ENFORCE20244

• Permit No: C1980007
• IBM Index Class Name: Enforcement
• Doc Date: 3/9/1993
• Doc Name: REQYEST TO VACATE MEMO
• From: DMG
• To: MIKE LONG
• Violation No.: CV1993006
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

~=
III IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
STATE OF COLC~~~,-=~~t~
DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY
Department of Natural Resources
1313 Sherman St., Room 213
Denver, CO 80203
Phone: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
~-~ ..
~p CG
/ a O9
,~ .:....iF ?a
a
\~ '~!
Rn.:nm er
Co~e•~or
~'.k iarl B. LonC
DATE: March 9, 1993 I_~' Dni°,on Direro.
~O: Mike Long ~'
FROM: Jim Pendleton - 1`""~
RE: Mountain dal pany's Request to Vacate NOV C-93-006
The Coal program issued NOV C-93-006 to the Mt. Gunnison $1 mine
for "failure to submit a Subsidence Monitoring Report on a semi-
annual basis as required by the permit and regulations". The mine
failed tc submit the required semi-annual reports in~•:riting rc rr,e
Di:•isic: from October 1990 through January, 1993.
n~ fir` .~ inf•~lly re T li vc T ncrcnnolly rcc,i or,rc ri all of
l'c:: ra -, awa__, be__e r_ _-,
Mt. Gunnisen's subsidence informatien up to about earl,-1990. ~t
that point in time I was assigned to other duties and distracted
from keeping track of my favorite subsiding mine sites. Mountain
Coal Company submits their belief that making subsidence monitoring
data "routinely available" during inspections should suffice to
keep the Division informed.
Tn order to provide the kind of information the Division's
subsidence technicians (M.e, Stover, Sorenson, etc.) need to assist
the reclamation specialists if an emerge::c1 :were to =rise, cr
during a permit revision (like they're now processingj, the
~i•risic- aeed~ the monitoring information readil,T available. We
might not have the luxury of waiting for it to be found, assembled
and delivered. For this reason Rule 2.05.6(6)(c)(1)(E) requires
that "results of the monitoring program shall be submitted to the
^i~'isicr. at least semi-annually".
Contrary to Scot k. Anderson's statement, in this instance the
I"iountain Coal Company has not "complied with the letter and spirit
of the subsidence monitoring regulations". Subsidence prediction,
monitoring and evaluation have been a very significant concern for
the Mt. Gunnison No. 1 mine since ics original permit issuance,
including a three year involvement for the Division at considerable
expense before the OSM Board and Administrative Law Judge. In my
opinion Mt. Gunnison got distracted by its recent frenzied
development of the B Seam longwall, concentrated its efforts
elsewhere, and 'blew-off' or 'spaced-out' the report submittal
requirement. It appears to me to be a valid administrative
violation with minimal seriousness.