Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Steven G. Renner <br />2 <br />configuration does approximate the original and adjacent topography. <br />The Cameo Seam portal area does not exhibit a remaining highwall, <br />spoil pile or depression." <br />MLRD's response further states: <br />"The area does not exhibit a highwall, spoil pile or depression <br />as defined within both the state and federal regulations. A <br />highwall is defined in Rule 1.04(58) as ". the face of <br />exposed overburden and coal in an open cut of surface coal mining <br />operations or for entry to underground mining operations". The <br />Cameo portal area is located at an elevation below the Cameo coal <br />seam. The face does not expose coal, nor does it expose <br />overburden." <br />AFO disagrees with MLRD's interpretation and discussion of both the Rule <br />cited [4.14.1(2)(a)] and the highwall definition at Rule 1.04(58). AFO <br />refers MLRD to the February 6, 1980, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation <br />and Enforcement (OSM) inspection report which was enclosed with AFO's <br />July 2, 1991, TDN issuance package. This report states in part: <br />"An engineering study has been done on the waste pile. The <br />reclamation plan now permits the location of the pile and <br />provides for a reclamation operation on the waste pile. The <br />plans call for the waste rock to be pulled back onto the bench <br />and backfilled into the face up area. Violation ~~2 of NOV 79-V- <br />1-11 can be terminated because the waste pile location was <br />approved by the State." <br />The "waste pile" referenced in this report is development rock generated <br />from both the Cameo Seam Portal Face-up area and subsequent entry <br />development. It is clear from the report that both MLRD and OSM recognized <br />the "waste pile." A reclamation plan was approved which required this <br />material to be removed and backfilled into the face-up and highwall area. <br />AFO believes subsequent permitting actions by MLRD, including the current <br />approved reclamation plan, were not processed in accordance with the <br />approved Colorado Program. The approved reclamation plan does not require <br />removal of the development rock pile for use in backfilling the face-up <br />area highwalls as required by Rule 4.14.1(2)(a). <br />AFO finds that MLRD's response to TDN 91-02-116-5, part 1 of 3, constitutes <br />an arbitrary and capricious response and, therefore, is inappropriate. <br />TDN 91-02-116-1, alleged violation 2 of 3, cites Rule 3.03.1(2)(a) and <br />states, "Failure to maintain the entire bond amount required by the <br />approved permit until such time as a bond release is authorized under Rule <br />3.03." MLRD's response acknowledges that a part of the bond adjustment <br />(reduction) approved in 1990 granted credit for reclamation work performed <br />