Laserfiche WebLink
coal fines and other material observed in the vicinity of the <br /> outlet of culvert E-12 was deposited there by the plowing of snow <br /> from the haulroad that overlies culvert E-12 . <br /> Thus, instead of establishing a failure of sediment control, <br /> the facts set out in NOV-26 establish that the material on the <br /> berms was not transported or deposited by water and is not <br /> uncontrolled sediment. By admission in NOV-26, the material on <br /> the berm at the grizzly pad, the material on the berm east of the <br /> shop/warehouse/buckethouse pad, and implicitly the material in <br /> the vicinity of the outlet of culvert E-12 did not reach their <br /> resting place as a result of a lack of sediment control <br /> structures. <br /> NOV-26 also contends that there was a failure to retain <br /> "sediment" within disturbed areas. As pointed out above, there <br /> is no such requirement in the provisions of the Act or Rules <br /> cited in the NOV. Further, an examination of the Permit C-80-001 <br /> maps that delineate the areas of the Edna Mine authorized for <br /> disturbance by mining operations establishes that none of the <br /> conditions cited in NOV-26 occurred outside of areas authorized <br /> for disturbance by Permit No. C-80-001. <br /> To establish the validity of a notice of violation, a <br /> regulatory authority must have sufficient evidence to establish <br /> the essential facts of the violation. Turner Brothers Inc. v. <br /> Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, <br /> 103 IBLA 124 , 129 (1988) . NOV-26 contains no credible data or <br /> fact-based statement which would evidence that P&M is in <br /> violation of the Act or Rules cited in NOV-26. <br /> -5- <br />