ENFORCE32769 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

5. Also in the review proceeding, Kerr moved for temporary relief from the abatement ordered by OSM in the NOV. Administra- tive Law Judge Child denied the motion and Kerr has appealed the denial to this Board. 6. The Division now seeks to intervene in the above-cap- tioned proceeding on the ground that its interests may or will be adversely affected by the outcome of this appeal. 7. The Code of Federal Regulation provides that any per- son, including a state, may petition for leave to intervene at any stage of a proceeding in the Office of Hearings and Appeals under the Surface Mining Control Reclamation Act ("SMCRA"). 43 C.F.R. § 4.1110(a). A petitioner must set forth its interest and, where required, a showing of why its interest is or may be adversely affected. 43 C.F.R. § 4.1110(b) The Code further provides that intervention shall be granted where the petitioner either had a statutory right to ini- tiate the proceeding in which it wishes to intervene or has an interest which is or may be adversely affected by the outcome of the proceeding. 43 C.F.R. § 4.1110(c). 8. In the present matter, according to the Code, the Divi- sion has a right to intervene because it has an interest which is or may be adversely affected by the outcome of this proceeding. OSM's actions adversely affected the Division's interests, and whether Kerr is granted interim temporary relief will or may fur- ther adversely affect the DMG's interests. OSM issued a notice of violation directly to Kerr without giving ten days of notice to the Division as provided in 30 C.F.R. § 843.12(a)(2). This in effect disallowed the DMG from deciding on an enforcement action and from appealing OSM's decision. OSM's action raises an issue concerning OSM's and the Division's enforcement authority over mining operations done on federal lands where the state has a cooperative agreement which provides that the state has primary jurisdiction over such operations. In addition, OSM's NOV alleges that certain reclamation performed by Kerr does not satisfy state approximate original contour (AOC) standards. OSM's interpretation of AOC standards affects regulation of mining operations by the Division since OSM's interpretation differs from one made by the Division pursu- ant to permit revisions requested by Kerr and approved in 1990 and 1993. A potential ramification of OSM's position is that the action required by OSM to abate the NOV undermines the Division's permitting decisions. OSM has ordered Kerr to begin earth-moving activities as of August 24, 1994, or have civil penalties imposed -2-