Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br /> <br />Explanation of Proposed Assessment for NOV C-90-042 <br />A. History: The mine has not been issued any NOV or CO during the preceding <br />T2 months. There is no assessment for history. <br />B. Seriousness: The unmarked area in question is surrounded by a rail <br />ooT p: TFie rail loop is designated as permit area; the isolated interior <br />region is not. No signs exist in the field to identity the limits of <br />this undisturbed region within the rail loop, a violation which <br />constitutes an obstruction to enforcement. A lack of permit boundary <br />signs makes it difficult to determine the extent of permitted <br />disturbance. The existence of this area, however, is clearly indicated <br />on maps in the permit application package; it is relatively isolated from <br />potential disturbance by the surrounding rail line; and the load out is <br />not in active use. As a result the degree of seriousness is considered <br />low and assessed at $250.00. <br />C. Fault: By not marking the limits of the permit area, the operator is <br />considered to have failed to exhibit reasonable care and to be <br />negligent. The area in question, however, was clearly marked on permit <br />application package maps. The mine is inactive, and the loadout is not <br />being used. Consequently, the degree of negligence is considered low and <br />assessed at 5250.00. <br />D. Days: The penalty is assessed for one day. <br />E. Good Faith: The violation has not been abated. There is no reduction <br />_. _ or goon aith. <br />1051E <br />