Laserfiche WebLink
~ ~ III IIIIIIIIIIIII III J~~ <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />DIVISfON OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY <br />Deparlmem of Natural Resources <br />1313 Sherman 51., Room 215 <br />Denver, Colorado 8020] <br />Phone' 13031 866-3 567 <br />FA% 1703) 832 8106 <br />May 19, 1995 <br />Mr. Thomas Ehmett, Acting Director <br />Office of Surface Mining Reclamation <br />and Enforcement <br />505 Marquette Avenue NW <br />Suite 1200 <br />Albuquerque, NM 87102 <br />Re: Response to 'Thirty-Day Letter" dated April 14, 1995 <br />Rimrock Mine, Permit No. C-89-074 <br />Dear Mr. Ehmett: <br />~~~~~~ <br />DEPARTMENT OF <br />NATURAL <br />RESOURCES <br />Roy Ramer <br />Governor <br />lames S Luchhead <br />Eae[ulive DueUOr <br />Michael B Long <br />Division Director <br />The Division received a letter from the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and <br />Enforcement on April 19, 1995. This letter was sent in reference to the Rimrock Mine <br />permit, Colorado permit No. C-89-074. The Office of Surface Mining believes this permit <br />was issued in violation of the reyuirements of section 510(c). The Division does not believe <br />that permit No. C-89-074 was issued improvidently, for the following reasons: <br />1) In accordance with 30 CFR 773.20(b), the State regulatory agency followed the <br />violation review criteria of the regulatory program at the time the permit was issued. <br />a) The application foi the Rimrock Mine permit was deemed complete by the <br />Division on February 24, 1989. On March 1, 1989 the Division notified other State <br />Regulatory Agencies of the receipt of the permit application and requested <br />information regarding any outstanding violations, cessation orders, patterns of <br />violation, forfeited bonds and delinquent penalties. The following States were <br />notified: Office of Surface Mining, Washington D.C., Alaska, Arkansas, Arizona, <br />California, Idaho, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Missouri, Montana, <br />Nebraska, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Ohio, Pennsylvania, <br />Tennessee, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, Washington, Wyoming, and applicable <br />Indian tribes. Only three responses were received, all reporting no outstanding <br />enforcement actions. The State agencies that replied were; Arkansas, Kansas, and <br />Virginia. A lack of a response by the regulatory agencies was interpreted as <br />indicating a lack of any outstanding problems. <br />