ENFORCE27938 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

.~~ III III III III IIII III C, STATE OF COLORADO MINED LAND RECLAMATION DIVISION Department of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman SI-. Room 215 Denver, CO 80203 303 8663567 Fa X: 303 832-8106 April 29, 1991 Mr. Robert Hagen, Director Albuquerque Field Office Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement 625 Silver Avenue, S.W., Suite 310 Albuquerque, New Mexico 87102 Re: Ten Day Notice X-91-02-116-004, Grassy Gap Mine (C-81-039) Dear Mr. Hagen: pF' COQ Ne %" O r ' ~ r8'16 ~ Roy Romer, Governor Fretl R. Banta, Division Director We have reviewed the above referenced Ten Day Notice and the April 10, 1991 AFO determination that our April 2, 1991 response was arbitrary and capricious. We have also reviewed the Grassy Gap file, Colorado and Federal statutes and the federal regulations. As you know, the Grassy Gap Mine site is subject to a Compliance Agreement. This Agreement was entered into by the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Division and The Rockcastle Company in July, 1990. The Compliance Agreement effectively establishes a schedule for site reclamation by Rockcastle. The Agreement further delineates a performance based schedule for bond release by the Division. The Agreement was established to act as an abatement to Notice of Violation C-90-007, issued for failure to maintain adequate bond. The Compliance Agreement was entered into pursuant to Rule 3.04.1(2). This rule allows for the Board to enter into a Compliance Agreement in lieu of permit revocation in order to correct permit violations or to comply with bond conditions. The Agreement which we have entered into achieves these goals, and fully complies with all provisions of 3.04.1(2)(a, b, c). In addition, upon a finding of completion of reclamation, we will forfeit the remaining bond and enter the operator into the Applicant Violator System. It is our position that alternative enforcement, through the use of a Compliance Agreement, is pursued when it becomes apparent that normal enforcement avenues will not produce compliance. The record will bear out that this is in fact the case at Grassy Gap. Bond forfeiture and ultimate civil action, in this case, would result in an unreclaimed site with no alternative funding. This Agreement was reached when it became evident that compliance schedule and performance based release were the only available mechanisms by which the site would be reclaimed. Due to the special and extenuating circumstances at this site, the settlement reached by the parties ensures that the site will be reclaimed and never be underbonded.