Laserfiche WebLink
<br />III. COMMENTS -COMPLIANCE <br />Below are comments on the inspection. The comments include discussion of observations made <br />during the inspection. Comments also describe any enforcement actions taken during the <br />inspection and the facts or evidence supporting the enforcement action. <br />On September 13, 1994, a complete inspection was conducted at the Marr Strip <br />Mine. This inspection was also to observe the issuance of a federal notice of <br />violation at this mine site. The OSM inspector was Russ Porter of the <br />Alburqueque field office. The inspection commenced at 8:45 am. The weather <br />was partly cloudy cool and windy. There had been a few brief showers in the past <br />2 weeks but current conditions were dry. <br />The first part of the inspection was spent observing the federal inspector <br />document the alleged violation and issue a notice of violation to the operator Mr. <br />George Patterson. Mr. Porter video taped the reclaimed pit no. 1 area from the <br />south, looking north, along the axis of the reclaimed disturbance. He also video <br />taped the 720 pit along the natural ridge to the east of the reclaimed 720 pit. <br />Mr. Porter then issued a notice of violation # 94-020-352-006 to the operator. <br />The abatement requires that the Marr Strip begin backfilling operations in the <br />former pit #1 area in two weeks (September 28, 1994) and to complete those <br />operations by October 29, 1994. <br />I asked Mr. Porter where would the backfill come from to accomplish this? He <br />said he did not know and that it was up to the mine to determine that. <br />I asked him if he knew how much material would need to be backfilled? He said <br />that he didn't know. <br />I asked if a plan would be required? He said that the mine could submit one, but <br />that one was not necessary. <br />I told Mr. Porter that the NOV was not specific in defining what he would call <br />acceptable AOC. He said that the ridge should be replaced. <br />The requested abatement would appear to circumvent the Division's permit <br />revision process as required in Rule 2.08.4. This Rule requires that "a revision to <br />a permit shall be obtained for significant alterations in the surface coal mining or <br />reclamation operations described in the original application and approved under <br />the original permit. Rule 1.04(90) defines: "Permit revision" means a significant <br />1 <br />