Laserfiche WebLink
• . iii iiiiiiiiniii iii <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />DIVISION OE MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Department ni Natural Resources <br />1311 Shmman 51., Room 'I $ <br />Denver, CC +i020 S <br />Phone: 1 SU J H6h-i56; <br />F/\.~: SO}I H 1'_-81116 <br />Date: March 16, 1993 <br />To: Steven G. Renner, Coal Program Supervisor <br />From: Daniel I. Hernandez, Senior Reclamation Specialist <br />Re: March 10, 1993 OSMRE Memorandum <br />OF'~~(O <br />~`/'may <br />~~I " <br />111 hrxa? . ~o'~ <br />rB]6 ~ <br />Ruv Rnmer <br />Covrmor <br />Ar~charl 8. Long <br />Diviaon Director <br />On March 16, 1993, I received a copy of the March 10, 1993 memorandum written to our <br />office from Robert H. Hagen, Director of the Albuquerque Field Office of the U.S. Office of <br />Surface Mining, Reclamation and Enforcement. I wish to take this opportunity to respond <br />to the statements in the letter that regard the Helen/Animas Mine near Trinidad, Colorado. <br />Mr. Hagen states that "the Helen/Animas Mine's permit renewal was conditioned with <br />possible retention of its highwalls when, and if, the Colorado program is amended." <br />Mr. Hagen states further that such an approval is "not consistent with the approved <br />[Colorado] Program," and requests that Colorado commit to revising the approval to <br />conform with the existing program. <br />I disagree with Mr. Hagen's belief that the Helen/Animas permit renewal approval is <br />inconsistent with our program. Our approval of the renewal not only holds the permittee <br />to current State standards for highwall reclamation, but holds them to standards that in <br />fact are higher than those of the Federal government. <br />During the Renewal Application Review process, the Division determined that the <br />reclamation plan approved for the original permit contained a provision that conflicted with <br />State law. This provision allowed for two mutually exclusive reclamation scenarios: one <br />for elimination of highwalls to be accomplished by backfilling them with coal processing <br />waste, and one for retention of highwalls if mining were to cease prior to the generation of <br />enough waste to complete backfilling. <br />This discrepancy was brought to the attention of the permittee in the Division's adequacy <br />letter of October 1 3, 1992. The permittee's subsequent response inadequately addressed <br />our concerns, and the permittee subsequently met with the Division to discuss the issue. <br />This meeting, held on January 21, 1993 at the Division's offices, resulted in both the <br />Division and the operator agreeing that elimination of all highwalls at the HelenlAnimas <br />Mine is required under current Colorado statutes. As such, this requirement of the original <br />permit remains in force. <br />