My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2011-08-04_ENFORCEMENT - C1981008 (2)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Enforcement
>
Coal
>
C1981008
>
2011-08-04_ENFORCEMENT - C1981008 (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 4:36:31 PM
Creation date
8/11/2011 2:21:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981008
IBM Index Class Name
ENFORCEMENT
Doc Date
8/4/2011
Doc Name
OSM Tech Review of PR6 Primeland Reclam, Soil Salvage & Redistribution, Graded Spoil & Soil Sampling
From
OSM
To
DRMS
Email Name
MLT
SB1
DAB
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.
/
30
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
• Within the replaced growth medium of the reclaimed prime farmland, approval of <br />PR -6 allowed an increase in EC from a maximum of 4 mmhos/cm, to a maximum <br />EC of 6 mmhos /cm. Such an increase in EC has strong potential to accept reclaimed <br />soils that may be toxic to corn as well as have a detrimental impact on alfalfa <br />production. Considering that alfalfa is the target crop for demonstrating the yield <br />capability of the reclaimed prime farmland and that corn is likely to be a primary <br />rotational crop after the land is returned to the landowner, approval of an EC <br />threshold of 6 mmhos/cm for affirming the suitability of the growth media to be <br />used for reclamation is not in compliance with the regulations at 4.05.8(1), 2.06.6 (2) <br />(d), and 4.06.2 (4) (a) of the Colorado State Program. <br />• The sampling methods described in the permit for confirming the suitability of the <br />soil/overburden substitute materials approved for use in reclaiming prime <br />farmlands, do not reflect common industry practice, are not representative of <br />sound scientific procedure, and are therefore not in compliance with State Program <br />regulation requirements at 4.05.8(1) and 2.06.6(4)(c). OSM's review fmds the <br />content of some of the statements made relative to sampling, confusing; and finds <br />such language within the permit to not be in accord with the obligation that the . <br />permit be written in a clear and concise manner as required in the Colorado State <br />Program regulations at 2.03.3 <br />5. REVIEW PREPARED BY: <br />c o?„, <br />A M Gregor, Soil Scientist Date <br />Rick Williamson, Ecologist & Technical Team Leader <br />22 <br />- 7/is - JO <br />?- <br />Date <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.