Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />Minutes, April 22-23, 1992 <br />~~±f~% Df~AFT <br />Subject To Board Approval 2 <br />SB 181 -- The Division has provided the Water Quality Cgfitrol <br />Board with a written report stating its position on the~ssues <br />related to this bill. 1'he Division has a MOU with the Department <br />of Health covering ground water and points of compliance, and <br />regulations for the Minerals and Coal Programs will be ,established <br />in the near future. ~ <br />c) Bond increases for 110(2) operations -- The Divisi n has received <br />some comments regarding this issue, and they are being reviewed. <br />The Division will develop an implementation plan hand present it to <br />the Board at its May Board Meeting for consideration. <br />d) Minerals (and Coal) Pror3ram -- due to the ~fpcoming field season, <br />priorities will be directed toward field work over the next few <br />months, in order to conduct more inspectiop's, etc. <br />e) BLM -- The Division and some Board Members met with BLM <br />representatives to discuss the curre~at MOU, as well as opening <br />lines of communication. The Divisio rs awaiting a response to a <br />letter sent to BLM which stated tha#~the Division would like to be <br />informed of operations on BLM lads involving leasable minerals; <br />these are not covered under the c rrent MOU. Board Member Stewart <br />briefly discussed the pr•ovision~ of the current MOU (established <br />in 1984) and its disi:inctipn between saleable minerals and <br />locatable minerals. ~ <br />f) Cyanide Guidelines -- ha-s been finalized and printed; copies <br />(ATTACHMENT A) were presented to the Board for review. The <br />Guidelines will be discx(ssed at a future Board Meeting at which <br />time the Board will be ,asked to consider its adoption. <br />g) Inactive Mine Recla~ation Program -- is staging a simulated mine <br />rescue project (ir/ May) in the Gilpin County area in conjunction <br />with Women In Mining, Gilpin County, the Division of Mines and <br />other community ,groups. <br />Board Member Stewa"rt initiated a discussion, regarding the vandalism <br />and destruction o ~IML mine closures by developers and/or landowners in <br />the Central Ci area. The State currently has no recourse for this <br />situation, be use it does not own the land in these cases. However, <br />it was noted that the structures become property of the landowner after <br />installatio and, therefore, the State could not file charges for <br />criminal ts, such as vandalism and trespassing. <br />The Di ector suggested that 'the Division state its concerns through a <br />lette to the Commissioners of Gilpin County informing them that the <br />Divi, ion would not be able to continue installing closures in that <br />ar~a, until a guarantee could be given that closures would remain <br />intact. <br /> <br /> <br />The Board suggested that an agreement be established requiring the <br />landowner to leave installed closures intact or provide an equivalent <br />safeguard, if the closures have to be removed for development, etc. <br />