1992-05-27_REVISION - M1988112 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Minutes, May 21-28, 1~ ~, QRAP~f 16 ,wdlect To Board Approval ~ As a further point of procedure, Mr. Johnson stated that he had just been provided with a petition, EXHIBIT B, by Jane Kircher for consideration of party status. He read the contents of the petition. In response to an inquiry from the Board, Ms. Kircher clarified that her request was for party status with regard to the matter currently being considered by the Board. there were no objections to Ms. Kircher being admitted as a party to this proceeding. It was MOVED that the Board admit Jane I. Kircher as a party to these proceedings. SECONDED AND PP.SSED UNANIMOUSLY (Kraeger-Rovey, Cooley, Stewart, Jouflas, Danni and Cattany); Danielson not present for the vote. At this time, Mr. Johnson discussed the proposed Order with the Board and asked that the Order be adopted, including any changes desired by the Board. The Findings of the Order relate to the determination that samples taken from the site in 1991 and 1992 revealed elevated cyanide levels and that this was considered a violation of the permit conditions. The Order also states that the operator has agreed to perform, according to the requirements established by the Division for abatement and that the operator has agreed to cease operations, if so ordered by the Division. Mr. Johnson suggested that the Order be amended to include Jane I. Kircher as a party to this proceeding. Mr. Johnson said the Order reflects the Board's decision to assess a $168,900 civil penalty for violations that occurred between October 17, 1991 and April 7, 1992 and provides that the Division may issue a cease and desist order, as necessary, to prevent violations of the permit, etc. The Board will be provided with another status report during the June 1992 Board Meeting. Board Member Stewart suggested a language-change be made to paragraph 21(c)--independent sampling and analysis--as follows: "...provides for independent (or third-party) verification of critical and analytical parameters". Mr. Dean Massey, an attorney representing the operator, addressed this issue briefly. Mr, Johnson clarified that the Board wants to leave the testing frequency of every two weeks at the discretion of the Division. He said the Board also wants to provide a shorter suite of metals for sampling. After discussion Ms. Stewart proposed the following language-change: "...provide for independent monitoring and anaiysis every two weeks by a third••party, at BMRI's expense, to verify pertinent data". Mr. Dean Massey said the operator had reviewed the draft notice of violation and proposed order, but was not in total agreement with the Findings of Fact. He said a concern was that the language of the proposed order, as presented, represents a duplication of the monitoring program. Mr. Massey suggested that the Board defer a decision about the frequency of monitoring and the parameters to the Division. He also addressed the procedure set forth in paragraph