ENFORCE32613 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

United States Department of the interior III IIIIII~IIIIIIIII OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING v Reclamation and Enforcement ~ ~ WASHINGTON, D.C. 20240 ~ ~ s' EP 2 4 1990 Mr. Dan T. Mathews Acting Coal Program Supervisor Hined Land Reclamation Division Department of Natural Resources 215 Centennial Building 1313 Sherman Street Denver, Colo/r//ad~'o 80203 Dear Mr. Mathe~ey~ I-l~l~~~`f~~ OCT 1 1990 Mined Land Reclamation Qivision This ie in response to your August 24, 1990, request for informal review of the Albuquerque Field Office Director's written determination that the Mined Land Reclamation Division (NERD) failed to take appropriate action or show good cause for inaction with respect to two alleged violations in ten-day notice 90-02-351-1 (New Castle Energy Corporation, permit number C-84-065). The record indicates that the MLRD performed an on-site inspection of the subject permit area on July 24, 1990, as a result of a citizen's complaint letter received by both the Director, MLRD and the Albuquerque Field Office Director on July 16, 1990. The complaint concerned the Coal Ridge No. 1 Hine, an underground mine that has been in temporary cessation since March of 1986. The first violation at issue alleges that the operator failed to place noncoal waste in a controlled manner in a designated site in violation of Colorado rule 4.11.4(1). In your request for review, you indicate that the presence of lumber, plywood, fiberglass insulation, and Mirafi filler fabric was noted during the July 24 inspection by your agency, but that these items are not subject to the requirements-of Colorado-rule 4.Y1.4(1) because they are not noncoal waste materials. You also report that a MLRD follow-up inspection of August 21, 1990, verified that the materials noted in the July 24 inspection report had been cleaned up or removed. The remedial actions of the operator resulted in a showing of good cause for Colorado not taking further action in this instance because the debris which gave rise to the alleged violation cited in the ten-day notice no longer exists. However, the MLRD'e inspection report of August 21 cited an additional sheet of plywood and loose insulation. Thus, I am concerned that in both cited instances when MLRD inspections were conducted on July 24 and August 21, that violations of Colorado rules concerning noncoal waste storage and disposal have not only occurred but were vncited by the State inspector. in both your initial response to the Albuquerque Field Office Director and in your request for informal review, you contend that the subject materials are not noncoal wastes. My reading of the applicable provisions of Colorado's approved regulatory program indicates otherwise. A plain reading of the performance standards regarding mining operations regarding disposal of noncoal wastes at Colorado rule 4.11.4(1), shows that Lumber is identified clearly as an example