ENFORCE25480

• Permit No: C1980007
• IBM Index Class Name: Enforcement
• Doc Date: 4/16/1993
• Doc Name: Memo on Assessment Conference
• From: DMG
• To: CHRISTINE JOHNSTON
• Violation No.: CV1993006
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

:.f~

SIIMMARY OF A88E88MENT CONFERENCE FOR NOV C-93-006
The assessment conference for NOV C-93-006 was held in the offices
of the Division on April 14, 1993. In attendance at the conference
were Scot Anderson, Terry O'Connor, and Kathleen welt of Mountain
Coal Company (MCC), and David Berry and Christine Johns~n of the
Division, in addition to myself.
The NOV was issued by Christine Johnson on February 19, 1993 to MCC
for operations at their West Elk Mine. The NOV was issued for
"[f]ailure to submit a subsidence monitoring report on a semi-
annual basis as required by the permit and regulations. A report
was not received during the period from October 1990 until a report
was received January 19, 1993". Rule 2.05.6(6)(c)(i)(E) which
requires results of subsidence monitoring programs to be submitted
to the Division at least semi-annually was cited in the NOV. Page
2.05-147 of the reorganized permit which states that subsidence
monitoring reports are submitted on a semi-annual basis in a format
approved by the Division was also cited.
At the opening of the conference, Terry O'Connor related the
priority that MCC places on environmental compliance and the pride
they have in their record of compliance and cooperation. He
indicated his belief that the NOV had been issued as a result of
miscommunication, and that no violation had in fact occurred. He
further indicated that, should the NOV be upheld, he felt the
abatement should be modified, because the abatement went beyond the
requirements of the Rules and the permit. He stated that MCC had
submitted the required report information in January, 1993, prior
to issuance of the NOV. He indicated that MCC was fully willing to
modify the report format as requested, but felt that the
modification should be separated from the NOV.
The Division representatives acknowledged the excellent record of
compliance and attitude of cooperation alluded to by Mr. O'Connor.
Christine Johns~n then summarized events and considerations
pertinent to issuance of the NOV. As a result of permit renewal
review during the fall of 1992, the Division became aware that no
semi-annual subsidence reports were on file since the second report
for 1990, submitted in October, 1990. A report was received by the
Division on January 19, 1993 which was essentially consistent with
previous semi-annual reports, although the Division believed that
certain format modifications were needed. Kathleen Welt at this
point stated that the reason the report was not submitted until
mid-January was because MCC had identified certain errors in the
survey data and considerable time was spent in reviewing the data
from 1985 forward in detail to insure accuracy.
Ms. Johns~n and Mr. Berry acknowledged that this was the case, and
they stressed that the NOV was not issued because the second semi-
annual report for 1992 was considered late, but rather because the