My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2017-08-29_ENFORCEMENT - M1989024
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Enforcement
>
Minerals
>
M1989024
>
2017-08-29_ENFORCEMENT - M1989024
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/30/2017 8:30:21 AM
Creation date
8/30/2017 7:45:30 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1989024
IBM Index Class Name
ENFORCEMENT
Doc Date
8/29/2017
Doc Name
Board (MLRB) Order
From
DRMS
To
Edward M Yaklich
Violation No.
MV2017026
Email Name
TC1
WHE
AJW
SDT
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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
16. Under section 34-32.5-124(6)(a), C.R.S., if the Board finds that an <br /> operator violated a permit provision, the Board may suspend, modify, or revoke <br /> such permit. By violating provisions of the Act and Rules, Operator is in violation <br /> of provisions of the permit, specifically the performance warranty. Suspension, <br /> modification, or revocation of the permit is appropriate. <br /> 17. Pursuant to section 34-32.5-1.24(7), C.R.S. the Board may impose a <br /> civil penalty of not less than $100 per day nor more than $1,000 per day for each <br /> day during which a permit violation occurs. <br /> 18. The Board may find a financial warranty subject to forfeiture where <br /> an Operator failed to cure a default under a performance warranty despite written <br /> notice of the default and ample time to cure such default. C.R.S. § 34-32.5- <br /> 118(1)(b) (2016). Operator's violation of provisions of the Act constitutes <br /> Operator's default under its performance warranty. Operator defaulted on its <br /> performance warranty, received written notice of the default, and failed to cure <br /> such default. <br /> ORDER <br /> Operator did not appear in this matter to present any mitigating factors. <br /> There is no information before the Board indicating that any action other than the <br /> requested action is appropriate. Therefore, based on the foregoing findings of fact <br /> and conclusions of law, the Board enters the following order: <br /> The Board finds Jeannette J. Yaklich-Houston and Edward M. Yaklich in <br /> violation of the Act, under sections 34-32.5-116(3)(a), (b), C.R.S. for failing to submit <br /> required annual maps. <br /> The Board finds Jeannette J. Yaklich-Houston and Edward M. Yaklich in <br /> violation of the permit. <br /> The Board AFFIRMS the cease and desist order issued by the Division on <br /> June 22, 2017. <br /> The Board AFFIRMS the civil penalty imposed by the Division on June 22, <br /> 2017. <br /> The Board orders that permit number M-1989-024 is REVOKED. <br /> The Board finds the financial warranty for permit number M-1989-024 to be <br /> subject to forfeiture under section 34-32.5-118(1)(b), C.R.S. for Operator's failure to <br /> cure a default under its performance warranty. <br /> Jeannette J. Yaklich-Houston and Edward M. Yaklich <br /> M-1989-024/Shangri La Pit <br /> MV-2017-026 3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.