Laserfiche WebLink
:, <br />~~ • iii iiiiiiiiiiiuiii • <br />< 999 <br />STATE <br />MINED LAND RECLAMATION DIVISION <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />1313 Sherman SI.. Room 215 <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />303 866-3567 <br />Fn X: 303 832-8106 <br />July 29, 1991 <br />Mr. Robert Hagen, <br />Albuquerque Field <br />Office of Surface <br />Reclamation and <br />625 Silver Avenue <br />Albuquerque, New <br />Director <br />Office <br />Mining <br />Enforcement <br />S.W., Suite 310 <br />Mexico 87102 <br />OF COLORADO <br />aF ~o~ <br />~~ ~ <br />a ~(.r)R• <br />~ 1876 <br />Roy Romer, <br />Governor <br />Fred R. Barra, <br />Drvieion Director <br />RE: Ten Day Notice X-91-02-116-5, TV3 - Frusta #1 and #2 Mines, <br />Permit No. 79-60/UG/C; File No. C-81-015 <br />Dear Mr. Hagen: <br />We have reviewed your July 24, 1991 determination regarding our July 15, 1991 <br />response to the above-referenced Ten Day Notice (TDN). The Albuquerque Field <br />Office (AFO) has determined that our response regarding Alleged Violation #1 <br />of 3 was arbitrary and capricious and, thus, inappropriate. As allowed by <br />INE-35; Policy/Procedures (c)(3), the Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Division <br />(CMLRD) respectfully requests an Informal Review of the AFO determination, by <br />the Deputy Director, Operations and Technical Services. <br />The AFO has granted additional time for the CMLRD to compile information <br />regarding Alleged Violation #2 of 3. The additional time is appreciated, and <br />our materials will be forwarded for your review no later than August 8, 1991 <br />(15 days after receipt of the July 24, 1991 AFO determination). The AFO has <br />determined that the CMLRD response regarding Alleged Violation #3 of 3 was <br />appropriate. <br />The basis for our Informal Review request <br />is as follows. The TDN x-91-02-116-5 TV3, <br />operator's "failure to transport, backfill <br />depressions to return all disturbed areas <br />contour". The location of concern is the <br />Frusta Mine. The AFO contends that Rule 4 <br />cited rule is specific in its language, as <br />pertaining to the application of Rule 4.14 <br />regarding Alleged Violation #1 of 3 <br />Alleged Violation #1 of 3 cites the <br />and grade all spoil piles and <br />to their approximate original <br />Cameo Seam Portal bench, at the <br />.14.1(2>(a) has been violated. The <br />are the Rule 1 definitions <br />.1(2)(a). <br />