Laserfiche WebLink
Powderhorn Coal Company v. OSM, 129 IBLA 22, 28 (March 18, 1994). <br />A. Hardship from the denial of temporary relief tips decidedly <br />in favor of Kerr• <br />The NOV issued by OSM to Kerr requires Kerr to begin trans- <br />porting backfill to return the areas disturbed to OSM's interpre- <br />tation of approximate original contour. The time set for abate- <br />ment was June 6, 1994. This date was extended by stipulation to <br />August 23, 1994. On August 24, 1994, OSM issued a cessation <br />order for failure to comply with the NOV. Consequently, since <br />August 2a, Kerr has been subject to civil penalties for failure <br />to comply. Kerr is left in a situation in which it either com- <br />plies with the NoV, expending a substantial sum of money for rec- <br />lamation which may be unnecessary to meet applicable standards, <br />or must incur thousands of dollars in civil penalties. In addi- <br />tion, the abatement action ordered may require a revision to the <br />state permit. without such. revision, Kerr may begin abatement <br />actions which violate its permit from the DMG. Accordingly, to <br />ensure an effective appeal, the granting of interim temporary re- <br />lief is necessary. <br />B. Likelihood of success on the merits <br />The issues Kerr raises in its Application for Review of the <br />NOV create serious, substantial, difficult and doubtful questions <br />about the NOV. The first issue is whether OSM had the authority <br />-5- <br />