ENFORCE35483 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1 H - G COAL COMPANY ~4;r~ffilOS ~.}~~.glia{ ~1CdCt1CU6N ldXX`1hY7d76SS E3C9C7.~XIi~78 ~x}~C'~i~C81}[~7C .,I'~. '~ 'l i.:~~J'.. . i i:.~~u' l~~L: Mr. Anthony J. Waldron Reclamation Specialist Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Division 215 Centennial Building 1313 Sherman Street Denver, CO 80203-2273 Re: Notice of Violation C-90-042 Permit No. C-80-003 Request for Vacation of NOV Dear Mr. Waldron, III IIIIII III IIII III BUSINESS OFFICE 5731 STATE HIGHWAY 13 MEEKER. COLORADO 816et 13091 824 -aa5t November 2, 1990 HG Coal Company hereby requests vacation of the NOV C-90-042 for the reasons outlined as follows. We are confident that the Division will agree that HG Coal Company has indeed complied with the requirements of the Act and MLRD rules and a NOV is not warranted in this case. The nature of the Violation is a failure to clearly mark the perimeter of the permit area where surface coal mining activities have and are occurring. Specifically, perimeter markers were not present on an internal irregular shaped area located within the rail loop. The rail loop is designated as permitted area and the entire loadout/loop area perimeter is marked with a wire fence. Rule 4.02.3 Perimeter Markers offers little guidance as to what constitutes a "perimeter" other than to state it is to be marked prior to the beginning of surface mining operations. A Dictionary definition of "perimeter" uses "outer limits" as an appropriate synonymous phrase. With this definition in mind we believe the perimeter fence and identification signs have adequately marked the outer limits or perimeter of the loadout area as required in excess of 10 years. This perimeter marker fence has been subject to review and approval well over 100 times during Division inspections and numerous times by OSMRE. We disagree with the rational for issuing the NOV at this time for lack of markers on such an internal area within the permit area perimeter.