My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2006-10-20_ENFORCEMENT - M1978208 (4)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Enforcement
>
Minerals
>
M1978208
>
2006-10-20_ENFORCEMENT - M1978208 (4)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/2/2020 11:10:11 AM
Creation date
11/21/2007 10:06:32 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1978208
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
10/20/2006
Doc Name
Board Order
From
MLRB
To
Aspen Enterprises
Violation No.
MV2006017
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.
/
6
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
Successor of Operators form was signed by Aspen Enterprises prior to the Board hearing. <br />The Boazd also heazd testimony that the Successor of Operators form, as submitted, was <br />acceptable to the Division. However, Elk Creek had not yet posted a bond as of the date of <br />the hearing. Therefore, the Successor of Operators was not yet effective. <br />8. It is appropriate for the Boazd to consider the following facts: (1) provided it can mine <br />outside of the revised 6.663 revised permit acreage but within the origina19.92 acres, Elk <br />Creek testified that it has agreed to post a suitable reclamation bond and to reclaim that azea; <br />(2) the Division testified that Aspen Enterprises has not submitted a revised reclamation <br />bond for that area and the existing reclamation bond is insufficient to reclaim the site; (3) the <br />Division testified that the site presents a safety andlor stability risk if it is not reclaimed; (4) <br />Elk Creek and the Division testified that Aspen Enterprises has consented to allow Elk <br />Creek to become the new permittee for the site by signing a Succession of Operators form; <br />and (5) the Division testified that the Successor of Operators form was acceptable, as <br />presented, but that Elk Creek still had to submit a reclamation bond in order for the Division <br />to approve the permit transfer. <br />9. Given the extraordinary circumstances presented in this matter, it is appropriate for the <br />Board to revise its prior order in this matter, changing the permitted acreage from 6.663 <br />acres to 9.92 acres provided Elk Creek first becomes the successor to the permit now held by <br />Aspen Enterprises and posts a reclamation bond acceptable to the Division <br />ORDER <br />Based on the extraordinary circumstances presented herein, the Board hereby revises its prior <br />Board order in this matter to change the permitted acreage from 6.663 acres to 9.92 acres on <br />condition that Elk Creek first (1) becomes the successor to the permit now held by Aspen <br />Aspen Enterprises/Elk Creek Revised Order <br />September 13, 2006 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.