APPCOR12529 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

United States Department.of the Interior OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING Reclamation and Enforcement HROOKSTOWERS 1020 1 STH STREE7 DENVER, COLORADO 80202 MEMORANDUM T0: John Lovell FROM: Al Rieba SUBJECT: ARCO Mt. Gunnison No. ~OJUL1981 1 Mine Decision Package iii iiiiiiiiiiiii iii 999 On July 7, 1981 OSM Region V sent to Headquarters its decision package which contained our Regional Director's recommendation for the ARCO Mt. Gunnison Mine. July 13, 1981 is the date when a final action must be taken by the Assistant Secretary on this proposed mine. This memorandum is to tell you why this package was not sent before July 7. _ Primarily, two factors slowed down the decision package. The first factor was the production of the Technical and Environmental Assessment (TEA) for the mine proposal. Due to contractual problems, which resulted from proposed revisions to the format of the document from the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Division (CLPfRD) and actual revisions to the technical body. of the document from both OSM and CLMRD, the TEA was not submitted to OSPf until June 23. The lateness of this TEA, which unfortunately we are still editing for typing errors and other minor nontechnical flaws, delayed our schedule. The second and most significant factor which delayed submittal of the package was controversy over permit stipulations between OSM and CMLRD. On July 1 a copy of Region V's stipulations, composed by compiling and editing for redundancy the stipulations from the CMLRD and the TEA, was given to Mr. Fred Banta of the CMLRD for approval. On July 2 Mr. Banta called and requested that eight more stipulations be added to our package. This was completed by the afternoon, but Pir. Banta requested that the package not be sent until July b, when Tom Gillis, who is [he CMLRD field inspector for the ARCO project and was then out of town, could review and approve the stipulations. On July 6, Mr. Gillis reviewed OSM's stipulations, asked for the revision of one stipulation and the addition of two more stipulations, and rejected, on behalf of the CMLRD, two stipulations requested by the Bureau of Land Mangagement (BLM). On July 7, verbal approval was given by Linn Lewis of the BLM to modify the two stipulations in question so that they were agreeable to CMLRD, OSh1, and BL11 itself. Due to this controversy, the submittal package, which was fundamentally prepared on July 1, could not be sent until July 7.