Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />Mr. Robert Hagen - 2 - April 2, 1991 <br />Rockcastle has been diligently abiding by the terms of the Agreement, as has <br />the Division. Therefore we cannot take any enforcement actions because <br />Rockcastle is currently in the process of abating the NOV on the bond in <br />accordance with the Board Order and the Settlement Agreement. Copies of all <br />the necessary documents are attached. <br />Another item which we should respond to is Mr, Austin's assertion on page 4 of <br />his inspection narrative that OSM-AFO has not reviewed the Division's October, <br />1990 bond release decision, This statement is in error. Page 4 of the <br />September 6, 1990 inspection report by D. Byrnes, which is attached and <br />referenced as being incorporated, indicates that the proposed decision was <br />reviewed by OSM-AF O. The public record indicates that OSM-AFO did not comment <br />on the proposed decision during the necessary time frames. (See minutes from <br />November 20, 1990 quarterly meeting.) Therefore OSM-AFO reviewed the proposed <br />decision and did not have any comments. <br />TV #2 Failure to examine sediment ponds. <br />TV #3 Failure to monitor surface and ground water, <br />In general, we concur that the above were required by the permit and have not <br />been accomplished. However, given that there is no longer a permit we are <br />unable to enforce permit provisions. The Division has posed this question and <br />OSM-AFO agreed that a policy must be developed to address these types of <br />sites. (See November 20, 1990 minutes from quarterly meetings). <br />We have been aware of the lack of monitoring. However since the site did not <br />have a permit, was under alternative enforcement by Board Order, and was in <br />bond forfeiture proceedings, we elected not to take enforcement action, <br />deeming it to be non-productive. <br />Given that both OSM-AFO and our office have acknowledged <br />discussions and policy implementation in this regard are <br />not issued a violation. I suggest that our offices work <br />this question so that similar situations may be avoided <br />Please contact me if you have questions or comments. <br />Sincerely, <br />~teven G.'Rdnner <br />Coal Program Supervisor <br />SGR/scg <br />Enclosure(s) <br />CC: Cathy Begej, MLRD <br />that further <br />necessary, we have <br />together to resolve <br />in the future. <br />4557E <br />