1990-07-09_GENERAL DOCUMENTS - C1981017

Home Browse Search

y r ENT OF T 0 United States Department of the Interior a� o OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING Reclamation and Enforcement ,�Q WASHINGTON, D.C. 20240 Michael B. Long, Coal Program A N' V ED Supervisor JAN 41 ` 3 Department of Natural Resources `� i�. o 215 Centennial Building MINED LAND 1313 Sherman Street RFCLAMATION Denver, Colorado 80203 Dear g; , This is in response to your December 28, 1989, request for informal review of the Albuquerque Field Office Director's determination that your agency has not taken appropriate action under the Colorado program with respect to two violations alleged in ten-day notice number 89-02-244-005 (MidContinent Resources, Inc., Coal Basin Mining Complex) . The first alleged violation concerns the failure to protect topsoil from wind and water erosion after it was redistributed on a coal refuse pile. In your request for review, you explain that snowfall has delayed the permittee's efforts to seed and mulch the topsoil. You maintain that since the permittee had until the end of 1989 to complete the reclamation work, and during that time reported that the work has now been completed, a violation does not exist. You add that although a December inspection conducted by your agency could not confirm that the permittee had in fact performed the required reclamation because of subsequent snowfall, there is no evidence which suggests the work was not performed or that any topsoil has been lost. I will consider your response to constitute good cause since you assert that snow cover has prevented your agency from confirming the permittee's claim that topsoil protection measures have been completed. Accordingly, I am granting your agency an additional 30 days from the receipt of this letter to reinspect the site and determine whether or not a violation of. the Colorado program exists. Please notify the Albuquerque Field Office within the prescribed time of the results of your investigation or if you require a reasonable and specified additional amount of time due to prolonged snow conditions. The second alleged violation concerns the failure to pass all surface drainage from the disturbed area through a sediment pond or treatment facility before leaving the permit area. In your request for review, you argue that there is no violation of this performance standard unless it is demonstrated that the runoff from the area in question is bypassing the sediment pond. You point out that while the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement inspector indicated in his report that there was a lack of proper berming to prevent sediment laden water from flowing around and through recent pipeline construction and then off the area, he did not specify how or where the sediment pond was being bypassed. Finally, you note that your inspector did not identify any areas where the sediment control system was being bypassed.