ENFORCE25127

• Permit No: C1981038
• IBM Index Class Name: Enforcement
• Doc Date: 4/4/1995
• Doc Name: MEMO BOWIE MINE 1 FN C-81-038 NOV C-95-004 PENALTY ASSESSMENT
• From: DMG
• To: LARRY ROUTTEN
• Violation No.: CV1995004
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

• • iii iiiiiiiiiiiii iii
999
STATE OF COLORADO
DIVISION OF MINERALS AND GEOLOGY
Depa rlmeN of Nalu ral Resources
1313 Sherman St., Room 215
Denver, Colorado 80203
Phone: [phone]
FAK. [phone]
April 4, 1995
~I~~
DEPARTMENT OF
NATURAL
MEMO RESOURCES
Roy Romer
Governor
lames S Lochhead
TO: Larry Routten EattuRVe Director
FROM: Tony Waldron W Michael&LOng
Division Director
RE: Bowie Mine No. 1, File No. C-81-038, Notice of Violation C-95-
004 Penalty Assessment
The following information is submitted to assist you in preparing
a penalty assessment for Notice of Violation C-95-004 which was
issued to Bowie Resources Limited on March 14, 1995 for failure to
declare all owners controllers and operators per rule 2.03.4.
Bowie received a permit transfer from Cyprus Orchard Valley Coal
Company for the Orchard Valley Mine on January 26, 1995 and renamed
it the Bowie Mine No. 1. Initially, during the transfer
application review, Bowie indicated that a company called Bruin
Mining Inc. would be the operator of the mine. The Division
requested owner and controller information for Bruin, however,
prior to the submittal of any information the deal for Bruin to
operate the Bowie Mine fell apart. Since Bowie was anxious to
complete the transfer they indicated to us that they would operate
the Bowie Mine and the transfer was approved.
Shortly after the transfer was finalized, Christine Johnston
conducted an inspection at the Bowie Mine. During that inspection
Christine discovered that a contract miner known as M.A.G. Mining
Inc. was actually performing the mining and Bowie Resources was
taking care of the surface portion of the operation. Not long
after that inspection an article in The North Fork Times also
indicated that M.A.G. Mining was conducting the mining for Bowie
Resources. From information contained in the article about who the
owners of M.A.G. were, the Division conducted a preliminary AVS
check which indicated that both owners mentioned in the newspaper
article had "deny status". The Division then contacted legal
representatives for Bowie Resources to clarify what the
relationship between Bowie Resources and M.A.G. Mining was.
Initially Bowie felt that M.A.G. should not be considered an
operator. However, upon reviewing the contract between Bowie
Resources and M.A.G. Mining Inc. the Division felt that M.A.G.
Mining was clearly an operator. Therefore, since Bowie had failed
to notify the Division about M.A.G.'s operator status and given the
AVS information, a violation was issued.