the inspection, and that level ground and slopes that were not south-facing were covered with approximately 2 inches of snow which was beginning to thaw. The inspection report continues that all topsoil salvaged from the designated Morgan Prime Farmland continues to be placed in stockpiles established on the eastern portion of the Morgan property, and there has been no redistribution of Lift A or Lift B topsoil on the Morgan property. During the inspection WFC was asked to provide the DRMS inspector with the precipitation records for the month of December 2010. The inspection report states that the mine tracks weather and precipitation on a daily basis, and a printed copy of the data was immediately provided by WFC. The DRMS inspector also asked the WFC representative to describe the topsoiling 2