2010-10-26_ENFORCEMENT - C1981008

Home Browse Search

You also point out that the Division has received extensive comments from Ms. Turner. You conclude there is no basis for issuance of a violation at this time. OSM has also received extensive comments including comments after the letters from WFC. In that regard, the letters from WFC have not curtailed Ms. Turner's involvement in the permitting process. We agree there is no violation at this time only because Ms. Turner has continued to be involved in the permitting process for PR-6. We therefore find that you have shown good cause as defined in 30 CFR 842.11. While we agree there is no violation, we do not agree with your statement that a citizen's rights to engage in the permitting process are theirs to exercise or waive. In our TDN we stated actions by WFC violate provisions of the Colorado program listed below which ensure the right of citizens to be involved in permitting actions. It appears to OSM that these rights affect the public interest and may not be waived or released by the Lease agreement referenced by WFC, because it would thwart Congress's intent to afford citizens such rights. In your response you state that the Division has no authority to enforce private lease provisions. In that we agree as we stated in our TDN, we recognize that the failure to make royalty payments is a matter outside the jurisdiction of the regulatory authority. However, actions taken by WFC that impact program requirements must be a concern. It should not matter that the Division has no role in the cause of the action. In this case, the action was WFC's attempt to thwart a citizen's right to participate in the permitting action. WFC maintains the cause for its action was the lease agreement. We will inform Ms. Turner of our findings and conclusion to TDN X10-140-377-004. If you have any questions call me at 303-293-5015. Sincerely, Jam.. James Fulton Chief, Denver Field Division Cc: Elizabeth Shaeffer