Laserfiche WebLink
N <br /> Mr. Robert Hagen, AFO Director - 3 - November 27, 1989 <br /> Issue 5. This is an alleged violation of Rule 4.09.4(6) involving drainage <br /> from the "rock tunnel dump." By the citation, the Division is not certain <br /> whether the OSM inspector's concern is failure to divert surface runoff or <br /> improperly designed channels. We are concluding that OSM's concern is failure <br /> to divert surface runoff. <br /> The definition of outslope made in the state program on page 22 specifies <br /> "the face of the spoil or embankment sloping downward from the highest <br /> elevation to the toe." So far as the Division is aware, the approved design <br /> of the outslope for the tunnel waste pile has been followed during its <br /> construction. Although construction of the pile is not complete, drainage <br /> from the existing portions of the outslope below the working pad portion <br /> of the pile is delivered as planned into approved north and east collection <br /> ditches. At the time of the inspection, no water was being directed over <br /> the outslope of the fill . <br /> As stated above, drainage is directed from the outslope of the durable rock <br /> fill . The working portion of the pond is still subject to heavy equipment <br /> passing over it as work continues. The drainage pattern of the upper portion <br /> of the fill is such that water is not directed over the outslope. There may <br /> be small localized areas of a temporary nature where water is captured in <br /> depressions due to heavy equipment operations. This is due to the working <br /> nature of the upper pad. It should be noted that no water was being directed <br /> over the outslope of the pile during the inspection. <br /> Since at this time the constructed portion of the outslope of the tunnel waste <br /> pile drains as designed into approved ditches , there is no violation to the <br /> rule cited. <br /> Issue 6. This is a violation of Rule 4.02.2 0 ) as cited and the Division is <br /> issuing g a Notice of Violation requiring installation of an identification sign <br /> so as to comply with the requirements of Rules 4.02.1 and 4.02.2. The time <br /> for installation of the sign shall be by December 15 , 1989. <br /> Issue 7. This is an alleged violation of Rule 4.03.2(c) or (e) and involves <br /> .'road rain on 2 mine road near old training stations and erosion on south <br /> fan road. „ There is no such rule. There are seven sections of Rule 4.03.2; <br /> five have subsections and three have (e) subsections. As difficult as <br /> this makes it for the Division to respond properly, since erosion is the <br /> issue mentioned in one case, the Division will assume this is the issue in <br /> the other. As regards the south fan road, however, it is a designated light <br /> use road (Exhibit II-B-6) and therefore its maintenance requirements are not <br /> covered by any part of Rule 4.03.2. <br />