My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ENFORCE22846
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Enforcement
>
ENFORCE22846
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:32:26 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 10:16:18 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981018
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
2/15/1994
Doc Name
DESERADO MINE PN C-81-018 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS NOV C-93-154 C-93-155 C-93-156 AND C-93-157
From
DMG
To
WESTERN FUELS - UTAH
Violation No.
CV1993153
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.
/
3
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
<br /> <br />SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT JUSTIFICATION <br />NOV C-93-153 <br />Notice of Violation C-93-153 was issued for "Failure to make <br />annual submittal of sediment pond inspections to the DMG by a <br />professional engineer". Larry Routten issued this NOV to western <br />Fuels Utah for the Deserado Mine on December 16, 1993. He <br />explained that WFU did inspect the ponds and impoundments on a <br />quarterly basis, but the reports were not submitted to the DMG <br />except for DP-1, an MSHA sized structure. WFU faxed a copy of <br />the inspection reports to the DMG shortly after the NOV was <br />issued and the hard copy was received on December 28, 1993. <br />Murari Shrestha and Jeff Dubbert, representing WFU, requested <br />that the NOV be vacated. The mine opened in 1981, and no one <br />from the DMG has ever requested that the reports be submitted. <br />Report submittal was never a permit requirement either. This was <br />simply a paperwork problem and it should not be an NOV. <br />I will uphold the NOV. Rule 4.05.6(13) clearly states that the <br />reports are to be submitted to the Division. I do agree with WFU <br />that it is a paperwork violation <br />as an administrative violation. <br />The proposed civil penalty was: <br />and as such should be assessed <br />History $100.00 <br />Seriousness $250.00 <br />Fault $250.00 <br />Good Faith $0.00 <br />Total $600.00 <br />Seriousness <br />As stated above, I feel this is an administrative violation. The <br />reports were completed and available at the mine site, they just <br />were not submitted to the Division. I propose to reduce <br />seriousness to $0.00. <br />Fault <br />I agree with the proposed civil penalty. <br />Good Faith <br />The reports were immediately faxed to the DMG and followed up <br />with a hard copy. I propose a $100.00 reduction for good faith. <br />Settlement Agreement Penalty $250.00 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.