Laserfiche WebLink
STATE OF COLORADO <br />MINED LAND RECLAMATION BOARD <br />DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES <br />IN THE.MATTER OF: The Corley Company, ) PERMITTEE PETITION <br />The Newlin Creek Mine ) FOR <br />Permit No. C-81-045 ) DECLARATORY ORDER <br />To The Corley Company and all other persons engaged in or owning or controlling the Newlin Creek <br />Mine coal mining operation located in portions of Sections 30 and 31, Township 20 South, Range <br />69 West of the 6th P.M., in Fremont County, Colorado. <br />FINDINGS OF FACT <br />Pursuant to the authority vested in the State of Colorado Mined Land Reclamation Board by C.R.S. <br />34-33-101 et seq., the Board hereby makes the following findings of fact: <br />On August 25-26, 1993,.the Board held a Formal Public Hearing to consider a Petition <br />fdr a Declaratory Order, pursuant to Rule 1.14 of the Board's Regulations for Coal Mining, <br />filed by The Corley Company ('Corley') on August 4, 1993, to grant Corley an exemption <br />from the requirements for release of performance bonds as outlined in Rule 3.03 and to <br />release in entirety the performance bond held by the State for the Newlin Creek Mine. <br />2. Corley presented evidence and/or testimony demonstrating that: <br />a. The Division of Minerals and Geology ('the Division") and the Harrison-Western <br />Corporation ('Harrison') entered into a Compliance Agreement on April 22, 1992 <br />regarding Harrison's responsibilities inreclaiming portions of certain mining-related <br />disturbances associated with the GEC Minerals, Inc. GEC Strip Mine (Revoked <br />Permit No. C-81-037). <br />b. The Division and Harrison entered into an Agreement on May 7, 1993 regarding <br />termination of Harrison's responsibilities inthe reclamation of the aforementioned <br />mining-related disturbances. <br />c. ~ Corley specifically did not appeal the May 7, 1993 Agreement between the <br />Division and Harrison in the hope that the Agreement would serve as justification <br />for an exemption from the performance bond release regulations as they applied <br />to Corley and the Newlin Creek Mine. <br />3. The Division presented evidence and/or testimony demonstrating that: <br />a. Permittees such as Corley must comply with all the Board's regulations, including <br />those associated with performance bond releases, and that the May 7, 1993 <br />Agreement, which was agreed to by Corley, should not be a basis for granting <br />Corley an exemption from those regulations. <br />