Laserfiche WebLink
29 <br /> A Motion made and Seconded to uphold the Division's decision <br /> not to vacate the NOV Failed, with one affirmative vote. <br /> Another Motion was made that the Board vacate the violation. <br /> During discussion of the Vote, Ms. Linden stated that the <br /> Rules require the Board to act on a - two-thirds or majority <br /> vote, when a quorum of Members are present. She said that <br /> this is a provision of the Minerals Rules (Page 5, Rule 1.3) <br /> which also apply, in general, to Coal Program cases. Ms. <br /> Linden said three affirmative votes would be required for a <br /> Motion to pass, in this case. Therefore, Board Chairman <br /> Stewart said that the Motion did not carry. <br /> Mr. Long suggested that the matter be handled in the same <br /> manner as Item 18, and the Board agreed. <br /> The Board continued this matter to the October 1993 Board <br /> Meeting, when the matter will be heard again in entirety or <br /> the other Board Members will be provided with an opportunity <br /> to review the tapes of this proceeding, in order to <br /> participate in the hearing in October. <br /> 21. FORMAL PUBLIC HEARING <br /> 0. C. COAL MINE File No. C-80-002 <br /> Robert Weaver. This matter related to the operator' s request <br /> for reconsideration of the Division' s bond calculation. Staff <br /> said this is an underground coal mine located near Gunnison, <br /> permitted for 80 acres and includes a surface disturbance of <br /> 3 .5 acres. <br /> The Division conducted a bond recalculation during last year' s <br /> permit renewal process, in order to calculate the liability <br /> for reclamation of the mine site. The current bond totals <br /> $36, 000 and that the Division calculated that $60, 734 would be <br /> required to reclaim the site. <br /> Staff said that the Mr. Robert Weaver, the owner and operator, <br /> had completed some work on the site, in order to reduce the <br /> reclamation liability to $46,482 . The law requires that there <br /> be a bond maintained on the site, in order to conduct all <br /> reclamation onsite. The Division believes that the minimum <br /> bond necessary for the site would be $46,482 . <br /> Mr. Weaver stated that he objected to the bond increase to <br /> $60, 000 occurring over a period of two years. He said that on <br /> May 3, 1990, the calculation was set at $36, 000, and his bond <br /> was submitted to cover that amount. Mr. Weaver said that his <br /> operation was small enough that the buildings, etc. , could be <br /> dozed, pushed against the highwall and covered at less cost <br /> than proposed by the Division. He said there would be no <br /> environmental concerns related to this method of reclamation. <br />