Laserfiche WebLink
.;. <br />~~ ... <br />C'-si-oa9 <br />Savage and Savage <br />practica(solutions br environ~ntrl problems <br />Land Rcstoration and Reclamation Services <br />464 Wes[ Sumac Court <br />Louisvine, Colorado 80027-2227 <br />~FCF_IVED <br />January 24, 1997 JAN 2 71991 <br />III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII <br />303 6667372 telephone <br />303 665fi808 facsimile <br />Mr. Robert J. Shukle, Chief <br />Permits and Enforcement Section ~ ~`~- - - ~•~'"Eta" ~ ueolo9Y <br />Colorado Department of Public Health And Environment <br />Water Quality Contro] Division <br />4300 Cherry Creek Drive South <br />Denver, Colorado 80222-1530 VIA FAX AND CERTIFIED LETTER <br />NO. P 252 162 944 <br />Re: CDPS Permit No. COG-850012, Sun Coal Company, Meadows No. 1 Mine, Routt <br />County, Colorado <br />Dear Mr. Shukle: <br />Savage and Savage represents Sun Coal Company in environmental matters for their Meadows <br />No. l Mine in Routt County, Colorado. Yesterday, Sun Coal informed us that WQCD had <br />sent Sun Coal a letter dated January 17, ]997 which threatened enforcement action if Sun Coal <br />Company did not submit delinquent discharge monitoring reports for outfall 001 of the above <br />referenced CDPS permit (letter enclosed). This discharge point was deleted from the CDPS <br />permit by your letter of May 30, 1996, and with that deletion, the need for all additional water <br />sampling was also deleted (letter enclosed). <br />l must state for the record that this is not the first time Sun Coal has been threatened with <br />enforcement action on this very same discharge point, after the point was deleted from the <br />permit. On October 17, 1996, after Sun Coal received a similaz letter informing them that <br />they were delinquent in submitting a DMR for this point, I contacted WQCD. I spoke with <br />Ms. Darlene Casey at 2:42 PM on that date and informed her that the 001 discharge point had <br />been deleted from the permit. I offered to send or fax her a copy of your May 30, 1996 <br />correspondence modifying the permit and deleting the point, but she declined, stating that was <br />not necessazy. She indicated that the problem would be resolved. Though she took my name <br />and telephone number in the event that additional information or explanations were required, <br />we did not hear from WQCD again, that is until your letter of January 17, 1997. Obviously, <br />the problem has not been resolved. <br />Today, I again telephoned Ms. Casey to discuss the January 17, 1997 delinquency letter. I <br />again informed her that the cited discharge point had been deleted from the permit effective <br />May 30, 1996. She confirmed this information to me after reviewing a copy of your May 30, <br />1996 correspondence. She agreed that there was no need to sample, since the discharge is now <br />