2011-01-24_ENFORCEMENT - C1981008 (2)

Home Browse Search

also was not given the opportunity to submit anything to the pre- conference hearing office. I was also denied the request of the hearing to be held in Nucla whcrc thr- operator was, were the landowners was. where the fanners were and was also denied to tour of the mime to show some of this prior to the hearing. The 35 other people who sent a request were never responded to and they too, requested the same thing. I asked for a Skype program and was also denied. Ise of this to the Board in writing telling them of all of this and was not responded to. The formal bearing was already decided before we ever entered the meeting and there was nothing decided in the landowners favor. The Board again violated the rules and regulations governing prune farmland 4.25. The Board also violated the Act which guarantees that the landowner will be protected to the fullest extent of the law from the adverse affects of,surfaee coal mining. In PR -06, they continuously use the soil decisions and re- vegetation decisions based on 4.15 and 4.06 even in the conclusions of the finding document of PR -06. This again is illegal. The 4.06 rule and the 4.15 rule is for all lands within the permit area except for Prime Farmlands which have to comply with 4.25. The Board approved this even after I tried to explain that they must comply with 4.25. I explained that 4.06 is GENERAL topsoil requirements, and not prune farmlands, they still ignored me. We acre not accepting PR-06, not are we going to allow them to violate all of these rules and regulations governing our property. We are again requesting the help of OSlvl and we v j_ou_IAJ:1kg_Ihzmm ing shut down on the Mo:Kgaa property until these rules and regulations are abided by. Even violating the WRITTEN portion as my attorney states is still a violation that results in the action which again is a violation. They again shoved beautiful soils off into the pit at James Johnsons which was bou2bt by WFC. According to rules and regulations, all salvaging must be done in two separate lift, even for pasturelands, etc. The permit that was in operation stated that a two lift operation was too to be done. This is the permit that was approved whenever they emte-ted o-ur-pro -p-g .� They violated that permit. The state said the current permit allowed them to do that, but if you read permit renewal number 4 and 5, you will see that within the permit itself, they state a two lift operation would place as per the rules of general requirements. Not even recognizing prune farmland, just general salvaging was documented as being a two lift operation. So, by accepting PR-06, the Board again violated their own rules and regulations. They had to do a two lift operation and salvage all available topsoil, a mixed lift was not accepted at alb in either permit. By approving PR -06, they allowed for 4.25 to be violated again. In 4.�5. It states that prime farmland must be returned to cropland. And to the crops that were normally grown such as corn as an annual crop and alfalfa as the perennial crop. We cannot grow corn under a sideroll and the Board ruled against corn being grown. Again a violation of all rules and regulations and the Act. We have grown corn on this place for 59 years. It also can never be furrow irrigated again and we had all of our irrigation in place prior to mining. We had gated pipe, furrows, siderolls, traveling big gun and bought a center pivot in 1994. We also purchased our siderolls in 1996. All of these were in place prior to the mine even: signing the lease. Mr. Morgan is the largest stockholder of the CCC Ditch and has enough water to make a lake out of 600 acres. The Board ignored everything we were trying to tell them. The Board violated the rules.by approving PR-06 because they state that we are to Hood irrigate and we have not flood irrigated for 39 years. We