My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ENFORCE25235
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Enforcement
>
ENFORCE25235
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:33:40 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 10:57:38 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981022
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Date
11/3/1993
Doc Name
SOMERSET MINE PN C-81-022 SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT NOV C-93-117 AND C-93-118
From
DMG
To
SOMERSET MINING CO
Violation No.
CV1993117
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.
/
6
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-93-117 <br />Notice of Violation C-93-117 was issued for "Failure to maintain <br />sediment control structures such that drainage from the disturbed <br />areas of Somerset Mine would pass through an approved sediment <br />pond or treatment facility before leaving the permit area". <br />Steve Shuey issued this NOV to Somerset Mining Company for the <br />Somerset Mine based on an August 12,1993 inspection. Mr. Shuey <br />explained that two areas were in violation: 1) the conveyor <br />corridor between the Sanborn Mine portals and the Elk Creek <br />facilities, and 2) the silt fence installed in the cattle guard <br />which collects drainage from the Elk Creek access road/storage <br />area. There was no evidence of any off-site damage from either <br />area. Both sites were repaired by August 14, 1993. The NOV was <br />issued from the office on August 20, 1993. <br />Mr. Walter Wright, representing Somerset Mining Company, did not <br />contest the fact that a violation had occurred. He did request a <br />good faith reduction in the proposed civil penalty. The proposed <br />civil penalty was: <br />History $250.00 <br />Seriousness $250.00 <br />Fault $250.00 <br />Good Faith $250.00 <br />Total $750.00 <br />Mr. Wright requested a good faith reduction because they had <br />repaired both sites by August 14, 1993, two days after the <br />inspection. All repair materials were available on site and they <br />repaired both sites immediately. The abatement was completed <br />before the operator actually recieved the NOV. I am recommending <br />a $100.00 reduction for good faith. <br />Settlement Agreement Proposed $650.00 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.