My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV00110
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV00110
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 12:57:50 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 8:43:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981039
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Date
5/24/1990
Doc Name
AFFIRMATION OF THE MLRD DECISION TO DENY PN C-81-039
Type & Sequence
SF1
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
4
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
:c ~ <br />Findings of Fact <br />1. Rockcastle Coal Company owns and operates a surface coal mine known as <br />the Grassy Gap Mine. The mine is located in Sections 20, 21, 28, 29, 31 <br />and 32, Township 5 North, Range 87 West of the 6th Prime Meridian in <br />Routt County. <br />2. The Rockcastle Coal Company developed an adequate mining and reclamation <br />plan and received approval for this plan from the Division on April 23, <br />1985, under the permanent regulatory program. <br />3. The permit carried with it the right of successive renewal under <br />Rule 2.08.5. <br />4. The operator did not apply for permit renewal under 2.08.5 and the permit <br />subsequently expired on April 23, 1990. <br />5. On May 24, 1990, the Division issued a recommendation that the renewal be <br />officially denied. This recommendation was based on the finding that <br />1) the terms and the conditions of the permit were not being <br />satisfactorily met, 2) the present surface coal mining and reclamation <br />operation is not in compliance with environmental protection standards, <br />3) the operator has not provided evidence that the performance bond will <br />continue in full force and 4) additional revised or updates information <br />required by the Division has not been provided. <br />6. The Division presented its recommendation to the Board, after public <br />notice, on May 24, 1990. <br />7. The Rockcastle Coal Company, through counsel Dean Massey, acknowledged <br />that no renewal application had been filed and accoraingly, did not <br />contest the Board's finding regarding permit renewal. <br />8. The Rockcastle Coal Company and the Division are working towards a <br />compliance schedule for reclamation at the site to be conducted during <br />the summer of 1990. Outstanding issues include involvement of the <br />landowner in the agreement, assessment of the role of the bank that <br />issued the letter of credit in the compliance schedule, and a decision on <br />the mechanism to be used to pay for reclamation at the site. <br />9. The December 14, 1989, Board Order, concerning three Stipulations to the <br />Mid-Term Review, has not been complied with by Rockcastle Coal Company. <br />Failure by Rockcastle to comply with Stipulation No. 5, concerning <br />augmentation of the bond, resulted in issuance of Notice of Violation <br />No. C-90-007 on February 19, 1990. The abatement deadline was May 16, <br />1990. Notice of Violation No. C-90-007 has not been abated. Stipulation <br />Nos. 6 and 7, concern AOC at Pits 5 and 6 and preparation of hydraulic <br />calculations or a Phase II Bond Release package. These stipulations have <br />a compliance date of June 15, 1990, following a February 13, 1990, <br />request for extension to enable access to the site. <br />10. Notice of violation No. C-89-034 was issued December 14, 1989 for failure <br />to maintain compliance with hydrologic performance standards in the <br />permit application and at the site. The abatement deadline was extended <br />on March 8, 1990, due to access difficulties, to June 8, 1990. Notice of <br />Violation No. C-89-034 has not been abated. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.