My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2017-03-09_ENFORCEMENT - M1991037
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Enforcement
>
Minerals
>
M1991037
>
2017-03-09_ENFORCEMENT - M1991037
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/16/2020 7:26:21 PM
Creation date
3/10/2017 8:01:10 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1991037
IBM Index Class Name
ENFORCEMENT
Doc Date
3/9/2017
Doc Name
Receipt of Payment
From
High Speed Mining, LLC
To
DRMS
Email Name
MAC
WHE
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
4• On December 21, 2016, the Division mailed the Operator a signed copy of <br /> the Reason to Believe a Violation Exists letter. The Division's letter provided notice <br /> regarding the alleged violations and information about the January 25, 2017 hearing. <br /> 5. The training plait for permit number M-1991-037 stales that the affectt'd <br /> lands would be limited to areas which were historically disturbed and free of vegetation, <br /> with no removal of timber. <br /> 6. Oil January 11, 2016, the Division received a letter from Ben Langenfeld of <br /> Greg Lewicki and Associates on behalf of the Operator, stating: "High Speed Mining <br /> acknowledges that some activity has taken place south of the southern permit boundary of <br /> the current permit. This is the only area of outside the permit disturbance that has taken <br /> place on site,as shown on the attached site map. It is roughly 1.7 acres." <br /> 7. At the hearing, Mr. Langenfeld testified that the Operator admits that land <br /> outside the permit boundary was disturbed, but disputes the amount of land disturbed <br /> beyond the pert-nit boundary. The Operator testified that the amount of disturbed land is <br /> not more than 1.7 acres. The Operator testified that it did not hire a professional land <br /> surveyor to stake the permit boundary. <br /> 8. The Division testified at the hearing that the southern boundary represented <br /> on a photograph from the Operator is too far south of the actual line,which accounts for the <br /> Operator's belief that only 1.7 acres has been disturbed, <br /> 9. The Division testified that it spent ten IIOUrS on this matter, at the cost of <br /> $56.64 an hour, incurring costs of$567.00 in the investigation of the violation. <br /> CONCLUSIONS OF LAW <br /> 10. The Board has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to the Colorado Mined <br /> Land Reclaniation Act for the Extraction of Construction Materials, Article 32.5 of Title 34, <br /> C.R.S. (2016). <br /> 11. Section 34-32.5-109(1), C.R.S provides that"before engaging in a new <br /> operation, an operator shall first obtain from the board or office a reclamation permit." By <br /> disturbing 2.4 acres of land beyond the approved permit boundary, the Operator engaged <br /> in a new operation without first obtaining a permit, in violation of section 34-32.5-109(1), <br /> C.R.S. <br /> 12. Pursuant to section 34-32.5-123(1), C.R.S., the Board may issue a cease and <br /> desist order when it finds that an operator has failed to obtain a valid perirrit. <br /> 13. The Board may impose a civil penalty of not less than$1,000 per day or more <br /> than $5,000 per day for each day during which a violation occurs, C.R.S.§ 34-32.5-123(2) <br /> (2016). Here, the Board may impose a penalty based on thirty-five (35) days of violation <br /> High Speed Mining,LLC <br /> Katuska Pit/M-1991-037 <br /> MV-2017-001 <br /> 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.