Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Pursuant to Rule 2.07.5(2)(h), the Division finds that the applicant does not <br />control and has nct controlled any mining operations with a demonstrated <br />pattern of willful violations of the Act of such nature, duration and with <br />such resulting irreparable damage tc the environment, as to inpicaLe an intent <br />nct to comply with the prov'sions of the Act. <br />The two findings above were made based on a review of Division record;, <br />information provided in the revision application, .4pplicant Violator System <br />(AVS) cneck.; of January 9, 1991 and July 29, 1991, and a Compliance States <br />Review (510(c)) check of January 13, 1991. The Division received t~.+e <br />re;JOnSe; tJ the 71D(Ci Check. A letter pdted F2bruarv 2'?. 139! *:om ^he <br />ReCi3md'`Jn DI'•/iSiJn Of the Montana Department of Stdte ~3CC; ~~d`~:3L?C :n3` <br />~e3pCd'J n37 t"rte 3C'_1ve ';i01dt10n; 1n MOntdnd, OUL the idm9ni;LraLi~;2 ~?!`:?tv <br />OrOC?;s hdp ^.OC been COmpleL?d on any Or the thre? violations. .4 loll?~' ]ated <br />April 1, 1.91 from the (lest Virginia Division of Energy (WVa DGE; ind+caL?~ <br />that Peapody had delinquent civil penalties for violations in that stale. i.n <br />a follow-up telephone conversation of May 10, 1991, Jana Miller of WVa DCE <br />indicated that the civil penalties were not delinquent, and the violations <br />were still within the administrative review process. <br />A`JS r?c:mmendation resulting from both the January and July, 1991 checks ':;a; <br />":slue''. In the initial check, P.ML fees were listed as deiinpue^t. Th? .~';S <br />offic? r25ean:hed the issue and determined that the fees list?d as delinpuent <br />had been caid. <br />The applicant is in compliance with this section of the Regulations. <br />?:. sand 1Jse - Rules 2.0?.3, 2.05.5 and 4.16 <br />The nine permit area consists of twc separata arias cf land usa; the mine area <br />and the tie-across haul road. Eacn is addressed separately. <br />The pr2acminant pre-mining land use cn the mining area is rangeland i•;ra=~ng <br />for domestic livestock and wildlife. Secondary uses consist of a small <br />industrial area (one active oil we!1) and miner water resources (three stock <br />ponds). The tie-across haul road pre-mining land use i5 classified a5 <br />cropland and rangeland with the western end classified as industrial due to <br />the Hayden Gulch coal loading facility. The cropland is non-irrigated ;mall <br />grain and represents an insignificant portion of the total farming unit <br />(0.2t>. These uses are depicted en Exh!bit 4.1 and described in Volume ?. Tab <br />d. 4f ;2` Alining, the apDilCanL OlanS t0 res tore the ore-mininc land U;2i. <br />Yegetat'cn sUppCrting rangeland U;2 'x11. esLabli;hed in 3re3; wn'C'I 'xe'? ^-- <br />Cf00ped or`or to min?ng, and ar?a; which wer? rrppped pr1Gr t0 m1n`: ng .~: ~~ ^_? <br />inC~~rpCra[?d into the original farming unit;. Pcst-mining land use ': <br />discusses in `/plume i3, Tab 22 of the apFiicaticn. <br />-9- <br />