Laserfiche WebLink
iii iiiiiiiiiiiu iii <br />999 <br />PO e[RT OELANEY <br />REN NETN eALCOM• <br />JONN A. TN yL50N <br />EDWARD MULX ALL. JR. <br />PO BERT C CU TT[R <br />SCOTT N. 9ALCONB <br />OAV~D R. STU RGES <br />LAWRENCE R. OMEEN <br />SCOTT Nc~N NIS <br />PI,N ELA N. PRCD COTT <br />RO e[RT N. MOO NE <br />DELANEY BC BALCOMB, P. G. <br />ATTORN EVS AT LAW <br />ORAW[R l90 <br />G LENWOOD SP8INO9, GOIAHADO BIB02 <br />January 11, 1984 <br />Mr. Fred Banta <br />Mined Land Reclamation Division <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />423 Centennial Building <br />1313 Sherman Street <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />Dear Fred: <br />Re: >Eastside Coal Company, <br />Harvey Gap Exploration <br />Exploration Approval No <br />e~9 COLORADO AVCNUC <br />o.s-es.e <br />TCLEPMONC <br />9.9-i]ll <br />•REA COOC ]O] <br /> <br />JAN ~? 3 i~~L; <br />k11NED LAP~D F~c^! p..'4ATION OIVISIOPI <br />Colo. Dept. o. ilaturC; nne.uurces <br />Inc. <br />Project <br />. CX-186-00 <br />This letter is to confirm several issues and pro- <br />posals discussed during our informal conference on <br />January 11, 1984, regarding NOV No. 83-34 and our request <br />for certain modifications of that NOV. _ <br />As should be apparent to everyone, there remains <br />several questions as to the intent and implementation of <br />Special Stipulation No. 1 in Exploration Approval No. CX-186-00. <br />As discussed by me, Special Stipulation No. 1, as <br />written, requires that prior to movement of coal from the <br />site, Eastside Coal shall submit proof that the coal to be <br />transported is committed for testing purposes. There is no <br />explicit or implicit written requirement in this stipulation <br />that such proof must be received by the Division prior to <br />such movement and that written approval by the Division as <br />to the adequacy of the submitted proof must be received by <br />Eastside Coal prior to movement of such coal. Presumably, <br />this issue will be considered by you in your written response <br />to our written request for modification of the abatement <br />order in NOV No. 83-34. <br />Apart from how the enforcement action in NOV No. 83-34 <br />is ultimately resolved, it appears appropriate for both the <br />Division and Eastside Coal to attempt to resolve and or <br />reach some understanding as to the implementation of Special <br />Stipulation No. 1, as written, or as it might be modified by <br />the CMLRD pursuant to the applicable law and Board regu- <br />lations (§115(1) and/or `(3) of the Act and Rules 2.08.3 <br />