Laserfiche WebLink
Minutes, January 2243, 1992 23 <br /> Staff explained that if the Division decided to take action against the <br /> operator in district court, the length of time involved would exceed <br /> 1992 spring runoff and the construction season. However, the operator <br /> is conducting site maintenance with the funds available. <br /> In regard to site maintenance and reclamation, Mr. Delaney stated that <br /> the operator has acknowledged the concern and a common interest for <br /> reclamation of the site. He said they have anticipated that the first <br /> phase of reclamation would include the removal of equipment, mining <br /> machinery, conveyors , structures , etc. Mr. Delaney said the operator <br /> has secured proposals for completion of the work. He said they are <br /> working with their bankruptcy counsel on preparing, for submittal , the <br /> documents that would provide for the orderly removal and liquidation of <br /> the assets . He assured the Board that a considerable amount work would <br /> be done during the 1992 construction season, if the property is not <br /> sold. <br /> Mr. Frank Johnson clarified that if the Division is responsible for <br /> reclamation and site maintenance, the property would have to be sold. <br /> He sai-d that the Division does not have the experience nor expertise to <br /> estimate the length of time it would take to sell the property and <br /> obtain the funds necessary to perform the work. <br /> Mr. Greg McKennis , with the Garfield Citizens ' Alliance, addressed the <br /> Board and presented concerns regarding environmental problems at the <br /> site. He answered questions from the Board. <br /> Mr. Mike Mechau, with the Crystal Valley Environmental Protection <br /> Association, stated that in addition to concerns, presented by Mr <br /> McKe-nnis, .-.he . is . c.oncerned speci-f-ical ly wi•.th the �prob-lem --of- sediment <br /> erosion off road embankments and disturbed areas , as well as the <br /> reclamation bond. He answered questions from the Board. <br /> During discussion of a suggestion that the Board order an increase in <br /> reclamation bond, Mr. Johnson stated that if pursued, the matter would <br /> eventually become part of the operator' s ensuing bankruptcy <br /> proceedings . He said the Division would not have a first lien on the <br /> increased bond amount. <br /> During further discussion, the Board, referring' to the Coal Act, said <br /> its statutory duty is to assure that the amount of the bond is <br /> sufficient to complete the provisions of the reclamation plan, if the <br /> work has to be performed by the Board. The law, it was noted, has as <br /> an expectation that the Board, in carrying out its environmental <br /> responsibilities , would promote mining. In this instance, the Board <br /> would attempt to achieve that goal by establishing guidelines that <br /> would make it possible for the mine to operate again and be reclaimed. <br /> However, the Board said the matter of requiring an increase in the <br /> reclamation bond would not be pursued during this hearing. At this <br /> point, there is no evidence that would indicate the amount of <br /> deficiency of the bond, specifically, the size of the deficiency. The <br /> Board cannot determine the amount of a bond increase without further <br /> data. <br />