APPCOR12255

• Permit No: C1996084
• IBM Index Class Name: Application Correspondence
• Doc Name: LORENCITO CANYON MINE PERMIT REVISION EXHIBIT 11
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

Jerry Koblitz
Page 9
July 22, 1997
mine until the applicant receives joint approval from the Division's Coal Program, the
Division's Mine Safety and Training Program and MSHA of a plan describing the nature,
timing and sequence of those operations that will be conducted within the 500-foot
buffer.
] 17. The Division initially found, with one exception, the proposed operations to be in
compliance with Rule 2.06, as the applicant indicated mountaintop removal methods
were planned for the surface mining (second sentence, third paragraph, page 2.06-1,
12/23/96). The exception was that the permit application binders did not cleazJy identify
the proposed operation to be mountaintop removal. The applicant's April 25, 1997
response indicated that the applicant had subsequently determined the proposed
operations did not meet the definition of mountaintop removal. The Division, in its May
27, 1997, response disagreed, and asked the applicant to provide itsjustification for its
position.
The applicant, in its July 1, 1997 response, stated that the operations do not meet the
• definition of mountaintop removal because the applicant "will reclaim the surface mine to
approximate original contour rather than to a `level plateau or gently rolling contour"', as
described in Rule 2.06.3(2). The applicant further stated that the operation didn't meet
the mountaintop removal definition because the applicant "is not proposing a land use
change for the area".
With regazd to the applicant's point about reclaiming to approximate original contour
(AOC), the Division does not find this to be a valid argument. Mountaintop removal
mining operations aze not exempted by Rule 4.14(2)(a) from reclaiming to approximate
original contour. Mountaintop removal mining may be exempted from reclaiming to
AOC by applying for a variance under Rule 4.26.2(1).
With regard to the applicant's point about changes in land use, the Division does not find
this to be a valid azgument. Rules 4.26.2(I)(c) and (d) apply to applicants who seek to
obtain a variance from the requirement to return the mining disturbance to AOC.
if the Division were to determine that the Lorencito surface mine operations were not
mountaintop removal mining, the Division would then have to find the Lorencito mining
operations to be steep slope mining. This would be the case now, if it weren't for the fact
that, according to Rule 4.27.2, the standards of Rule 4.27 do not apply to operations
occurring on steep slopes that are also mountaintop removal mining operations.
• Please add something to the permit binders that indicates clearly that this application is
for mountaintop removal operations (Rule 2.06.3(3)(e)).