Laserfiche WebLink
JIM & ANN TATUM <br />IBLA 96-90,96-91 Decided January 5, 2000 <br />Appeals from two decisions ofthe Regional Director, Western Regional Coordinating Center, Office of Surface <br />Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, atfinning decisions ofthe Denver and Albuquerque Field Offices, determining that <br />the State regulatory authority had taken appropriate action in response to a Ten-Day Notice issued in response to a citizen's <br />complaint. No. CC-93-020-008. <br />Decision in IBLA 96-90 affiimied as modified; decision in IBLA 96-91 vacated and case remanded <br />Surtace Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977: Citizen's Complaints: Generally- <br />Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977: Enforcement Procedures: Generally- <br />Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977: Inspections: I ( Day Notice to State <br />Upon review of action taken by the state regulatory authority in response to a I D-day notice, <br />OSM is obligated to conduct an inspection unless the state takes appropriate action to cause the <br />violation to be corrected or shows good cause for failure to do so. "Good cause for failure to <br />act" includes a finding that the alleged violation does not exist and OSM's standard on review <br />of such a finding is whether the state regulatory authority's action or response to the 10-day <br />notice is arbit ary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion -rider the state program. <br />i <br />Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977: Enforcement Procedures: Generally- <br />Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977: Inspections: I ()-Day Notice to State <br />i <br />Assuming actionsIby a surface coal rhining operation result in the diminution ofa person's <br />water supply, the operator is responsible for replacement of that water supply, in accordance <br />with section 720(ax2) of the Surface Mining Control and <br />151 IBLA 286