Laserfiche WebLink
waste -rock dump by a prior operator to serve as a secondary escapeway for the <br />Monongahela Raise when the headframe and hoist room building were constructed <br />in 2015. Operator buried the storage containers without a Permit revision prior to <br />conducting this activity. <br />E. TR -13 includes necessary modifications to the mining and reclamation <br />plans and maps and a bond recalculation. Operator self-reported that in 2015 prior <br />operators built the hoist building and headframe and placed the two refuge <br />chambers on the Terrible waste -rock dump in an area approximate 500 feet away <br />from the permitted location and outside the Permit boundary in Governor Basin. <br />Operator buried the refuge chambers in essentially the same location where a prior <br />operator placed them on the surface of the Terrible waste -rock dump. Operator <br />buried these refuge chambers to provide subsurface access to the chambers from the <br />Monongahela Raise, because snow accumulation at the site in winter typically <br />precludes access from the surface. <br />F. The Division issued its preliminary adequacy review on March 15, <br />2021. One of the primary concerns identified in the Division's adequacy review was <br />that it was unclear whether all disturbances related to the secondary escapeway, <br />and refuge chamber were within the Permit boundary. <br />G. On March 18, 2021, Operator notified the Division via email that <br />construction activities conducted at the Monongahela Raise Bore and secondary <br />escapeway impacted lands outside of the approved Permit boundary. The off-site <br />area impacted is approximately 0.50 acres. This constitutes a possible violation of <br />C.R.S. 34-32-116(7)(h) of the Mined Land Reclamation Act for failure to protect <br />areas outside of the affected lands from slides or damage occurring during mining <br />and reclamation operations. <br />H. On April 1, 2021, Operator withdrew TR -13. Rather than attempt to <br />address these issues through the TR process, in consultation with the Division, <br />Operator determined that the more appropriate course of corrective action would be <br />to submit an Amendment application to address, at a minimum, disturbances <br />outside the Permit boundary. <br />1. On April 14, 2021, the Parties motto address the remedy for possible <br />off-site impacts and the associated administrative process. During the meeting, the <br />Parties agreed that the Permit, which a prior Operator submitted to the Division, is <br />difficult to understand and would greatly benefit from a holistic review and revision <br />to generate a more cohesive and understandable Permit. Operator indicated that it <br />had retained a consultant to review and revise the Permit. <br />J. On May 13, 2021, the Division delivered to Operator a Reason to <br />Believe a Violation Exists letter ("RTB' j along with a final copy of the Division's <br />March 10, 2021, inspection report. As outlined in the RTB, the Division commenced <br />an enforcement action pursuant to its authority under Section 34-32-124 of the Act <br />to address the off-site impacts. <br />2 <br />