Laserfiche WebLink
<br />III IIIIIIIIIIIII III <br />STATE' OF CULU 9x~uu <br />MINED LAND RECLAMATION DIVISION <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />7373 Sherman St., Room 215 <br />Denver, CO 60203 <br />303 666-3567 <br />Fa%: 303 832-6106 <br />pF' COQ <br />ti~ 9,~ <br />„~i oo <br />~+. r ,J ~ <br />Roy Romer. <br />Governor <br />May 15 , 1991 Fred R. Banta. <br />Division Director <br />Mr. Robert Hagen, Director <br />Albuquerque Field Office <br />Office of Surface tAining <br />Reclamation and Enforcement <br />625 Silver Avenue, S. W., Suite 310 <br />Albuquerque, New hfzxico 87102 <br />Re: Bourg Mine (Permit C-81-021), Ten Day Notice X-91-02-244-008 TV1 <br />Dear M•. Hagen: <br />On May 1, 1991, the Division received the AFO finding regarding the Division's <br />April 11, 1991 response to the above referenced Ten Day Notice (TDN). In that <br />finding, AFO proposed to allay the Division an additional 15 days after <br />receipt of the finding to review the record of the bonding actions taken at <br />the Bourg Mine and to respond accordingly. This letter is intended to be the <br />Division's response as a result of that review, <br />The TDN was issued for "Failure to maintain a minimum of 40~ of the approved <br />bond amount after a Phase I bond release but prior to obtaining a Phase II <br />bond release (Permit Area) bond adjusOnent - Dec. 7, 1990." Cited in support <br />of this violation was Rule 3.03.1(2). <br />The Phase I bond release for the Baurg Mirte was approved October 30, 1989 <br />(copy of the decision package is enclosed). Based on that decision,.60$ of <br />the existing bond liability of 5536,000 or E321,600 was released. The <br />remaining $214,400 was retained and is the amount of bonding currently in the <br />Division's possession. Earlier information provided the OSM inspector by this <br />Division that the amount of bond held by the Division was $536,000 was <br />unfortunately and unintentionally in error, based on a preliminary check of <br />the records conducted at the time. More thorough review revealed the_error. <br />As a result of a band reduction applira tion received August 22, 1990 and the <br />Division's policy at the time, the Division ultimately approved a reduction of <br />bond to 596,500 on December 7, 1990. This redaction, however, has not taken <br />place. The operator has not reduced the existing bond, which remains at <br />5214,400. <br />The Division declines to take enforcement action in regard to this alleged <br />violation. At this time, no violation of the State program as cited has <br />actually occurred, as 40% of the pre-Phase I approved bond amount remains in <br />place. <br />