Laserfiche WebLink
Crumpacker Coal Basin draft memo re: Task Force"Outline of Procedure For The <br /> Evaluation of the Mid-Continent Proposed Development Plan", Section II, <br /> "Requirements of Governing Public Authorities", B. "State Government: Department of <br /> Minerals and Geology" <br /> Under Colorado and federal law, coal mine owner-operators have the responsibility to <br /> "reclaim" the areas disturbed by the mining, see"Surface Coal Mining Reclamation Act", <br /> 30 USC 1201, et seq., and C.R.S. 34-33-101, et seq. The reclamation is to be funded by <br /> the cash or surety bond of the owner-operator, and the laws contain detailed permit <br /> requirements and environmental performance standards for the reclamation, which are to <br /> be executed and enforced by the Colorado Department of Minerals and Geology (DMG), <br /> backed up by the federal Office of Surface Mining(OSM). The object is to allow the <br /> development of coal resources for public energy needs, while <br /> "...requiring those persons involved in surface coal mining to reclaim land <br /> affected by such operations as contemporaneously as possible with the <br /> surface coal operations so that the affected land may be put to a beneficial <br /> use...to protect society and the environment from the adverse effects of <br /> surface coal mining operations ...to aid in the protection of wildlife and <br /> aquatic resources, and to protect and promote the health, safety and <br /> general welfare of the people of this state" (C.R.S. 34-33-102). <br /> C.R.S. 34-33-120(2)(b) states that the reclamation must: <br /> "Restore land affected to a condition capable of supporting the uses which <br /> it was capable of supporting prior to any mining, or higher or better uses of <br /> which there is a reasonable liklihood, so long as such use or uses do not <br /> present any actual or probable hazard to public health or safety or pose any <br /> actual or probable threat of water diminution or pollution which would be <br /> contrary to state or federal laws or, rules, or regulations, and so long as the <br /> permit applicant's declared proposed land use following reclamation is not <br /> deemed to be impractical or unreasonable, is not inconsistent with <br /> applicable land use policies and plans, does not invlove unreasonable delay <br /> in implementation, and is not vioiative of federal, state or local law." , <br /> Under these provisions it is clear that the 455 acres must be restored to the <br /> use it was capaple of before the mining: which was forest land. Mid-Con is <br /> being liquidated in bankruptcy, all its properties are being sold to pay its <br /> debts (including the primary creditor with priority, DMG, which has taken <br /> over the reclamation), and the confirmed liquidation plan provides that <br /> Mid-Con and its stockholders are to receive o► retain nothing. Legally Mid- <br /> Con, which is going out of existence, has lost any ability to determine the <br /> "beneficial use" its property(it`4 ould be illegal for Mid-Con to develop the <br /> land, profit from it, or seek a"higher or better use" for it). Rather the <br /> property must be sold soon to fund the reclamation and pay creditors. <br /> 1 <br />