ENFORCE25846

• Permit No: C1981039
• IBM Index Class Name: Enforcement
• Doc Date: 5/29/1991
• Doc Name: Request for Vacation on two NOV Memo
• From: Cathy Begej
• To: Acting Director
• Violation No.: CV1991003
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

~.v III Ilillllllllll III
.
.
:
STATE OF COLORADO
MINED LAND RECLAMATION DIVISION
Department of Natural Resources
7313 Sherman St., Room 215
Denver. CO 80203
303 866-3567
FA x: 303 832.8706
GATE: May 29, 1991
T0: Dave Bucknam, Acting Director
FROM: Cathy Begej C} tn~
RE: Requests for Vacation, NOV's C-91-002 and C-91-003,
Grassy Gap Mine, File C-81-039
pF'p0(p
r.~-- q9
N`t~8
.# ., ~:
'~ /e96 ~
Roy Romer.
Governor
Fred R. Banta.
Division Director
Brent Anderson of Parcel, Mauro, Hultin & Spaanstra, representing Rockcastie
Coal Company, has requested vacation of two violations written April 30,
1991. These violations were written following the Division's receipt and
unsuccessful appear of Ten Day Notice X-91-02-116-4-TV 3 for failure to
perform sediment pond semi-annual monitoring (NOV C-91-002) and failure to
perform hydrologic monitoring (NOV C-91-0031.
The Grassy Gap permit expired April 23, 1990. The company failed to provide
adequate bond as required by NOV C-90-007 by May 16, 1990. Instead of writing
a Failure-to-Abate Cessation Order fFTAC0) the Division and the Company
entered into a Settlement Agreement, signed June 27, 1990. It allows the
company to complete reclamation at the site and receive bond monies for
reclamation through the bond reduction process. In addition, the Settlement
Agreement specified the terms for completing some engineering work, resolution
of NOV's C-90-007 and C-89-034 (a violation on the surface water drainage
system), and ultimate forfeiture of a 550,000 band. The Division believes the
Agreement is a modification of the bond release processes and the reclamation
plan. We do not believe that it supersedes other permit requirements nor
other applicable Derformance standards in the regulations. Paragraph I(2) of
the Agreement supports our interpretation.
Mr. Anderson argues in Section I of the May 20, 1991, vacation request that
the Settlement Agreement refers strictly to reclamation related compliance
obligations. Reclamation is never severed from operations under the general
regulatory scenario, and it was not the Division's intention to separate the
two with this Settlement Agreement.
In Section II of the May 20, 1991, Mr. Anderson makes the fo]lowing
observations:
Rockcastle basically complied with requirements associated with sediment
pond monitoring;
NOV C-91-002 referenced inspections of Ponds 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5/6;
NPDES sampling was performed during 1990 and this constitutes substantial
compliance with the monitoring.