Laserfiche WebLink
of Land Management if any archaeological or cultural resources are discovered during <br />MCM's mining activities (2.07.6(2)(e)). <br />6. For this surface mining operation, private mineral estate has been severed from private <br />surface estate; therefore, the documentation specified by Rule 2.03.6(2) has been provided <br />in descriptions of lease numbers, sublease agreements, warranty deeds, and quit claim <br />deeds in the permit pages. (2.07.6(2)(f)). <br />At the time of the Division's December 16, 2003, proposed decision to approve RN -04, <br />RAG Empire Corporation (Operator prior to MCM) maintained right of entry for surface <br />lands affected by surface disturbance. Surface access rights to one property apparently <br />expired January 15, 2004. RAG maintained that it retained the right -of -entry to the <br />property in question. The Division requested that RAG provide documentation of their <br />continued right -of- entry. RAG requested a time extension of the final decision until <br />March 31, 2004 to produce the requested documentation. Due to RAG's inability to <br />document the right -of entry on the specific property, the Division withdrew its proposed <br />decision to approve RN -04 on January 16, 2004. <br />RAG was unable to reach an agreement with the owners of the property in question (the <br />Barker property) regarding right -of- entry. On August 18, 2004, RAG filed a legal <br />complaint, in Moffat County District Court, seeking declaratory relief recognizing the <br />permittee's right -of -entry to maintain and monitor completed reclamation on the property <br />owner's land. Legal proceedings ensued though 2005. On December 27, 2005, the parties <br />arrived at a settlement, with legal documentation filed with the Moffat County Clerk and <br />Recorder on January 4, 2006. The permittee provided copies of the legal documents to <br />the Division on January 25, 2006. With the resolution of this issue, the Division finds that <br />the permittee upholds the right -of -entry for the required property. <br />During this time frame, RAG applied for a transfer of its permit, SO -2, to BTU Empire <br />Corporation. SO -2 was approved by the Division on May 26, 2006. <br />7. On the basis of evidence submitted by the applicant and received from other state and <br />federal agencies as a result of the Section 34- 33- 114(3) compliance review required by the <br />Colorado Surface Coal Mining Reclamation Act, the Division finds that Moffat County <br />Mining's parent company, Peabody Energy Corporation, does not own or control any <br />operations which are currently in violation of any law, rule, or regulation of the United <br />States, or any State law, rule, or regulation, or any provision of the Surface Mining Control <br />and Reclamation Act or the Colorado Surface Coal Mining Reclamation Act <br />(2.07.6(2)(g)(i))- <br />8. The permittee does not control and has not controlled mining operations with a <br />demonstrated pattern of willful violations of the Act of such nature, duration, and with <br />such resulting irreparable damage to the environment as to indicate an intent not to comply <br />with the provisions of the Act (2.07.6(2)(h)). <br />9. Pursuant to Rule 2.07.6(2)(i), the Division fords that the Williams Fork Mines will not be <br />inconsistent with other operations anticipated to be performed in areas adjacent to the <br />Williams Fork Mines 16 Permit Renewal 06 <br />C- 1981 -044 December 8, 2014 <br />