Laserfiche WebLink
. ~ , ii <br />DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />1313 Sherman St., Room 215 <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br />Phone: 003)866-7567 <br />FAx: (303) 8328106 <br />DATE: October 7, 1993 <br />T0: Dan Mathews <br />FROM: David Berry <br />RE: Draft OSM Document - "SettlAgr. 94" <br />of cow <br />ti :R <br />~~~ ~~ <br />,8,6 R . <br />Roy ROmer <br />Governor <br />michael 8. Long <br />Division Oveclor <br />Following are some comments regarding the above-referenced draft document <br />addressing Colorado Settlement Agreements. This memorandum discusses the Apex <br />and Grassy Gap situations. <br />Apex No. 2 Mine <br />It is true that on October 21, 1993, the MLRB executed a Settlement Agreement <br />which, under specific circumstances, allowed the Sunland Mining Corp. to <br />retain a highwall at the site. <br />The execution of this agreement, and subsequent proceedings involved the <br />following circumstances: <br />1.' For several years, this Division had been pressuring Sunland Mining Co. <br />to make a final decision regarding their future intent to mine, and if <br />mining was not planned, to reclaim the mine site. <br />2. The operator decided to conduct most of the reclamation during the late <br />summer and early fall of 1992. We viewed this as beneficial and <br />necessary. , <br />3. The existing and approved mine plan acknowledged the pre-law status of <br />the site, the local lack of backfill material, and the physical <br />impossibility of entirely reclaiming the old highwall. <br />4. The operator learned that the OSM had been making an issue of this type <br />of situation, and indicated that they were not willing to initiate <br />reclamation if there was some risk that the approved, and the only <br />physically feasible plan might be rejected by the OSM at some later date. <br />5. We understood the concern, and rather than prolonging an already lengthy <br />(and legal) temporary cessation, we decided that it was in the best <br />interest of the people of this state, to take whatever steps necessary <br />and prudent, to expedite the final reclamation of this site. <br />6. A regulatory amendment package had already been submitted to the OSM, and <br />based upon approvals in other states and direct correspondence with AFO <br />personnel, we believed that the OSM would expeditiously review and <br />approve our regulation package. <br /> <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />