Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. JoEllen Turner <br />Box 346 <br />Nucla, Colorado 81424 <br />Dear Ms. Turner: <br />United States Department of the Interior <br />OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING <br />Reclamation and Enforcement <br />Western Region Office <br />1999 Broadway, Suite 3320 <br />Denver, CO 80202 -3050 <br />APR - 4 2011 <br />We received your telefaxed complaints dated March 18, 21, 22, 25, 28, 29, 30 and 31, 2011. We <br />have received nearly all of this information in your previous submittals. Reiterated concerns are <br />already being addressed through our review of Permit Revision 6 and State responses to ten day <br />notices (TDN) #X11 - 140 - 182 -001, X11 - 140 - 182 -002, and X11 -140- 117 -001, newly issued TDN <br />#X11- 140 -182 -003, or will be addressed through our subsequent review of the Division of <br />Reclamation Mining and Safety (DRMS) procedures and implementation of its program. Please <br />be advised that repeatedly submitting information slows progress of the review we are currently <br />conducting. <br />By fax dated March 25, 2011, you express concern with "the pond interpretation." Rule <br />4.25.2(4), analogous to Federal rule 30 CFR 785.17(e)(5), pertains only to permanent <br />impoundments which would be retained after bond release. I am enclosing a copy of the Federal <br />Register notice explaining the rationale behind the need for landowner consent for such <br />permanent impoundments. Because Pond 11 is not permitted as a permanent impoundment, <br />landowner consent is not required for its design or placement. Colorado's regulatory program <br />requires sediment control measures at Rule 4.05.5 to prevent additional contributions of sediment <br />to streamflow or runoff outside the permit area; to meet applicable State or Federal effluent <br />limitations; and to minimize erosion to provide protection for topsoil, vegetation, fish and <br />wildlife, and the hydrologic balance. Rule 4.05.6, Sedimentation Ponds, specifies sedimentation <br />ponds must be located as near as practicable to the disturbed area. Landowners may not exempt <br />mine operators from regulatory requirements. Sedimentation ponds are designed and located to <br />be most effective in their function. Pond 11 is located at the lowest point on the Morgan <br />property permitted for disturbance. OSM has reviewed this matter and finds no regulatory <br />conflict with the sedimentation pond permitted for the Morgan property. Again, this pond will <br />not be retained permanently, and the aggregate total of your prime farmland acreage will not be <br />decreased after mining and reclamation operations are complete. <br />By the same fax dated March 25, 2011, you also express concern with the county road on your <br />property not being included within the permit boundary or being reclaimed to prime farmland <br />standards. We believe you are referring to BB27 Road serving as an alternative public access <br />route to the western portion of BB Road. We have inquired with DRMS regarding this road. It <br />has been identified as a re -route of BB Road constructed under a three -way agreement between <br />Western Fuels — Colorado (WFC), Montrose County and the Morgans. Under 2.07.6(2)(d)(iv), <br />the Division or the designated public road authority may allow relocation of public roads after <br />public notice and an opportunity for a public hearing. It is our understanding that a public <br />hearing was held on October 21, 1999, whereby the Board of Montrose County Commissioners <br />approved the special use agreement effective February 15, 2000. This public road was <br />