ENFORCE24363 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

This language is more in concert with the Board's Regulations at Section 4.05.1(1) regardirtg the performance standards addressing disturbances to the prevailing hydrologic balance. 2. Basin Resources presented evidence and/or testimony that: a. Basin had complied with all the appropriate stipulations and statutory and re_ gulatory require- _ - - - -- ~- menu necessary to obtain`renewal of the Golden Eaglee ivline permit, and that its permit for the Golden Eagle Mine should be renewed. 3. Raton West presented evidence and/or testimony that: a. Four issues remain unresolved regarding the permit renewal. These are: (i) Basin Resources is required per Colorado Revised Statute 34-48-106 to post a bond with each landowner which may be undermined by the mining operator prior to under- mining occurring. Basin has not done this, and the Board should not renew the permit until Basin has done so. (ii) Basin Resources is not entitled to having their permit renewed, because Basin did not submit an application for renewal at least 180 days prior to the expiration of the existing permit as required per Colorado Revised Statute 34-33-109(~(d). (iii) The Division's Proposed Decision document should be revised to reflect that the findings regarding hydrologic impacts with respect to the property owned by Raton West are as yet inconclusive, as evidenced by the fact that a groundwater monitoring program is proposed by Basin to evaluate the impacts of the mining operation upon the hydrologic regime. (iv) Basin Resources should be limited to providing the Public Notices required by Section 4.20.2 of the Regulations of the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board for Coal Mining to no earlier than eight to twelve months prior to undermining occurring. b. With regard to the first issue, Raton West stated that: (i) It had brought this item to the attenrion of the Division in correspondence from April 1993, December 1993 and February 1994; (ii) It had requested Basin Resources post this bond in correspondence dated November 1992 and December 1992; (iii) A Ltndowner separate from Raton West had in December 1993 requested information regar~dirtg this type of bond; (iv) As demonstrated by overlays of Basin's Mine Progress Map and Raton West's Lot Layout Map, Raton West was still owner of some of the lots that would be affected by future subsidence; (v) L1 addition to C.R.S. 34-48-106, this bond should be required of Basin by the Board due to: (A) Basin's previous enforcement history;