GENERAL36733 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

,'~ •• GCA Proposal: a. The Division take enforcement action immediately on Eastside for operating during temporary cessation. b. The Division institute procedures to independently verify that valid local permits are in effect for all mine facilities and sites. We believe such verification should be done as part of each complete inspection'. 3. At our meeting with you on October 24, you stated that it was the Division's policy not to allow load outs to be added by technical revision. We have learned that on October 31, 1989, Eastside applied for a technical revision (TR-06), and the Divi- sion approved it for a load out located in Rifle, Colorado. In the past two months, Alliance members have contacted the city and learned that the site is zoned highway commercial, which does not include load outs; city officials expressed surprise that a load out was permitted by the Division and can find no evidence that the city ever gave permission for a load out on this site. In September 1990, the Division proposed to approve removal of the load out by technical revision. The Division's proposal included a notice to the Office of Surface Mining that OSM could request an informal conference. The Alliance reviewed the East- side files, found the letter to OSM, and requested an informal conference by letter an September 27, 1990. You rejected this request by letter dated October 10, 1990, stating the rules did not require an informal conference on technical revisions. GCA Proposal: a. The Division cease immediately its practice of using technical revisions for load outs, important facilities, or activities which affect the amount and type of surface disturb- ance. b. The Division institute procedures to independently verify that valid local permits are in place for mine facilities and sites as requested in 2b above. 4. On April 25, 1990, Alliance members told Mike Long and others on the Division's coal staff that Eastside's permit renew- al application failed to identify fully the financial and legal interests as required by Rule 2.03. Despite the staff's active discouragement of GCA members, the Alliance brought the matter before the Board; the Board agreed with the Alliance and required Eastside to make full disclosure. As you may know, OSM's Applicator-Violator System has flaws and is not complete. Far example, Mr. Matthies was an officer of Western Slope Carbon after 1970, but he did not disclose this required information in the New Castle application. When OSM ran the AVS, this information surfaced but did not when the Division ran it. The Alliance found the information in the Division's own 2