1993-11-15_PERMIT FILE - C1981017 ‎(2)‎

• Permit No: C1981017
• IBM Index Class Name: Permit File
• Doc Date: 11/15/1993
• Doc Name: Request for federal Intervention ‎(Part 2 of 2)‎
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

Mr. Steven G. Renner
Coal Program Supervisor
Department of Natural Resources
1313 Sherman Street, Room 215
Denver, Colorado 80203
Dear Mr. Renner:
States Department of the Interior
OFFICE OF SURFACE MINING
Reclamation and Enforcement
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20240
MAR 301992
". iCt ?te
� a
4PR 6 1999
, A..� ?,,,
't ' •)r r;
This is in response to your February 3, 1992, letter requesting informal review of the
Albuquerque Field Office (AFO) Director's determination that your agency did not
take appropriate action with respect to ten -day letter (TDL) number 91 -02 -244 -005,
(Mid- Continent; Coal Basin Mine).
The TDL alleges that the bond value of the real property being held to ensure
reclamation work has been reduced below the amount required to complete
reclamation. In your request for review, you explain that both your agency and the
Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement agree on the amount of
performance bond necessary for this permit and agree that the bond instrument may
provide insufficient money to perform site reclamation. However, the amount of any
such deficiency is unknown. To address this potential problem, you further explain
that your agency entered into a settlement agreement with the permittee in lieu of bond
forfeiture as authorized by Colorado Rule 3.04.1(2). Under mechanisms contained in
this agreement, your agency would take steps to obtain any deficient bond amount as
events unfold regarding permit status. You argue that this agreement forecloses the
issue of bond adequacy until such time as one of the .mechanisms in the agreement is
triggered.
The record shows that the May 22, 1991, settlement agreement was executed in order
to avoid bond forfeiture and allow the permittee time to correct violations and to
decide if the mining operation could continue or should be sold to an operator who
could comply with the provisions of the Colorado program. Colorado Rule 3.04.1(2)
provides that declaration of forfeiture may be withheld if the permittee agrees to a
compliance schedule to correct violations of the permit or to comply with bond
conditions. As part of the agreement, mechanisms were included which would
address the issue of any bond deficiency if operations were to resume or if the